Articles by Joseph Romm

Low doses of radiation can cause harm; coal plants worse than nuclear plants

The effect of radiation is not a subject I blog on a great deal, although it is a subject I have studied a great deal. Indeed, my uncle, a former nuclear physics professor at MIT, started our family Radon testing business, which was sold off years ago.

I asserted that people should be worried about low doses of radiation, especially cumulatively over time. Charles Barton of The Nuclear Green Revolution commented, "Your low doses over time assertion has been repeatedly falsified by empirical studies." Quite the reverse is true. As the National Research Council's Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation (!) reported definitively three years ago:

Jet Propulsion Laboratory has new climate website that shows global sea-level trends

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory has a very good new website on global climate change. It offers a nice summary of the relevant science in a variety of areas: key indicators, evidence, causes, effects, uncertainties, and solutions. The website is a good place to send people who are uninformed on global warming, but looking for basic information.

JPL has a very nice front-page banner with pulldown menus providing data on "Vital Signs of the Planet," including Arctic sea ice, carbon dioxide, sea level rise, global temperature, and the ozone hole. Here is the expanded chart showing the recent 70 percent jump in sea level rise:

The WSJ alleges that our use of hybrids increases oil prices

The Wall Street Journal's Environmental Capital blog is a must-read. But what exactly were they thinking with this column:

So you think you're being virtuous by trading in the SUV for, say, a Prius? What if, instead, you're really sticking the next guy in line with higher pump prices?

Yes, The WSJ is revoking the law of supply and demand. Less demand translates into higher pump prices! How is this possible, you ask?

Conservatives will drill-and-burn this planet to the point of destruction

Great Paul Krugman column in The New York Times today. And another absurd Charles Krauthammer column in The Washington Post -- yes, I know, that's a dog bites man story.

They both teed off Nancy Pelosi's statement that one of the reasons she was blocking a vote on coastal drilling was, "I'm trying to save the planet; I'm trying to save the planet."

Krugman understood that, notwithstanding the fact that offshore drilling would never have a significant impact on oil prices, she was talking about global warming: "Beyond that, Ms. Pelosi's response shows that she understands the deeper issues behind the current energy debate."

As Krugman points out, that point is utterly lost on Senator McCain, who has now become "a standard drill-and-burn Republican." Krugman's worry: