Latest Articles

Rumor has it Obama will tap Van Jones as his green jobs czar

Word around the blogs is that Van Jones has been tapped to serve as a “green jobs czar” in the Obama administration. We’re still trying to confirm, and we’ll have more soon on this potential new role for someone who’s been a household name here at Grist. [UPDATE: A well-placed source confirms that Jones has […]

Ron Sims of Seattle plans to green HUD as deputy secretary

Ron Sims. Ron Sims wants to bring a fresh, green perspective to the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Sims — the county executive of King County, Wash., which encompasses the Seattle metropolitan area — is President Obama’s nominee for deputy secretary of the department. “President Obama has … challenged his Cabinet to prepare for […]

Saul Griffith calculates what we need to do to keep the world we evolved in

When pondering whether we need to invest in energy efficiency, a smart grid, new storage technologies, or transmission to the best renewable energy resource areas, I urge interested parties to first take some time to watch TV. Specifically, this presentation given by Saul Griffith, MacArthur Genius at the Long Now Foundation:

He calculated what's needed to, in the eloquent words of James Hansen, keep the world we evolved in. The answer? Cut each individual's carbon footprint to the bone via serious lifestyle choices. Then, dedicate an area the size of Australia to renewable energy production. And do so in the next 25 years.

It's not an either/or proposition. We need it all.

Slides available on Griffith's blog, here.

Ford starts marketing campaign to emphasize fuel economy in new hybrid

During American Idol Tuesday evening, Ford launched the “We Speak Car” marketing campaign to sell the 2010 Fusion and Fusion Hybrid. The ads tout the Fusion Hybrid as “America’s most fuel efficient mid-size sedan,” which is awfully misleading because the 2010 Prius (50 mpg combined) is technically the most fuel efficient mid-size vehicle. It’s just […]

A one-time cheerleader for hyper-consumerism lays down his pom-pom

Thomas Friedman :

We have created a system for growth that depended on our building more and more stores to sell more and more stuff made in more and more factories in China, powered by more and more coal that would cause more and more climate change but earn China more and more dollars to buy more and more U.S. T-bills so America would have more and more money to build more and more stores and sell more and more stuff that would employ more and more Chinese ...

We can't do this anymore.

Mall-operating behemoth General Growth Properties plunges in value

In the ongoing collapse at the stock market, big names get the most ink. Weighed down by excessive debt and bad bets in its finance division, industrial giant General Electric has shed more than 80 percent of its value over the last year. Not long ago, it counted as the most valuable corporation in the world. Now, smart people are openly wondering whether it will be the next too-big-to-fail recipient of a government bailout.

AIG, once the globe's premier insurance company, now exists solely by the charity of the U.S. Treasury. It has already consumed $180 billion in taxpayer cash; observers expect it to gobble at least another $70 billion, bringing its total price tag to a staggering quarter trillion dollars. 

Citigroup, Bank of America ... the list goes on: once-mighty corporations that now must beggar the taxpayer in order to live, and whose stock trades at pennies to the dollar of recent valuations.

Here's a name that deserves a bit more attention in this financial meltdown: General Growth Properties, which owns, manages, or has interests in more than 200 shopping malls in 45 states. Staggering under a massive debt load and battered by the bad economy, General Growth looks headed for bankruptcy or a fire sale. As recently as last June, its shares fetched $40. Today, you can snap one up for less than 40 cents.

Does General Growth's plight augur the un-malling of America? Maybe. The Wall Street Journal reported recently that:

Last year, [mall-based] retail sales on a per-square-foot basis in the top 54 U.S. markets declined by their greatest extent since the 1990-91 recession.... Vacancy rates at U.S. malls climbed to 7.1% in the fourth quarter, the highest rate since real estate research firm Reis Inc. started tracking the figure in 2000. And average rents have started to decline.

The mall industry, like so many industries in the modern global economy, thrives on rapid growth fueled by easy credit. Now credit has dried up, debt needs to be repaid, and sales growth has gone into reverse.

Time to start thinking about other economic models?

What the world needs now

More public dancing!

