Latest Articles

California wildfires mucking up state’s air quality

California’s raging wildfires, which have burned some 660 square miles in the last few weeks, are also significantly worsening air quality, causing high levels of soot, and aggravating asthma patients. “Our waiting rooms are full of people with sore throats, itchy eyes, and sniffles,” said a respiratory therapist with Fresno’s Sequoia Community Health Center. Already […]

Climate policy isn’t a pill to swallow, it’s a way off a sinking ship

This Ezra Klein post echoes what has rather rapidly become conventional wisdom among progressives on climate legislation, and it makes me want to tear my hair out. The idea is that climate legislation will inevitably hurt people financially in the short-term, in order to secure environmental benefits in the distant future, so the only way […]

A possible consensus perspective on the tax vs. cap debate

Last revised: 07/10/2008

In his recent Congressional testimony, James Hansen talked about a "perfect storm" of climatological tipping points that may soon converge to yield global cataclysm. But another kind of perfect storm is brewing: a technology storm that could rapidly displace fossil fuels and restore global climate sustainability.

Effective regulatory policy could provide the kind of incentives and stable investment climate that are needed to facilitate the clean-energy revolution. Unfortunately, the "caps and standards" approach that is currently in vogue cannot provide the economic backbone for a rapid and orderly transition to a sustainable global economy. Emission caps and performance standards are rarely if ever set at levels that represent true sustainability, and are generally biased toward extreme cost conservatism. Regulators try to second-guess markets in setting targets and schedules, while markets try to second-guess regulators; the instability and unpredictability of carbon prices deters long-term investment in clean energy.

A carbon tax like the one advocated by Dr. Hansen and many economists would provide price stability, and could theoretically be five times more cost-efficient than cap-and-trade, but taxes are politically verboten. Industry interests oppose taxes because of their alleged high regulatory costs and cap-and-traders won't let go of their hallowed "environmental certainty."

So the tax-versus-cap debate goes round and round, never resolving and never converging on a credible climate stabilization strategy. But the debate could be resolved if policy makers -- and the economics profession -- could put aside their dogmatisms and recognize several basic principles of climate policy:

White House disses Supreme Court, kills $2 trillion savings

The following post is by Earl Killian, guest blogger at Climate Progress.

The Wall Street Journal published new material ($ub. req'd) on the White House's emasculation of last year's Supreme Court global warming decision: The court told the EPA that the Clean Air Act requires it to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

The White House seeks to nullify that decision by stuffing the EPA document down a memory hole and substituting antithetical language. The WSJ has seen the EPA's draft document and reports:

The draft ... outlines how the government, under the Clean Air Act, could regulate greenhouse-gas emissions from mobile sources such as cars, trucks, trains, planes and boats, and from stationary sources such as power stations, chemical plants and refineries. The document is based on a multimillion-dollar study conducted over two years.

A review of Fields of Fuel

Fields of Fuel, directed by Josh Tickell, is visually compelling and technically polished, which unfortunately bestows a veneer of legitimacy the film does not deserve.

Promotional films are stereotypically one-sided, ignoring or glossing over negatives while exaggerating and or fabricating positives. That is to be expected, but what set this film apart from your generic promotional film is Tickell's success at manipulating viewers' emotions.

The EPA documents the White House doesn’t want you to see

Brad Johnson over at Wonk Room acquired a copy of the EPA’s recommendations on regulating greenhouse-gas emissions that the White House has been trying so hard to hide. The documents give you a good idea why: EPA officials concluded that the benefits of new, tougher standards “far outweigh their costs.” In fact, if gas prices […]

Staycation, all I ever wanted

"Staycation ... a portmanteau that combines "stay" and "vacation" and refers to a holiday that takes place either at or near home."

With gas well above $4 per gallon this summer, and with airlines raising prices and canceling flights because of high fuel costs, it's not too surprising to find a word like "staycation" gaining a toehold in the North American lexicon. Google now finds nearly 200,000 web pages that use the word -- most of them added within the last few months, if my casual browsing is any indicator.

But even back when fuel wasn't so pricey, some of my favorite vacations were spent within a 50 mile radius of home. It's easy to forget how many parks, museums, nature walks, boat rides, and all-around fun can be found close to where you live -- which makes a staycation a perfect opportunity to reconnect yourself to your home town.

So I'm curious: Is anyone out there planning a staycation this year? Where are you, and what do you plan on doing?

Mainstream media realizes that McCain’s energy rhetoric and record don’t match up

The mainstream media has started to pick up on the fact that John McCain’s energy policy is totally inconsistent. Bloomberg: As a senator, John McCain has condemned policies that pick market winners and losers, aiming particular criticism at government ethanol subsidies as a taxpayer rip-off. As a presidential candidate, the Arizona Republican himself is backing […]

Snippets from the news

• More Americans view oil drilling higher priority than energy conservation. • World is enjoying a “green energy gold rush.” • Donation will help Princeton tackle energy and environment issues. • India spells out vague climate plan. • Portland bike-rental scheme hits the wall. • Goodyear offers refunds for misleading ads.

Satellite images show rapid deforestation in Papua New Guinea and Amazon

The following post is by Ken Levenson, guest blogger at Climate Progress.

Pushed from center stage by the expected record arctic ice and permafrost melt, tropical rain forest destruction has been elbowing its way back through the smoke and into view. This Mongabay article, "Papua New Guinea's rainforests disappearing faster than thought," is one such look:

Previously, the forest loss was estimated at 139,000 hectares per year between 1990 and 2005. But now?

Using satellite images to reveal changes in forest cover between 1972 and 2002 ... Papua New Guinea lost more than 5 million hectares of forest over the past three decades ... Worse, deforestation rates may be accelerating, with the pace of forest clearing reaching 362,000 hectares (895,000 acres) per year in 2001. The study warns that at current rates 53 percent of the country's forests could be lost or seriously degraded by 2021.

Stunning. Adding insult to injury -- the good news as reported last Thursday in the New Straits Times: