Uncategorized

Americans and Climate Change: Intro and executive summary

We've talked a great deal on this site about how best to "frame" global warming. How can we shrink the gap between what science tells us about the dangers of climate change and the relative disengagement of the American public? How can we get the public fired up and thus spur more aggressive policy responses?

That's the subject of "Americans and Climate Change," a new report from the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, based on a conference held late last year. The 200-page report can be ordered in book form or downloaded for free as a PDF (uh, PDF). (It's written by Associate Dean Daniel Abbasi, based on notes from the conference.)

Now, normally, a post like this would end here. I would recommend the report and move on.

But let's face it. None of you are going to pay $20 to order a conference report. None of you are going to read a 200-page PDF.

And here's the thing: I actually read this one. The whole thing. And it's extraordinary: lucid, insightful, and practical. So I don't want to let it pass by. (Incidentally, thanks to the NYT's Andy Revkin for recommending it.)

I contacted the folks at Yale, and they've agreed to let me reprint some or all of the report (depending on how it goes), in small chunks that are easier to read than, say, a 200-page PDF.

I hope it starts some discussion. And I hope it isn't, as my wife tactlessly suggests, the dorkiest, wonkiest thing anyone's ever done, ever.

Below you'll find the beginning of the Executive Summary, which frames the rest of the report.

Attribution 101

The Wall Street Journal editorial page is responsible for a great deal of the FUD that still surrounds global warming. But their news operation is top notch.

Case in point: Here's an excellent, plain-language explanation for how climate scientists attribute warming to human activity, from Sharon Begley. Bookmark it and send the link to friends who've been reading too many WSJ editorials.

(via Deltoid)

As the windmill turns: A native perspective

Who would have thought my sleepy little home town of Corpus Christi and nearby Padre Island would be in the news so much this year. First dead-eye Dick Cheney shoots his friend in the face at a ranch nearby, and the victim is whisked to our local hospital. Now the largest wind farm in the U.S. is slated for waters a little ways down the coast. (This picture showing the location of the wind farm even includes the town of Armstrong, near the Armstrong Ranch where the hunting of quail and shooting of friends took place!)

So as you might guess, the news of the new wind farm caught my attention.

President Al Gore’s SOTU

Somewhere, in an alternate reality ...

Thanks SNL!

Update [2006-5-15 11:10:13 by David Roberts]: It appears the video was yanked off YouTube. For now, at least, it's still available on Crooks & Liars.

Update [2006-5-16 15:11:25 by David Roberts]: It's also available on iFilm.

Tug of war

I have tried to stay out of the ethanol debate because I always assumed it would die a natural death. However, it does not seem to be going away, so I thought I would look into the latest hoopla.

A tug of war is quietly taking place inside environmental groups as individuals sort out where they stand on a given biofuel issue. For example, Mongabay has an upbeat article on biofuels, surrounded by articles showing its destructive potential. I suspect the same thing is happening inside the Sierra Club, The Nature Conservancy, and everywhere else. The idea that environmentalists are now in bed with God-fearing patriots on the issue of oil independence might seem unsettling at first, but to be honest with you, neither side has a monopoly on rational thought. When our heads start to hurt from thinking too much, we tend to just go with what feels good.

Rest in infamy

GM has killed the Hummer. The big one, anyway. Baby steps.

(via Environmental Action)

Feebird!

Continuing with the recent spate of attention to "feebates," Republican senator Gordon Smith from Oregon floated the feebate concept at a recent congressional hearing. Bully for him!

With gas prices as high as they are, and the security costs of ensuring North America's petroleum supplies (think, say, of the cost of America's military involvement in Iraq), feebates are an idea whose time has come. And Smith's support suggests that the idea may even have some bipartisan appeal.

The basic idea of feebates is to charge car buyers an extra fee when they buy a gas guzzler, and rebate that money to people who buy efficient vehicles. The amount of the fee or rebate depends on the miles-per-gallon rating of the vehicle, compared with the average for all new cars sold. (For more details, see here).

The beauty of feebates is that they create incentives for continuous improvements to vehicle efficiency. That is, no matter how efficient the average car or truck becomes, feebates will still help boost sales of the most efficient vehicles on the market.

Grist props

Columbia Journalism Review has a very flattering write-up of our late, lamented Poverty & the Environment series. Cool.

Scientists confirm existence of grizzly-polar bear hybrid

Weird:

A DNA test has confirmed what zoologists, big-game hunters and aboriginal trackers in the far northern reaches of Canada have imagined for years: the first documented case of a hybrid grizzly-polar bear in the wild.

That's right, folks, a polar bear and a grizzly bear have mated and produced offspring -- a bear mutt of sorts. As the polar bear's habitat disappears (thanks, global warming!) and the range for both bears continues to overlap, will we see more hybrids?

I certainly hope so! But only if I get to be on the naming committee. Check out these proposed monikers (emphasis mine):

[Big game hunter Jim] Martell told the newspaper he has dubbed the hybrid creature a "polargrizz." [Polar bear biologist Ian] Stirling said others in his office have been tossing around in jest possible names for the hybrid: a "pizzly" or a "grolar bear." One colleague said they ought to call it "nanulak," combining the Inuit names for polar bear -- "nanuk" -- and grizzly bear, which is "aklak."

Can we call it a "pizzly"? Pretty please?!

Econ 101 for progressives

My favorite economist, Dean Baker (I want his rookie card!), has just put out a free PDF of his latest book, The Conservative Nanny State. (PDF link here.)

I would urge everyone to read this book -- it's not all directly related to environmental causes, but some of it is. More broadly, there's an obvious moral: The system we live in is, to an enormous extent, determined by government policies. Understanding that, and understanding how the apparatus of the state is tilted towards the already-wealthy, is crucial to any progressive cause.

Some specific examples below the fold.