Latest Articles

‘There is no consensus’–If this is not consensus, what would consensus look like?

(Part of the How to Talk to a Global Warming Skeptic guide)

Objection: Climate is complicated and there are lots of competing theories and unsolved mysteries. Until this is all worked out, one can't claim there is consensus on global warming theory. Until there is, we should not take any action.

This is similar to the "global warming is a hoax" article, but at least here we can narrow down just what the consensus is about.

Answer: Sure there are plenty of unsolved problems and active debates in climate science. But if you look at the research papers coming out these days, the debates are about things like why model predictions of outgoing longwave radiation at the top of the atmosphere in tropical latitudes differ from satellite readings, or how the size of ice crystals in cirrus clouds affect the amount of incoming shortwave reflected back into space, or precisely how much stratospheric cooling can be attributed to ozone depletion rather than an enhanced greenhouse effect.

No one in the climate science community is debating whether or not changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations alter the greenhouse effect, or if the current warming trend is outside of the range of natural variability, or if sea levels have risen over the last century.

This is where there is a consensus.

Public transit that would work in Houston

No, mass transit is not just for cities like Boston, New York, and Washington D.C. CyberTran^[1] is a form of mass transit suitable for most parts of the nation, from suburbs to the densest parts of Manhattan. It is not so much a new system as an overlooked one. The advantages:

• It offers 24-hour availability.
• Your journey time is about the same as in a car.
• Your rail-car is ready when you are.
• You never need to stand.
• Stops are near your home and your final destination.
• You can read the paper during your trip.

No magic is involved.

Greens get giddy over election results, and more

Read the articles mentioned at the end of the podcast: A Green Party Still Giddy After All These Hours Heart of a Howard In Toilets Is the Preservation of the World Now Utah-kin Read the articles mentioned at the end of the podcast: Show Time Snob Appeal To Tell the Truth Being Julian Chilly Screens […]

City passes municipal carbon tax

Have you been on the edge of your seat wondering whether Boulder, Colo.'s carbon tax passed?

It did, with about 58 percent of the vote, making the city the first in the nation to pass a municipal tax charging residents and businesses for the energy they use.

Mixed reports

Today in E&E Daily (sub. only), there's a chipper piece from Darren Samuelsohn about the prospects for action on climate change in the 110th Congress. Look, how exciting!

The 2006 election outcome may be less than a week old, but the pieces have started coming together for how the next Congress will tackle the global warming issue.

"Clearly, it's a sea change," said Emily Figdor of U.S. PIRG. "For the first time in a long time, Congress can finally get down to the business of what's happening."

Incoming Senate EPW Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said last week she would take a lead role for the Democrats. Speaking with reporters, Boxer said she plans to use California's new global warming law -- requiring a statewide cut of emissions of 25 percent by 2020 -- as a model in the drafting of federal climate legislation.

Wo0t! Right?

But a few paragraphs later:

Methinks the definition of ‘eco-friendly’ …

... is getting somewhat stretched.

Nike is recognized for sustainability, commutability

Swoosh, for those not hopelessly entrenched in American consumer culture, refers to Nike, and is not to be confused with the enviably-young-and-far-more-talented-than-I-will-ever-be Smoosh.

My point being:

He would have us accept disaster

Robert Samuelson is fixated on pushing a simple point about global warming: we can't do anything about it.

Like so many pundits pushing right-wing talking points around economics, he pitches this stance as a kind of brave, hard-headed realism, in contrast to all those other deluded fools who think we can solve problems. Why anyone would want to spend his time on this planet explicitly and openly fighting progress on the biggest challenge humanity faces is beyond me, I'll confess. But to each his own.

I wrote about his defeatism in an earlier column, and now he's at it again. After some unsubstantiated bashing of the Stern report, he lists three reasons why the problem is hopeless.

With today's technologies, we don't know how to cut greenhouse gases in politically and economically acceptable ways.

This is ... what's the word? ... bullshit.

Shark finning divisive issue

A few days ago I came across this post by Doctor Mark Hyman touting the medicinal properties of food. During his recent trip to China, the doctor was "treated" to the "delicacy" of shark fin soup, which he claims can help ease arthritis and possibly fight cancer.

Umbra on travel mugs

Dear Umbra, I am putting together a fundraiser for the Environmental Law Association at the George Washington University Law School, whereby I intend to sell coffee mugs. If you saw all the paper cups that get thrown away at my school you would be in tears (at least two trips to Starbucks a day: double […]