Skip to content
Grist home
Grist home

Articles by David Roberts

David Roberts was a staff writer for Grist. You can follow him on Twitter, if you're into that sort of thing.

All Articles

  • And there’s massive demand.

    Holy smokes! Mike Millikin reports that pre-orders for the wee-little ZAP "Smart Car" have topped $750 million. That's pretty amazing. Apparently the U.S. Department of Transportation has signed off on it, so as soon as ZAP finds a U.S. distributor, the candy-cars are on their way. I want one!

    For more on the Smart Car, see these two previous posts by Mike.

  • Huh?

    There's a good interview with Christie Whitman over on Environmental Science & Technology. I go back and forth about Whitman, but she definitely puts her best -- and by "best," of course I mean, "most sympathetic to my own views" -- foot forward in this interview.

    I found this a bit bizarre though. When asked about climate change, she says:

    In fairness, I think we can do more. I think we can get a cap on carbon that would give utilities time to reach it without so dislocating the industry that it will drive the costs of energy out of sight. And I think, ultimately, we will have a cap on carbon. But you also have the studies, I think two years ago, from NASA showing the impacts of land change.

    So there are still scientific differences on where to focus the dollars. The president has acknowledged that climate change is occurring. But then Michael Crichton, who is enormously popular, writes a book [State of Fear] saying that it's not happening. And that sets you back. So it is not as widely accepted as it should be.

    Michael Crichton: single-handedly thwarting the social consensus on climate change that President Bush so desperately wants.

    And then later:

    It’s not just a partisan issue. I haven’t read the book, but Michael Crichton cites studies that show climate change is natural and that we are not in immediate danger. Then you have that movie, The Day After Tomorrow, where the world is coming to an end immediately if we don't do something tomorrow. When you have those two images in the popular media, it's hard for the people to figure out what's right. That's one of the reasons the administration hasn't been that engaged, and why they haven't felt any pressure.
    Hm ... what do they call it when an administration champions an issue of great import that isn't receiving enough public attention ... oh, right!

    Leadership.

  • Models and rock bands are overrated.

    A while back I drew attention to Gil Friend's "Sustainable Business: A Declaratin of Leadership," a handy (and colorful!) capsule summary of what sustainable biz is all about. Now that much-blogged-about document has its very own website, where you can download a poster-sized version. Put it on the wall of your dorm room!

    None of the sub-pages work yet, but I'm assuming Gil is all over that.

  • Read Chris Mooney’s two recent columns on climate-change skeptics.

    Chris Mooney is on a roll lately. I finally got around to his piece in the latest issue of Mother Jones, and it's an absolute must-read. Lots of people have the vague impression that there's a sort of climate-skeptic cottage industry out there, funded largely by a few large financial interests, particularly ExxonMobil. Well, they're right -- check out this chart.

    There's nothing wrong, of course, with industries trying to advance their views on economic and policy issues, but this is a coordinated attempt to "do science," or rather, create the illusion of scientific controversy around an issue on which there is in fact overwhelming scientific consensus.

    Also check out Mooney's latest column in the American Prospect, which highlights some of the more obvious absurdities in James Inhofe's recent speeches on "Four Pillars of Climate Alarmism." In particular, Inhofe is cherry-picking from a report that draws heavily on another report he hated so much he tried to sue to block its release.

    Inhofe faces this predicament because of his, and the right's, cavalier treatment of serious scientific documents. If climate-science reports are deemed too "alarmist," as the "National Assessment" was, they are viciously denounced. If the reports are subtle and contain plenty of language about scientific uncertainty that can be quoted out of context, they are misrepresented as throwing the scientific consensus into question.

    Clown town.

    Update [2005-4-19 12:41:23 by Dave Roberts]: If you get tired of seeing the same old oft-debunked climate-skeptic arguments used again and again, stay entertained with Deltoid's Global Warming Skeptic Bingo! Fun for the whole family.