Climate Climate & Energy

Poll: Americans deeply, perhaps irredeemably, confused

From the American Institute of Architects’ annual public survey (sub rqd): The greatest percentage — 31 percent — of respondents said they believed recycling was one of the three most important things they could do to reduce [global] warming. Reducing driving came in next, at 25 percent, followed by reducing energy consumption, at 23 percent. […]

Earth still round; sky, blue

IPCC: climate change will hit poor hardest.

No supply-side energy solution will come to our rescue

No one is going to come to the rescue on the supply side -- and, of course, we remain stuck with an administration that doesn't believe in demand-reduction strategies.

As the Wall Street Journal (subs. req'd) reported in "OPEC's Lever Loses Its Pull on Oil":

Oil prices are hovering near historic highs, but consuming nations shouldn't expect quick relief from OPEC, the world's only source for big, quick supplies.

For several reasons, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries has neither the clear leverage nor the inclination to open the spigots and drive down the price of crude, which jumped past $90 a barrel in intraday trading in New York last week for the first time.

This figure shows how little spare capacity OPEC has -- essentially none outside of Saudi Arabia, and the Saudis have no inclination to initiate a major price drop, especially since these prices do not appear to be destroying demand.

Moreover, the International Energy Agency (IEA) warned back in July that it saw "OPEC spare capacity declining to minimal levels by 2012."

And the WSJ notes no one outside of OPEC will be coming to the rescue either:

Saudi Arabia has little to fear from the world's other major producers, such as Russia, which in decades past have ramped up supplies in an effort to capture a greater market share. But at the moment, the world's major producers for the most part are already pumping flat-out.

"They have little competition from non-OPEC suppliers and few worries about losing market share," says Jeffrey Currie, senior energy economist at Goldman Sachs in London.

We cannot be far from $100+ oil.

Notable quotable

“Well, there are public health benefits to climate change, as well, both benefits and concerns …” — White House spokeswoman Dana Perino

Two new environmental blogs

In general, I have been critical of media coverage of global warming. So I am pleased to announce that two of the best environmental journalists working have launched blogs:

• A new environmental blog from Mark Hertsgaard, the terrific environment correspondent for The Nation (and author of a lot of great books).

• A new sustainability blog from The New York Times, dotearth, led by their first-rate climate reporter, Andrew Revkin. Revkin notes the limits of the traditional media on these issues:

Citigroup finds Senate fuel efficiency targets attainable

Financial giant Citigroup recently analyzed the question of whether the CAFE fuel-efficiency targets in the Senate energy bill are possible for the automakers to meet. Its finding: Yes, they are "tough but attainable" (sub rqd), and might even prove a net financial benefit. Said Rep. Ed Markey: "When you have the world’s number one bank, […]

Brundtland update finds problems unsolved

How about a big, gristly, indigestible hunk of bad news? Yeah? OK! Everything that was going to hell 20 years ago is still going to hell (sub rqd): Twenty years after the seminal … Brundtland Commission report "Our Common Future" warned of persistent global environmental degradation, the most pressing concerns facing the world’s climate and […]

French president launches environmental initiatives

French President Nicolas Sarkozy today described a smattering of green initiatives for the country, prescribing some and promising to study others. Capping a two-day conference on ways France could green itself, Sarkozy outlined the policy ideas in a speech, with climate campaigner Al Gore looking on. Afterward, Gore offered the praise he was likely invited […]

Climate change mitigation: not all gravy and low-hanging fruit

Anybody who refers to insulating trailers as the "trench warfare of climate change" has my attention -- clearly someone who understands that the response we need is far more than handwaving that implies an ability to distribute capital and expertise around the globe at an instant's notice.

Give it a read; it's a great article on the reality behind the hype of the easy response to climate disruption, and a good discussion of why RECs are so problematic.

Stop dwelling on the climate change nightmare and dream about change

This post is by ClimateProgress guest blogger Bill Becker, executive director of the Presidential Climate Action Project.

-----

When I was a child in the 1950s, I went about my business with a little cloud hanging over my head. It didn't matter whether I was playing in the backyard, studying in my bedroom or suffering from my first romantic crush (Annette on the Mickey Mouse Club). The cloud was always there.

It was the fear of nuclear war. We lived in suburbs west of Chicago. All day long, jets flew overhead on their way to O'Hare International Airport, sometimes so high that they were just a silver spot gleaming in the sun as they moved across the sky. When I saw one, I stopped what I was doing and waited several minutes to see if a mushroom cloud appeared to the east over Chicago. Once I saw the mushroom, I knew from school, our neighborhood would be flattened a few seconds later.

It never happened, of course. I can't say that the cloud ruined my childhood or followed me into adulthood, but its shadow came back to mind Friday night (Oct. 19) as I watched John Stossel's latest "Give Me a Break" segment on ABC.