Latest Articles

Johnson Pussyfoots

EPA chief will decide whether to regulate greenhouse gases … next year Climatic evidence notwithstanding, U.S. EPA chief Stephen Johnson would like to assure you that snoozers are not losers. On Friday, Johnson told a House special committee on global warming that he’s going to put off making up his mind about whether vehicle greenhouse-gas […]

Water You Waiting For?

Donate to Grist, win a chance at splash-tastic prizes You know how two-thirds of the planet is covered in water? Funny thing: we still need to raise two-thirds of our fundraising goal, and today we’re featuring water-related prizes. See the connection there? See it? Ahem. To show just how grateful we are to those of […]

What rules would you impose to address global heating if you were

America, nominally a democracy, acquired a strange fetish for "czars" during the Nixon administration (how telling).

I remember William Simon being appointed "energy czar" back in the 70s. Like the Romanoffs, he had a fearsome title and did nothing good for most of the people in his country.

Still, it can be a useful exercise to think about what you would do if you suddenly had responsibility for something like dealing with global heating, and you could make the policy changes you thought wisest. What would yours be?

G8 nations agree on weak climate deal, Bush admin tools with Clean Water Act, and more

Read the articles mentioned at the end of the podcast: A Jury Of Your Pyrrhus Raptor ‘Round Their Fingers An Ugly Alternative Find ITT on eBay Clean Water Is Highly Overrated

A. Carl Leopold, nature activist, answers Grist’s questions

What work do you do? Mostly the organizations I’m involved with are oriented toward active programs for nurturing quality pieces of nature. I am on the board of the Aldo Leopold Foundation; president of the Tropical Forestry Initiative; founding president of the Finger Lakes Land Trust; on the board of the Black Locust Initiative; vice […]

Your math teacher knew you’d need this stuff someday!

During one of our many discussions here at Gristmill around cutting greenhouse-gas emissions, I did some figuring and realized that, if we started in 2008, we would have three "halving" periods between then and 2050 if we could just cut emissions by 5 percent per year -- not an unreachable goal for people who absolutely waste a buttload of energy.

I've been talking up what I've taken to calling "The 5% Solution" here in Springfield (where the Simpsons live), making contact with a local group to propose starting a campaign for it as a project of the organization, with the idea that it would spread to other towns, cities, and states, and then all over America (insert Howard Dean-like scream here).

This morning, the fellow I've been talking to sent me to this link about something I have not heard of, the Sierra Club's "2% Solution." What?! Have I been left at the gate? Did I invent something well after the patent had already been issued to someone else?

Turns out, no.

The days when they would take whatever you served up are gone

Why does Amory Lovins say that the market is deciding against nukes?

On smart grids

My last post made the points that:

• Long-distance transmission lines tying different climate zones together reduce storage needs to a few hours capacity, by ensuring that most of the time when one machine is not producing, another is.


• The least expensive and most ecologically sound way to store electricity on the particular scale needed is with closed-cycle, lined, modular pumped storage that recirculates the same water over and over again, and thus does not draw on rivers, lakes, or other natural watercourses.

However a grid must not only be able to meet baseload (the part of demand that is the same 24 hours a day) plus daily peaks. It also has to deal with seasonal peaks as well. After all, in cooling climates (say Houston) electric demand will peak at a much higher rate in the summer than the winter. Similarly in a heating climate (say New England, Toronto, or Glasgow), demand will peak much more in the winter than the summer.

The same extended grid that can help smooth out supply can also help smooth out demand. If we have a grid that extends 3,000-5,000 kilometers across multiple climate zones, you can connect heating and cooling climates so that summer and winter peaks vary less.

Skeptical about skeptics

One last comment on NASA administrator Michael Griffin's comments about global warming. The skeptics out there heralded his comments. For example, Bob Carter was quoted as saying, "My main reaction to Michael Griffin is to congratulate him on his clear-sightedness, not to mention his courage in speaking out on such a controversial topic."

What these skeptics seem to forget (or conveniently ignore) is that Griffin's comments were only about the moral question of whether we should address climate change, not about the reality of human-induced climate change. From the New York Times: "In his comments to NPR and in today's interview, he did not express any doubt that the warming trend is real or that humans have been found to play a part in that rise." Skeptics never comment on this aspect of Griffin's statement.

This is a good example of why skeptics cannot be trusted. A skeptic would only tell you the point about Griffin's questioning the moral aspect of climate change policy, and conveniently forget to tell you that Griffin specifically endorses the dominant scientific view that humans are warming the world. Remember that next time you hear a skeptical statement about climate change.

Nice job, Einstein

I'll give you some hints. Just a few days ago, a man walked on a stage a few hundred yards from where I sit to accept an honorary degree in science. Following is the speech that preceded the award:

As Einstein is to relativity you are to biodiversity -- the insight that our world is unimaginatively rich in its number of species, whose lives are inextricably woven together. This idea has powered much subsequent biological research and re-shaped forever human understanding of the world and our place within it. This intellectual journey began, as so often in science, with a child's curiosity -- in your case with the ants you collected in the series of Southern towns in which you were raised. Your fascination in the face of nature's detail led to your adult study of how species adapt to their surroundings and how genes and culture interact to affect social behavior. Most recently you have inspired the growing inquiry into the vast array of species with which we share this planet and into the delicate web that holds together all life. In doing so you have fathered the modern environmental movement and inspired countless scientists with the knowledge that there is so very much more of life to be discovered. Like Einstein you, too, are dedicated to unifying ideas across the disciplines -- to finding those areas in which science, humanities, and social sciences converge -- and to exploring how science can best inform religion, morality, and ethics. And, as relativity shaped so much of the human agenda of the Twentieth Century, so biodiversity stands poised to do in the Twenty-First -- providing head-spinning new insights along with the sober realization that upon the use we make of this knowledge hangs the very existence of human life.