Climate Climate & Energy

Don’t let the one color your feelings on the other

I don’t think it’s politically or substantively wise to set ourselves up as dogmatically opposed to any given source of energy (except coal!) (just kidding!) (only not!). The key is to set up low-carbon standards and benchmarks and say, "if you can meet these without ginormous subsidies, have at it." This is true of biofuels […]

Hansen gives a talk in Iowa about climate change impacts

Hansen writes faster than I can blog. He has posted a "talk given at Des Moines last Sunday, with description of Declaration of Stewardship slightly edited for clarity." He talks about the "three major consequences of global warming, if we go down the business-as-usual path, with fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions continuing to increase":

More thoughts on how sea level will be influenced by global warming

Hansen has posted some important thoughts about sea level rise on his website. In particular, he has shortened his "Scientific reticence and sea level rise" paper and New Scientist has published it. The key conclusion:

[I]ce sheets will respond in a non-linear fashion to global warming --- and are already beginning to do so. There is enough information now, in my opinion, to make it a near certainty that business-as-usual [emissions] scenarios will lead to disastrous multi-metre sea level rise on the century time scale.

This leads directly to his emissions strategy:

The global community must aim to restrict any further global warming to less than 1°C above the temperature in 2000. This implies a CO2 limit of about 450 parts per million or less. Such scenarios require almost immediate changes to get energy and greenhouse gas emissions onto a fundamentally different path.

Hansen also offers some useful thoughts about recent research on Greenland, and has been misunderstood by the media.

Word Gets Around

New bike, parking policies leave polluting vehicles in the dust Now for some wheely good news (sorry, it had to be done): officials around the globe are moving forward on innovative eco-transportation schemes. Last week, the city council of Reykjavik, Iceland, enacted a rule that gives free parking to those who drive fuel-efficient vehicles. In […]

Will he be able to weather the storm?

Here’s another semi-old story that I’m just now getting around to (and yes, I’ve forgotten how I found it). It’s deceptively significant. Using California’s tough environmental regs, state Attorney General Jerry Brown is throwing some elbows, trying to force a range of projects from housing developments to oil refineries to show how they’ll reduce emissions. […]

Watch a video outlining the conflict over this wind farm

"Nantucket Sound, blessed with a vast diversity of native life ... "

Update, 11 Sep 2007: The video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Viacom International Inc., unfortunately.

Finally

Oy. Things are, as usual, happening faster than I can blog them. Before it gets too old, let me be the last person in the green blogosphere to link to this remarkable article in Newsweek. It’s about the history of the global warming denial industry. It’s not remarkable because it uncovers any new information. Those […]

How the two are related

Science Friday recently had a great segment on cognitive dissonance, defined as:

A psychological term which describes the uncomfortable tension that may result from having two conflicting thoughts at the same time, or from engaging in behavior that conflicts with one's beliefs.

Because it is uncomfortable, your brain will seek out ways to resolve the contradictions.

So if you think you're a good and moral person, but you fudge a little on your taxes, you might justify this with an excuse like: "I've overpaid in previous years," or "the government is using my money in an immoral way," or "everyone else is doing it."

New research shows that this is not some individual character flaw, but a strong and consistent human impulse. Brain scans show that the brain floods with pleasure when conflicting ideas are resolved.

I thought the segment went a long way toward explaining why skeptics on global warming still exist. When presented with conflicting views, such as "I am a good person" vs. "my lifestyle is destroying the planet," the brain comes up with a way to resolve them, such as, "global warming is a conspiracy cooked up by celebrities and scientists."

This really highlights why we need to emphasize solutions. If we give people ways to address the problem, they won't need to deny it.

Well Oil Be Damned

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez pursues energy treaties in South America Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is on a four-nation swing through South America this week, using his country’s oil riches to win friends and influence people. Yesterday, Chavez signed an “energy security treaty” with Nestor Kirchner, the president of Argentina; he will continue on to Uruguay, […]

Someone Alert Ben and Jerry

Indo-Pacific coral reefs disappearing twice as fast as rainforest, study says Forget the rainforest: the coral reefs of the Indian and Pacific oceans are vanishing twice as quickly, researchers say. The Indo-Pacific region, home to 75 percent of the world’s coral reefs, has lost nearly 600 square miles of reef each year since the late […]