Environmental scientist Theo Colborn warns about the chemicals all around us

This guest essay comes from Theo Colborn, an environmental health analyst, professor of zoology at the University of Florida, Gainesville, and president of The Endocrine Disruption Exchange (TEDX). She's one of the experts featured in Leonardo DiCaprio's new eco-documentary The 11th Hour, which opens in L.A. and New York on Aug. 17 and in other spots around North America on Aug. 24.

What a crazy world we live in when almost everyone knows what the acronym ED stands for. Millions of dollars have been poured into creating awareness of ED, erectile dysfunction, because it is profitable. This 21st-century sales-pitch strategy -- "disease mongering" -- has proven to be good for the bottom line. The irony of all this is that there is another ED out there into which millions have also been poured -- to keep it a secret. That ED is endocrine disruption, and if the public were to learn about it, bottom lines could shrink instead of grow.

Endocrine disruption should be right at the top of the list of most critical technological disasters facing the world today, up with climate change. With little notice, vast volumes and combinations of synthetic chemicals have settled in every environment in the world, including the womb environment. Synthetic chemicals at very low concentrations in the womb change how genes are programmed, cells develop, tissues form, and organs function, and thus undermine the potential and survival of developing animals, including humans. The chemicals threatening the integrity of future generations are derived from the processing of crude oil and natural gas, the same processes that are driving climate change. This is an integral part of the climate change story.

Umbra on salt

Dear Umbra, What’s up with salt, environmentally speaking? Is it good for the Dead Sea if I buy Dead Sea...

A closer look at the argument for climate change underestimation

My previous post debunked an article that argued scientists have seriously overestimated climate change. Now let's look at the evidence for a serious underestimation of climate change.

To do that, we must understand the fatal flaw with the IPCC's over-reliance on the poorly named "equilibrium climate sensitivity" (ECS). Recall that the ECS is the "equilibrium change in global mean surface temperature following a doubling of the atmospheric (equivalent) CO2 concentration," which the IPCC's 2007 Fourth Assessment Report concluded was 2 to 4.5°C.

You might think that the ECS tells you how much the planet's temperature will rise if humans emit enough CO2 to double its atmospheric concentration. But it doesn't. It is just a theoretical construct. It tells you only how much the planet's temperature will rise if CO2 concentrations double and then are magically frozen.

That's because the ECS omits key carbon cycle feedbacks that a rise in the planet's temperature will likely trigger. For instance, a doubling of CO2 to 550 ppm will lead to the melting of the permafrost and the release of huge amounts of carbon currently frozen in it. These amplifying (or positive) feedbacks are the main subject of this post.

Politicians behaving badly

I'm thinking of marketing a politician handshaking kit that would consist of one rubber glove that can be carried in a wallet or purse to protect potential politician handshaking partners from slime.

This started out as a comment on Kate's post, but got so long I decided to put it up front. As Kate points out, the Democratically controlled House just approved continued funding of abstinence-only education to the tune of $50 million. What really makes this unbelievable is that the results of a decade-long study (PDF) funded by Congress, released just two months ago, showed conclusively that abstinence-only education has no effect whatsoever on the sexual antics of teenagers. The bar graphs starting on page 45 sum it up.

Overfishing, pollution contribute to exponential rise

Oceana divers documenting the state of ecological communities in Cabrera Marine Park along the Mediterranean Coast encountered swarms of jellyfish, with numbers in the thousands, 30 miles south of the area.

On a seamount some 130 meters from the surface, Oceana's unmanned submarine robot revealed especially high concentrations of these jellies that have wreaked havoc along the Mediterranean in years past. Oceana is working to have the area added to the national park.

High concentrations of jellyfish are not a local problem. The same factors that allow jellyfish to "overflourish" in many parts of the world are at play here: Essentially humans are creating a jellyfish wonderland by overfishing and polluting our oceans.

Blue dogs for energy efficiency

This group of 43 conservative and moderate Democrats from around the country have a new energy plan. Here's what they say about energy efficiency:

8. Energy Efficiency

• Energy efficient technologies and energy conservation are among the most important ways for the U.S. to reduce its energy consumption, benefiting both consumers and producers of energy.
• Blue Dogs support the furtherance of energy efficient technologies including green buildings, energy saving appliances, advanced lighting technology, and better fuel economy standards.

Blue Dogs support the promotion of energy efficient light bulbs, high-efficiency vehicles, advanced batteries, home appliances, and energy storage. The Coalition believes the federal government should lead the way by moving toward green buildings and energy efficient programs for all federal buildings as soon as possible. Private sector energy efficiency improvements to new and existing buildings -- both residential and commercial -- should also be encouraged. Fuel economy standards for automobiles and small engines should also result in energy savings.

We also support improving energy efficiency assistance to state and local governments and believe that state utility regulatory commissions should adopt federal standards to promote energy efficiency. The Department of Energy’s successful Energy Star program should also be expanded. Finally, Blue Dogs support tax incentives for consumers and businesses that are early adopters of energy efficient technologies.

Kudos to the blue dogs.

15 Green Cars

The greenest way to get around? On your own two feet, of course, or on a bicycle, unicycle, skateboard, or...

Dumb arguments rear their heads yet again

A reader pointed me to a letter in the South China Morning Post, "Cold water on the warming debate" (subs. req'd). The writer, a senior research fellow of the HK Institute of Economics and Business, rehashes a number of mistaken arguments I hear all too often:

Many people fail to knit together these two strands - climate change and the exhaustion of fossil fuels. If they did, they would see that the energy crisis, which is predicted as a result of the exhaustion of fossil fuel reserves, contains the seeds of the resolution of the global warming crisis. As fossil fuels become scarcer, their price is sure to rise. We see this already. Under market forces, this will accelerate substitution, largely towards nuclear energy. This will, in turn, redress the climatic concerns.

No. Conventional oil may be peaking, but the world has plenty of affordable coal, far more than is needed to destroy the climate (which is Hansen's point). The climate problem is not self-resolving. Indeed, peak oil may drive us to liquid coal, a climate disaster. The article continues:

Strengthening community is an important benefit of eating locally

The following is a guest essay originally posted at AlterNet by David Morris, vice president of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance.

Some 30 years ago NASA came up with another big idea: assemble vast solar electric arrays in space and beam the energy to earth. The environmental community did not dismiss NASA's vision out of hand. After all, the sun shines 24 hours a day in space. A solar cell on earth harnesses only about four hours equivalent of full sunshine a day. If renewable electricity could be generated more cheaply in space than on earth, what's the problem?

A number of us argued that the problem was inherent in the scale of the power plant. Whereas rooftop solar turns us into producers, builds our self-confidence, and strengthens our sense of community as we trade electricity back and forth with our neighbors, space-based solar arrays aggravate our dependence. By dramatically increasing the distance between us and a product essential to our survival, we become more insecure. The scale of the technology requires a global corporation, increasing the distance between those who make the decisions and those who feel the impact of those decisions. Which, in turn, demands a global oversight body, itself remote and nontransparent to electric consumers.