New York governor goes in the tank for industry, backs away from climate plan

It's a shocking reversal from one of the states that pioneered efforts to deal with global warming from electric power plants.

The New York Times reveals that New York state's accidental Gov. David A. Paterson has caved in to energy industry demands and now appears ready to run roughshod over his own experts to give industry free carbon emission permits.

CMU study suggests GM has wildly oversized the batteries in the Chevy Volt plug-in hybrid

Plug-in hybrid vehicles are certainly the car of the very near future and a core climate solution. And electricity is the only alternative fuel that can lead to energy independence (see here). But I have a long been concerned that General Motors has overdesigned its showcase plug-in hybrid electric vehicle, the Chevy Volt (see here).

Now a major new study by a team of researchers from Carnegie Mellon University, "Impact of battery weight and charging patterns on the economic and environmental benefits of plug-in hybrid vehicles" (see here [PDF]) confirms my basic analysis that plug-ins make sense, but a 40-mile all electric range does not:

We find that when charged frequently, every 20 miles or less, using average U.S. electricity, small-capacity PHEVs are less expensive and release fewer GHGs than hybrid-electric vehicles (HEVs) or conventional vehicles ...

Large-capacity PHEVs sized for 40 or more miles of electric-only travel are not cost effective in any scenario, although they could minimize GHG emissions for some drivers.

Bloomberg quotes Jeremy Michalek, an engineering professor who led the study: "Forty miles might be a sweet spot for making sure a lot of people get to work without using gasoline, but you're doing it at a cost that will never be repaid in fuel savings."

Note that CMU considered a "high gas price" of $6.0 a gallon, which is the equivalent about $200 a barrel, a reasonable high price case for the next decade.

Perhaps the most significant finding for car companies who want to enter the plug-in hybrid business, minimize costs, and frankly crush GM, is something I have thought for a long time -- a very short AER can make sense for a large fraction of drivers:

Paul Roberts' MoJo article on farming gets big idea right and details wrong

I like Paul Roberts. I liked his book The End of Food. But I must admit that I was a bit underwhelmed by his recent article on sustainable farming in Mother Jones, "Spoiled: Organic and Local Is So 2008." That's not to say there's nothing to recommend it. His central premise -- that we way we're farming today isn't sustainable and that no large-scale model of what sustainable agriculture would look like currently exists -- is valid and important (as anyone who hangs out around here is well aware).

And any article that gets its money quote from sustainable ag guru Fred Kirschenmann is certainly on the right track. Said Kirschenmann, "We've come to see sustainability as some kind of fixed prescription -- if you just do these 10 things, you will be sustainable, and you won't need to worry about it anymore." Which isn't true, of course.

But that title! Shouldn't it be "conventional agriculture" that's so 2008? Meanwhile, there were far too many straw men in the article for my tastes (ever eaten a straw man? Blech!) Take, for example, the thought experiment supplied by environmental scientist Vaclav Smil on the effect of totally eliminating the use of synthetic fertilizer:

Such an expansion, Smil notes, "would require complete elimination of all tropical rainforests, conversion of a large part of tropical and subtropical grasslands to cropland, and the return of a substantial share of the labor force to field farming -- making this clearly only a theoretical notion."

That's probably accurate as far as it goes. But it's unclear how he modeled this version of organic agriculture - at a minimum it appears to be a vast oversimplification. And his conclusion then becomes the basis upon which to reject the whole organic concept. Meanwhile, look at one of Smil's central assumptions -- that "dietary habits remain constant," i.e. in his experiment we're all eating as much meat, high-fructose corn syrup, and processed foods as we are now. Well, to take one example, you don't have to look far to find folks who will tell you that current meat consumption, especially red meat consumption, is the sine qua non of unsustainability -- Roberts himself held forth at length on that very point in his book. By holding that constant, you've just pre-determined the outcome of your thought experiment. And look at a crucial element in Smil's calculation -- that he's trying to determine "the extra land we'd need for cover crops or forage (to feed the animals to make the manure)." Now I don't know for sure if he presumes the forage will be pasture or cereal (aka corn), but either way that's a pretty high bar he's set.