Articles by Joseph Romm

Forests and fires foster fearsome feedbacks

Previously, I looked at why the permafrost won't be perma for long. Then I looked at whether the potential destruction of the tundra represents the point of no return for the climate, necessitating that we keep atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide below 450 ppm or else risk going to 800 ppm to 1,000 ppm. Here I examine two local amplifying feedbacks that further threaten the permafrost: forests and fires.

Reduced snow cover and albedo (reflectivity) in the summertime Arctic landscape, caused by global warming, has added local atmospheric heating ($ub. req'd) "similar in magnitude to the regional heating expected over multiple decades from a doubling of atmospheric CO2." That same Science study warns "Continuation of current trends in shrub and tree expansion could further amplify this atmospheric heating 2-7 times."

U.K.’s former prime minister says symbolic vote on Boxer-Lieberman-Warner matters to the world

In March, British prime minister Tony Blair launched the Breaking the Climate Deadlock initiative to promote a new global agreement on climate change.

Today he has an op-ed the in the Washington Post, "Leading On Climate Change: How Action in Congress Can Move the World," in which he argues,

U.S. driving down 11 billion miles in March, the sharpest drop in history

Price does matter. So does public perception of likely future prices. As it becomes increasingly clear that high gasoline prices are not a fluke, Americans are adjusting their driving habits.

March 2008 saw "the sharpest yearly drop for any month in FHWA history" of total vehicle miles traveled (aka VMT) according to the Federal Highway Administration's monthly report on "Traffic Volume Trends" [PDF].

In March 2008, Americans drove 246 billion milles, compared to 257 billion in March 2007. Indeed, the March 2008 figure is lower than the March 2004 figure. To see just how remarkable that is, look at the annual vehicle-distance traveled data (in billions of miles) since 1983 (this is a moving 12-month total):

Probably no U.S. CO2 emissions cuts from new Lieberman-Warner bill until after 2025

I made a mistake about the Boxer substitute for the Lieberman-Warner bill. Every year, it allows enough offsets into the market to cover 30 percent of the total quantity of emissions allowances. I had said it was 15 percent, which was a loophole the size of the Gateway Arch. How big a loophole is 30 percent offsets? Wait and see.

I had said the three offsets -- domestic, international, and international forestry -- could make up 15 percent of allowances because the WRI summary [PDF] says that "The combination of all three of these mechanisms is limited to 15 percent of total emissions allowances" and because when I read the actual bill (page 23), that's what it seemed to say. But in fact we read it wrong. My apologies! What does this all mean?