Latest Articles

Sobering lessons from 250 million years ago

One of the very few reasonable points made by climate skeptics is that it's hard to have a great deal of confidence in computer-model predictions of a system as complex and varied as the global climate system. It is comprised of several subsystems -- the ocean, the atmosphere, the cryosphere, and the biosphere -- each extremely complex in its own right. There is some reassurance to be had in hindcasts and other modeling successes, not the least being the triumph of model predictions over the contradictory satellite records.

But there are really so many unknowns, both the known unknowns and the unknown unknowns, that it is reasonable to cast a suspicious eye on a forecast of global mean temperature in the year 2100. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a climate scientist who would not admit it.

But the obfuscators and denialists fail to realize something critical: in decision-making, especially when potential futures are extremely bad, uncertainty is not your friend.

‘What about mid-century cooling?’–No one said CO2 is the only climate influence

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

Objection: There was global cooling in the '40s, '50s, and '60s, even while human greenhouse-gas emissions were rising. Clearly, temperature is not being driven by CO2.

Are the wind credit cards deceptive?

A kerfuffle has broken out in the green blogosphere. The state of play thus far:

• Steve Johnson noticed the new "Wind Power Card" from Renewable Choice Energy, available now at a Whole Foods near you. He is not a big fan:

  When you buy a card, you don't get any wind-generated electricity delivered to your home however. In fact, all you get is a card that doubles as a refrigerator magnet. Actually, you don't even get any credits, it's just a word they use to give you a sense of getting something from your money. The money you spend goes towards helping Renewable Choice Energy buy and sell electricity.
  
  The cards are not even an investment, because you won't get any material value in return. It's all going to help another company get rich. Most companies seek investors to secure capital. But in this case, RCE is asking people for free money under the context of doing your part to help the environment.

• The mighty BoingBoing (1.7 million unique visitors a day) picked it up and added some RCE bashing.
• Over at Sustainablog, Jeff responded with some umbrage, defending RCE.
• The mighty BoingBoing responded in kind, and several readers chimed in. Consensus: wind credits may be OK, but the cards are deceptive.
• Shea Gunther, founder of RCE, pointed to a post about how wind credits work, and another with pictures of how the cards are presented in Whole Foods.
• CitizenGreen has thoughts; GroovyGreen weighs in; so does Ecospree; Jeff again; Treehugger too.

What to make of all this?

‘The satellites show cooling’–No, they don’t

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

Objection: Satellite readings, which are much more accurate, show that the earth is in fact cooling.

I wonder how long before this one stops coming up?

Go veggie — a poll

With Science about the collapse of the world's fisheries, I think it's appropriate once again to examine a topic that doesn't get enough attention: our diets. Not only does eating fish exacerbate the collapse of marine ecosystems and lead to the death of millions of other creatures, including turtles, dolphins, and whales, but the energy used to catch deep-sea fish is equivalent to factory-farmed beef.

Why only takings?

I have a question about these "regulatory takings" measures (which Eric is ably blogging about here, here, and here). Maybe Eric can answer it, or one of you can.

The basic idea behind these things is as follows: the government passes some new regulation that restricts land use; a landowner thereby loses some of the value of his land (e.g., he can no longer sell it to a strip mall developer); the government is obligated to compensate that owner for the lost value. Only fair, right?

Put aside the practical consequences for a moment. Instead, answer me this:

California’s per capita GHG emissions are falling

According to this, California's total greenhouse gas emissions rose by about 14 percent from 1990 through 2004.

OK, so that's not exactly good news.

But it's not the worst news in the world either, really. Over the same period, California's population grew by about 20 percent; so, running the numbers, it looks as if per person emissions fell by about, oh, 5 percent. That is, at the same time California's cars and homes got bigger and its economy boomed, the state managed a 5 percent reduction in per-capita GHG emissions.

Stories of how Measure 37 has affected Oregon landowners

For two days now, I've been blathering on about the unholy "property rights" ballot measures in 2006 -- see here and here. But if you really want to understand the potential impacts of these takings initiatives, there's one real-world example: Oregon.

For two years, Oregon has been the only state in the nation with a pay-or-waive law on the books: Measure 37. The results clearly illustrate the dangers facing other Western states. So as a way to warn other places of what can happen, Sightline Institute (where I work) recently compiled a batch of real-life stories from neighbors and communities in Oregon.

You can read the full stories, along with some additional context, in our report, Property Wrongs (PDF). If you don't have time for that, here's the bite-sized version:

The truth about ethanol

Harvard environmental science professor Michael B. McElroy takes a sober look at ethanol:

The balance in terms of emission of greenhouse gases is close to a wash for the United States: the reduction in net emissions of carbon dioxide obtained by using corn rather than petroleum as a "feedstock" for motor fuel is largely offset by additional emissions of the several hundredfold more potent greenhouse gas, nitrous oxide, formed as a byproduct of the nitrogen fertilizer used to grow the corn.

I don't know anything about McElroy's potential biases, but he certainly comes off as a serious-minded critic rather than a hit man. So if you're interested in a hype-free view of ethanol production in the U.S., this seems like a good place to start.

Car-maker planning to expand the family

The Prius may soon be more than just one oh-so-stereotyped hybrid motor vehicle. Toyota's talking about starting a family of the cars, and in this case I'd have to support wanton reproduction.

The automaker announced this week that they are considering creating a line of the gasoline-electric cars. It could include a wagon and a smaller, Smart-Car-esque inner-city model.