Articles by David Roberts

A story in increasing fears of climate-change ‘tipping points’

Next up is Juliet Eilperin, documenting the increasing worry among experts about global-warming "tipping point" scenarios.

While scientists remain uncertain when such a point might occur, many say it is urgent that policymakers cut global carbon dioxide emissions in half over the next 50 years or risk the triggering of changes that would be irreversible.

There are three specific events that these scientists describe as especially worrisome and potentially imminent, although the time frames are a matter of dispute: widespread coral bleaching that could damage the world's fisheries within three decades; dramatic sea level rise by the end of the century that would take tens of thousands of years to reverse; and, within 200 years, a shutdown of the ocean current that moderates temperatures in northern Europe.

Irreversible changes, in the next few decades. Whee!

Eilperin also touches on the political pressure being put on Hansen, and digs up this deliciously Orwellian quote:

Mary L. Cleave, deputy associate administrator for NASA's Office of Earth Science, said the agency insists on monitoring interviews with scientists to ensure they are not misquoted.

"People could see it as a constraint," Cleave said. "As a manager, I might see it as protection."

Yes, Dr. Hansen, this is for your own good. Now please relax -- it's easier when you don't struggle ...

A story on the suppression of climate scientist James Hansen

Wow. Here it is only Saturday night and already the weekend's seen two stellar pieces of reporting on global warming, from two of environmental journalism's top stars, on page A1 of their respective newspapers.

First up is Andy Revkin's latest revelation on the Bush administration's ongoing defensive maneuvers against, uh, reality. In this case, reality was being described by the closest thing climate science has to a wise man: James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Administration officials have -- not officially, but clearly, in informal phone calls and memos -- let it be known that he needs to shut up about policy responses to global warming.

The fresh efforts to quiet him, Dr. Hansen said, began in a series of calls after a lecture he gave on Dec. 6 ... he said that significant emission cuts could be achieved with existing technologies, particularly in the case of motor vehicles, and that without leadership by the United States, climate change would eventually leave the earth "a different planet."

..

In one call, George Deutsch, a recently appointed public affairs officer at NASA headquarters, rejected a request from a producer at National Public Radio to interview Dr. Hansen, said Leslie McCarthy, a public affairs officer responsible for the Goddard Institute.

Citing handwritten notes taken during the conversation, Ms. McCarthy said Mr. Deutsch called N.P.R. "the most liberal" media outlet in the country. She said that in that call and others, Mr. Deutsch said his job was "to make the president look good" and that as a White House appointee that might be Mr. Deutsch's priority.

I have trouble working up umbrage about this stuff any more, it's so routine. What strikes me most is the absurdly counterproductive politics of it is. Hansen's going to have 10 times the soapbox now -- and they can't touch him.

Update [2006-1-29 15:26:20 by David Roberts]: More inside details from RealClimate.

Font size

You may notice that the default font size on Grist (and Gristmill) has increased (starting today and covering the entire site within a week or so). This is being done in response to several complaints from readers and over a year of tireless advocacy (read: obnoxious nagging) by yours truly. The site should be more accessible now, more easily readable by a wider range of people. There will be more scrolling, but this being 2006 and all, I think people have gotten over their aversion to scrolling.

Let us know what you think -- if anything.

(And props to Chris!)

Big profits, little ethics

Exxon Mobil Corp., you may have heard, just ended the most profitable year ever, for any American corporation. Ever. To the tune of $34 billion.

That means Exxon pulled down about $1,110 a second last year.

Nonetheless, as Carl Pope extensively documents, the company remains one of the biggest deadbeats in the world, still digging in its heels about paying victims of the Exxon Valdez oil spill (2,000 of which are dead -- and their surviving family members have no standing in the case, and will never receive anything). Then there's the matter of oil and gas royalties, which -- despite the skyrocketing cost of oil and gas, and subsequent industry profits -- have remained level over the past few years. All that profit is going directly into corporate coffers.

"Without a shadow of a doubt, Exxon has the best management in the oil industry,"' said Doug Leggate, an analyst at Citigroup Inc. in New York.

Yeah, I guess you could say that. If you were a soulless fuckwit.

Anyhoo, the point of all this is that ExxposeExxon has a new video up lampooning Exxon, and it's kinda funny.

(Also, here's my tribute to departing Exxon CEO Lee Raymond, from August '05.)