Climate Politics

Good interview on climate change

Good interview with Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (R-Md.) in Foreign Policy in Focus this week. Gilchrest, chair of the House Climate Change Caucus and co-sponsor of the Climate Stewardship Act, was not appointed to the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming last month because he refused to deny that humans are causing climate change. […]

This time, it’s personal

(Continued from parts I and II.)

Last but not least (actually, what quite literally hits closest to home!):

North America

Oh, the anticipation!

The IPCC report I’ve most been looking forward to is from Working Group III, on mitigation. It looks like drafts of that report are already leaking — Reuters has a (poorly written) rundown. From what I can tell through the muddy writing, the IPCC lays out a range of mitigation scenarios, which would run anywhere […]

A visual comparison

When the IPCC WGII summary was released last week, there were media reports on last-minute clashes between scientists and political types — the former pushing for the original strong language, the latter pushing to water it down. George Monbiot’s column yesterday addressed the subject, in characteristically outraged tones. For those interested in the details, DeSmogBlog […]

Gingrich and Kerry face off on climate, except they don’t really face off all that much

John Kerry and Newt Gingrich squared off on climate change this morning. The result? Gingrich committed to the statement that something needs to be done and distanced himself from partisan brethren like Inhofe. He also dropped a line about a need for some “green conservatism.” The transcript: KERRY: I’m excited to hear you talk about […]

Another One Writes the Bust

Court rules against Bush administration’s fish-protection plan The Great Judicial Smackdown of 2007 continued this week, with a federal appeals court ruling that the Bush administration’s plan for “protecting” fish on the Northwest’s Columbia and Snake rivers violates the Endangered Species Act. The feds had claimed that the rivers’ hydroelectric dams could be made safe […]

Do They Even Have Roads There?

Vermont court hears landmark vehicle-emissions case This week, the U.S. state with the fewest registered cars will take the driver’s seat in the race to regulate carbon-dioxide emissions. A Vermont court will hear a landmark case on whether the state’s adoption of a stringent California emissions law is legal. Under the Clean Air Act, states […]

Our prez nearly made a slip of the plug

The funniest news lede I've read in a long time:

Credit Ford Motor Co. CEO Alan Mulally with saving the leader of the free world from self-immolation.

Apparently, our befuddled prez was about to stick an electrical plug into the hydrogen tank of a Ford hydrogen-electric plug-in hybrid. This act, if completed, would have generated Hindenburg-esque bad publicity and probably made Cheney our next president. (Eep!)

To make the save, Mulally apparently "violated all the protocols," grabbing the president's arm and steering him away from the plug.

Maybe that's exactly what Bush needs: someone who's not afraid to step in to steer him away from stuff that's eventually going to blow up in his -- and our -- face.

Wonder if Mulally would accept a pay cut ...

Learning is fun

Check out this great article in the Washington Post. It explains many of the pitfalls and unintended consequences that have occurred under the EU's system and some of the challenges the US will likely face.

The innerworkings of it all

Those opposed to action on climate change are compelled to attack the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its reports. Not doing so would cede the scientific high-ground of the argument and essentially doom their preferred do-nothing policy approach.

One way to attack the IPCC is to describe it as a nameless bureaucracy pursuing its own political agenda, and entirely disconnected from the scientific community. For example, a report from the Fraser Institute makes this argument explicitly:

[A] compelling problem is that the Summary for Policymakers, attached to the IPCC Report, is produced, not by the scientific writers and reviewers, but by a process of negotiation among unnamed bureaucratic delegates from sponsoring governments. Their selection of material need not and may not reflect the priorities and intentions of the scientific community itself.

This argument is transparently false on several counts. First, the authors are not nameless, but are listed prominently on the first page of the Summary. In addition, they are not bureaucrats, but all have scientific credentials in the arena of climate change.