Latest Articles

Umbra on adult tricycles

Dear Umbra, I want to reduce my carbon footprint. I already take a commuter train to work, but the station is down a steep hill from my house, so I drive the first mile or so in the morning and back up the hill at night. The train station has lock-ups for cycles and I’m […]

An effective political response to the Republican push for drilling

Following up on this and this: The Democrats need an effective response to the drill-and-burn message coming out of the GOP. It’s a fight the right thinks it’s winning and Dems think they’re losing. Problem is, that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy; Dems get intimidated into hedging and equivocating, while the right pounds home a consistent, […]

McCain adviser Forbes suggests candidate will dump cap-and-trade plan

Steve Forbes, who serves as an economic adviser to John McCain, suggested on The Glenn Beck Program last week that he expected the Republican presidential candidate to abandon his call for a cap-and-trade system to regulate emissions once he takes office: I think cap and trade is going to go the way of some other […]

There’s only one way to get big near-term carbon reductions

If we want to stabilize atmospheric CO2 at 450 ppm around 2050 -- the minimum necessary, which still might carry major impacts -- we need to achieve at least 2 percent average annual net reductions in emissions, globally, starting in two years. Not only do the near term emissions reductions matter the most, but it will get easier, not harder, as we go along. Solar PV and solar thermal are likely to become cheaper than new coal plants in a decade or so. They will also probably become cheaper than wind around the same time, and together these resources will make it possible to eliminate about three quarters of fossil generation.

It may be possible to exceed the 2 percent rate. But the only way to know that is to achieve 2 percent first. Nothing weaker than 2 percent is particularly worth talking about, and anything stronger is very hard to achieve. Also, any strategy to reduce CO2 emissions must address ongoing growth. While there are many reasons to believe the rate of new growth will change, as it has done historically, it is at present about 1.5 percent per year. Thus a 2 percent annual net reduction in today's world means a 3.5 percent gross reduction.

This series discusses the implications of this goal for the U.S. electric industry.

McCain’s switch on offshore drilling brings him big money from Big Oil

While the drumbeat for more domestic drilling is unlikely to get additional oil flowing anytime soon, it has increased the flow of cash to GOP presidential candidate John McCain. McCain changed his position on offshore drilling last month, calling for coastal areas to be opened to exploration, and since then he has been campaigning hard […]

Advocates pushing LEDs into the spotlight

Compact fluorescents have had their time in the sun; it’s time to herald the era of LEDs, say advocates. Light-emitting diodes are bright, extremely long-lasting, über-efficient, and can color-shift by remote control (fun!). The bulbs shine in many traffic lights, colored the Times Square ball on New Year’s Eve, may soon light up the Empire […]

EDF’s support for self-cooling cans got deservedly chilly reception

Ken Ward posted an intelligent critique of the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF). I want to anticipate a response. EDF always says something along the lines of "We are getting the absolute best deal available. Go with us, or you will end up settling for something worse, probably nothing." Let's set the wayback machine to 1997 and look at a case where the mainstream environmental community did not go along with EDF.

Briefly: The Joseph Company wanted to market soda in a self-chilling can, cooling produced via HFC R-134a, a greenhouse gas many times more potent than CO2. The HFC in one of these cans would have produced a greenhouse forcing equivalent to driving a car 200 miles. EDF saw this as a perfect opportunity for emissions trading. This product is going to come to market regardless of what we do, they intoned solemnly. The Joseph Company is willing to offset their emissions -- a win-win situation.

Over the objections of EDF, the rest of the environmental community, including grassroots EDF members, stepped up and stopped this stupid project. Eventually a new version that uses CO2 was developed instead; this improved product is as bad as for the environment as canned soda normally is, but at least is not several thousand times worse. If EDF had succeeded in helping to push it through, they would be offering it today as an example of practical politics to win environmental goals, rather than an absolutely unnecessary cave. Read the long version at Nonprofit Watch.

Driving cutback in U.S. bankrupting fund for infrastructure improvements

High gasoline prices in the United States have prompted a sustained cutback in driving, and the resulting dip in revenue from the federal gas tax is already canceling plans for infrastructure projects due to lack of funding. Right now, roughly one-quarter of bridges in the U.S. are either “functionally obsolete” or “structurally deficient,” and one […]

If we just trust Monsanto and ADM, we can eat and drive to our heart’s content

I’ve been a pretty harsh critic of industrial agriculture for a while. I’ve also been known to utter unkind words about the government’s extraordinary, multibillion-dollar effort to promote ethanol. But I’ve changed my mind. I now believe chemical-dependent, monocrop agriculture can be counted on to not only “feed the world,” but also keep its hundreds […]

EPA administrator Stephen Johnson neglects his federal oath

This post is by ClimateProgress guest blogger Bill Becker, executive director of the Presidential Climate Action Project.

-----

Some of us had high hopes for Stephen Johnson when President Bush appointed him in March 2005 as administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Johnson was not a former oil-industry lobbyist or Halliburton executive. He was a career civil servant who had been with the federal government for 24 years. He was a scientist, not a political hack, and he had served under both Democrat and Republican presidents.

I could relate, although my federal career was the reverse of Johnson's.