Uncategorized

Shuffling the Deck

New nominees for top spots at EPA worry enviros The Senate last night confirmed President Bush’s pick for the No. 2 slot at EPA — Marcus Peacock, most recently a number-cruncher at the Office of Management and Budget, responsible for determining whether the cost of environmental regulations is justified by their benefit to the U.S. […]

Development in NYC

Way back in June (seems so long ago, doesn't it?) I posed the question of what constitutes a city. People frequently cite the statistic that half the world's population will soon live in cities, but those 3.4 billion people will not be living in anything close to downtown Manhattan. The definition of "urban" under which the majority of the planet's people live in urban areas is more inclusive than what people usually think of as a city -- the mega-cities like New York or London.

Considering this, I picture the view looking west from Manhattan. The first time I saw it, it hardly looked like a major city at all, just abnormally dense suburbia. While it does have the efficient mass transportation net characteristic of many cities, Brooklyn is lacking in density.

It ain’t pretty

The energy bill passed through the House today, and is expected to pass the Senate by a wide margin on Friday.

The nation's editorial boards have not taken kindly to this bill. The folks at Campaign for America's Future sent around a sampling of responses, which I've included below the fold. I've added some links. If you have links to other op-ed reactions, leave them in comments.

The CAFTA vote

Don't miss Sam Rosenfeld's post on last night's CAFTA vote. It enough to turn the stomach. See also tpmcafe for a discussion thread and this intriguing mention of possible House voting shenanigans.

Over at redstate, of course, they're pleased as punch.

Also, as I forgot to mention last time: We ran a great op-ed on CAFTA back in June.

Solar Grove

Is it me or is this a way-cool and efficient use of a parking lot?

Kyocera recently installed its first public "Solar Grove" consisting of 25 "solar trees" that converts a 186-vehicle parking lot into a 235 kW solar electric generating system. The system's 25 solar trees form a carport in a Kyocera employee parking lot, utilizing a total of 1,400 Kyocera KC-187G solar photovoltaic (PV) modules and 200 custom-manufactured, light-filtering PV modules.

Pictured here:

(via TH c/o GCC)

Turns out the Apollo folks don’t like it either

Beneath the fold is an op-ed written in reaction to the energy bill by Robert Borosage and Joel Rogers. Borosage is co-director of the Campaign for America's Future and co-founder, with Rogers, of the Apollo Alliance.

A letter from a dozen green groups to Congress

Yesterday, a letter opposing the energy bill was sent to Congress, signed by the following environmental groups: Alaska Wilderness League, American Rivers, Defenders of Wildlife, Earthjustice, Friends of the Earth, National Audubon Society, National Environmental Trust, Natural Resources Defense Council, Public Citizen, Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, U.S. PIRG, and Union of Concerned Scientists.

The full text of the letter is below the break.

Dirty Financing: Havana Nights

Environmental groups unanimous in distaste for energy bill Yesterday, a letter signed by reps from more than a dozen environmental organizations was sent to Congress with a strong message about the energy bill that recently emerged from conference committee: it stinks. It does nothing to wean the U.S. from its dependence on foreign oil. It […]

Energy bill is (surprise!) also a budget hole

The CBO sent this letter [PDF] to Joe Barton, Chairman of the Energy Committee, to let him know that yes, indeed, the energy bill will be putting a hole in the budget. The CBO estimates that the bill will reduce revenues by over $2 billion a year in 2008 and by a total of $12 billion over the period from 2005-2015.

However, I don't know that the CBO included this lovely addition from one Tom Delay. That story isn't really getting too much press this morning -- the Boston Globe is probably the most widely circulated paper running a story.

A debate over environmental priorities never gets at the real point

J.H. Adler points us to a debate in the pages of Foreign Policy between Bjørn Lomborg and Carl Pope. Since I read the whole thing, here's the highlight reel, so you don't have to:

Pope: "The global environmental dilemma teems with both risks and opportunities."

Lomborg: "Yes, we have problems. But we have solved many more. Yes, we can solve those that remain, but not all at once. We need priorities."

P: "True, we need priorities. ... Having priorities doesn't always mean Sophie's choice."

L: "I'm glad you agree that we need priorities. But I worry that your commitment is rhetorical."

P: "No, Bjørn, Sophie's choice is avoidable."

L: "... You insist that there are no real trade-offs between the environment and prosperity. ... It is not that environmental projects are not worthwhile. ... Often, there are other, better projects that must come first."

P: "... You keep posing artificial choices... It is simply not the case that the world -- or the United States -- does only one thing at a time."

L: "Advocacy groups understandably want to focus on headline-grabbing issues ... But when we emphasize some problems, we get less focus on others."

P: "Bjørn, you ignorant slut ... "

Okay, that last one was an embellishment.