Latest Articles

Just when the anger was fading

Ralph Nader is thinking about running. Are we allowed to laugh about this now, or are there still enough idiots around that we have to care?

In the summer heat

Global warming is going to make things hotter. Nuclear power plants need lots of cool water to operate. When it gets hot, the cool water gets used up quickly. You do the maths.

Articles about climate skeptics

Even while rejecting the authority of the most comprehensive and reviewed scientific document on any subject, namely the IPCC report, one of the most common climate delusionist tactics is the argument from authority. Whether it is Alexander Cockburn responding to George Monbiot or some anonymous person on some blog, everyone has some personal "scientist" friend who assures them the rest of the world has gone mad.

When an argument from authority is invoked it is perfectly legitimate to then examine said authority's, um ... authority, to see if there is really a good reason we should take their word over the word of ... well, just about everybody who would know.

Mixing up paths and goals

RPS legislation (which seems to have recently died in the Senate, although could conceivably be reintroduced on amendment) is well-intended, but poorly constructed.

Roll the clock back 100 years, and assume you're the legislator tasked with figuring out how to get the population to go West. Which do you choose: (a) the Homestead Act, giving people land as soon as they prove that they can get there and cultivate it, or (b) a tax rebate to anyone who hitches five white horses to a Conestoga wagon and takes Route 66 west?

Lies, more lies, and still more lies from the head of CEQ

Tim Dickinson’s Rolling Stone piece on the Bush administration’s coordinated attempts to stifle action on global warming is now online, and it’s worth a read. (Also worth checking out: the accompanying multimedia slideshow.) Lots of it will be familiar to long-time readers, but it’s nice to see it pulled together into a single (extraordinarily damning) […]

After many years of trying, we’re moving in the right direction at last

I'm a bit bleary eyed after midnight votes, and about to do an event in Boston on the energy fight, but I wanted to come back here to Gristmill to tell you how good it feels to have gotten something good done in the Senate instead of just stopping bad things from happening.

A year ago I was battling to stop drilling in ANWR. Last night, finally -- after years of battling and five years after we introduced the Kerry-McCain legislation to raise fuel efficiency standards -- we actually accomplished things in the Senate that will improve the environment.

This is something that never would've happened with Bill Frist as the Majority Leader. But with Harry Reid leading the Senate, we were able to finally pass the first significant rise in CAFE standards in over a generation.

Senate Dems still fighting for energy package

Disappointed about the half-victory in the Senate yesterday? Don’t give up hope yet. Majority leader Harry Reid’s still got some fight in him (from CongressNow, sub. rqd.): Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) this afternoon said he will revive the energy tax package that was defeated amid Republican opposition this week, saying he was confident […]

Picking apart an argument against carbon taxes

Yesterday's L.A. Times ran an odd op-ed calling carbon taxes an ineffectual antidote to global warming. Unlike other critiques that brand carbon taxes politically unpalatable, this one argued that they're simply not up to the job of cutting carbon emissions:

Carbon taxes -- taxes on energy sources that emit carbon dioxide (CO2) -- aren't a bad idea. But they only work in some situations. Specifically, they do not work in the transportation sector, the source of a whopping 40% of California's greenhouse gas emissions (and a third of U.S. emissions).

I've known Daniel Sperling, the author of the op-ed, for decades. As the long-time director of the Institute of Transportation Studies at UC Davis, Dan probably knows as much about automotive engineering as anyone in the world. What's more, he's conscientious, tireless, and concerned.

So why do I think he's wrong about carbon taxes? Actually, Dan is part right, but his message is wrong. Let me explain.

From Sexy to Sexier

Who doesn’t appreciate a good asset? G-Money is trying to get ScarJo on board for Live Earth. And why not? She’s got great assets — which is, alas, more than can be said for the rockers in Antarctica. We heart geeks and all, but they ain’t no Kelly. Photo: John Sciulli/ WireImage.com Cue violin music […]

Self-proclaimed conservatives often simply just like different outcomes

Michigan has an important case up before a state Supreme Court known for two things: Making radical revisions to laws the Republican majority dislikes, and proclaiming its strict textualism in interpreting the law.

In the case before the Supreme Court, attorneys for Nestle Waters North America have argued in opposition to citizens' rights under [the Michigan Environmental Protection Act], saying that citizens must be "directly affected" by an environmental action to go to court over it. That means only people who can show pollution, impairment or destruction of natural resources on their own property could take action under MEPA. Nestle, which wants to continue pumping water from a large Michigan wetland for bottling and sale, mostly outside the state, is being challenged under MEPA by a group called Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation.