Latest Articles

Oh, wait, we don’t have a national water policy

This essay was originally published on TomDispatch and is republished here with Tom's kind permission.

---

"Lisa, the whole reason we have elected officials is so we don't have to think all the time. Just like that rainforest scare a few years back. Our officials saw there was a problem and they fixed it, didn't they?" -- Homer Simpson

On June 24, 2008, Louie and I curled up on the couch to watch seven of the nation's foremost water resources experts testify before the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee's Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.

This was a new experience for us. For my part, the issue to be addressed -- "Comprehensive Watershed Management Planning" -- was certainly a change of pace from the subjects I ordinarily follow in Judiciary and Intelligence Committee hearings. I wasn't even entirely sure what a "watershed" was. I knew that, in a metaphorical sense, the word referred to a turning point, but I was a bit fuzzy about its meaning in the world of hydrology. (It's the term used to describe "all land and water areas that drain toward a river or lake.")

What was strange from Louie's point of view was not the topic of the day, but that we were stuck in the house. Usually at that hour, we'd be working in the backyard, where he can better leverage his skill set, which includes chasing squirrels, digging up tomato plants, eating wicker patio chairs, etc. On this particular afternoon, however, the typically cornflower-blue San Jose sky was the color of wet cement, and thick soot was charging down from the nearby Santa Cruz Mountains. Sitting outside would have been about as pleasant as relaxing in a large ashtray.

It would have been difficult, on such a day, not to think about water.

Google Maps adds walking directions

Taking another step toward complete indispensability, Google Maps on Tuesday became the first service of its kind to add walking directions. In addition to searches for car and transit travel, pedestrians — and, hell, Segway-ers too — can now find the most direct and flat route from Point A to Point B. The function works […]

Memo calling for increased offshore drilling and shale development

I have received the text of an Alice-in-Wonderland memo (below) that House Republican leaders will circulate today on legislation they plan to offer. It claims:

To increase the supply American-made energy in environmentally sound ways, the legislation will:

* Open our deep water ocean resources, which will provide an additional 3 million barrels of oil per day;

* Open the Arctic coastal plain, which will provide an additional 1 million barrels of oil per day; and

* Allow development of our nation's shale oil resources, which could provide an additional 2.5 million barrels of oil per day

First off, we opened the vast majority of our deep water ocean resources to drilling two years ago and oil prices doubled.

Second, according to the Bush administration's own energy analysts, ending the federal moratorium on coastal drilling would add perhaps 150,000 barrels of oil per day in the 2020s and have no impact on prices through 2030, unless, as seems likely, California blocks drilling off its coast, in which case it would add well under 100,000 barrels of oil per day in the 2020s.

Third, opening up the "Arctic coastal plain" (GOP-speak for Arctic National Wildlife Refuge) would also have no impact on prices, according to the Bush administration's own energy analysts.

Fourth, you can't develop U.S. shale in environmentally sound ways.

Yet Republican leader John Boehner, Republican Whip Roy Blunt, Conference Chairman Adam Putnam, and Chief Deputy Whip Eric Cantor still have the chutzpah to write:

Guy who understands oil drops knowledge on folks who don’t

“I’m not a big believer. I think you’re going to get a rude awakening as to the value of the East and West coasts when it’s opened up and when it’s put up for sale. When it’s put up for sale, I think you’ll be surprised at the price you get for the tracts.” — […]

Oil execs, the neutral arbiters energy policy has needed for so long

“My friends, we have to drill offshore. We have to do it! Oil executives say within a couple years we could be seeing results from it.” — Republican presidential candidate John McCain, at a town hall meeting in Rochester, N.H.

Popster Miley Cyrus pens ‘eco-anthem’

Photo: mileycyrus.com Fifteen-year-old Disney pop starlet Miley Cyrus (aka Hannah Montana) wants America to wake up and deal with global warming … though she’s not quite sure what that means. At least, that’s what she admits in a song — dubbed an “eco-anthem” by some, though I’m curious what qualifies it as an anthem — […]

Growing demand and tight supply fuels increase in gas prices

In his "Semiannual Monetary Policy Report to the Congress" before the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate, last week, chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke explained why oil prices are so high and are likely to stay that way for the foreseeable future:

The spot price of West Texas intermediate crude oil soared about 60 percent in 2007 and, thus far this year, has climbed an additional 50 percent or so. The price of oil currently stands at about five times its level toward the beginning of this decade. Our best judgment is that this surge in prices has been driven predominantly by strong growth in underlying demand and tight supply conditions in global oil markets. Over the past several years, the world economy has expanded at its fastest pace in decades, leading to substantial increases in the demand for oil. Moreover, growth has been concentrated in developing and emerging market economies, where energy consumption has been further stimulated by rapid industrialization and by government subsidies that hold down the price of energy faced by ultimate users ...

On the supply side, despite sharp increases in prices, the production of oil has risen only slightly in the past few years.

Matt Yglesias is making sense

On Republican gas price demagoguery: [Anti-density zoning and minimum parking mandates] are regulatory barriers to solving our energy problems every bit as much as the ban on offshore drilling is. And conservatives are against regulation, right? Except the anti-drilling regulation is good for the environment and for coastal economies whereas anti-urbanist regulation is economically inefficient […]

World Bank overstates commitment to environment, says internal watchdog

The World Bank overstates its commitment to financing sustainability-minded projects in developing countries and should greatly improve its efforts, according to an internal review. Official estimates hold that the bank put $59 billion into environment-focused projects between 1990 and 2007; while the bank’s coding system makes it difficult to figure out specifics, the Independent Evaluation […]

Netroots Nation pledges to cut footprint … in 2009

Five pounds of stuff.

That's what greeted me at this year's Netroots Nation '08 conference in Austin, Texas. As is the case with most conventions, registration came with a schwag bag loaded with magazines, pamphlets, and assorted trinkets from sponsors.

I took the bag back to my hotel room and unpacked it one piece at a time, spreading the contents on my bed. (I actually had to stand on a chair to get a wide enough view to get all the schwag in one shot.) While most liberal and green conventions these days make at least token efforts to ease impacts -- an organic cotton bag, green trinkets -- the NN08 schwag bag didn't do anything to distinguish itself.

Organizers of NN08 went out of their way to include the best and brightest voices of the environmental movement, not just as panelists but as keynote speakers. They've also pledged to green the event next year, holding it at Pittsburgh's convention center, a green building certified to LEED's gold level.

But the schwag bag was only the first sign that NN08 would miss some key opportunities to cut the event's environmental footprint and direct dollars to green businesses.