Gristmill

BRICs

I've been trying to figure out a way of recommending this TriplePundit post without just repeating the whole thing ... without success. So screw it:

BRICs - An acronym for "Brazil, Russia, India and China" refers to the emerging combination of economic power weilded by those four nations. An outstanding analysis on Z+Partners weblog sheds some light on the growing influence of this bloc of nations, the rise of potential conflicts with the G7 group, and various environmental scenerios. A key quote:

Perhaps the prospect of a massively destabilizing and massively expensive competition for oil with the BRICs will be the tipping point the finally pushes the U.S. toward a true green energy revolution.

It’s a bloated, industry-friend piece of crony capitalism. And its breath stinks.

The House starts work on the monstrosity that is the Energy Bill today, and could vote on it as early as tomorrow.

It contains this hideous provision, a naked givaway to big industry that would "bypass Congress's normal spending process to funnel up to $2 billion over 10 years into research for recovering oil and gas from the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico."

And that's just the beginning. It's difficult to describe just how reprehensible this bill is -- an exquisite example of the crony capitalism and patronage network that have long since replaced responsible governance for the ruling party in this country.

Check out this Moving Ideas page on the bill, its specific provisions, and what you can do to stop it.

(And also check out this NYT editorial.)

Do you enjoy humor?

Then this is the cartoon for you!

Could there be an environmental version of the new food pyramid?

The new USDA food pyramid has arrived. In a very ownership-society type of way, the pyramid has been transformed into ... MyPyramid. The website is super-slow thus far -- I haven't been able to really dig around yet -- but the arrival of this new-fangled pyramid has made me wonder if some genius, marketing-savvy environmentalist might be able to fashion a clear graphical illustration of environmental do's and don'ts for individuals. Relatively insignificant no-nos (say, acquiring yet one more nasty plastic bag) would be weighted appropriately against much more significant evildoings (say, purchasing a clothes dryer or embarking on yet one more cross-continental flight).

I'm not talking about exercises like the Ecological Footprint, which I find utterly demoralizing and disempowering. (Yes, if everyone lived like me, humanity would need 9 gazillion planets to make do, rather than our single orb.) I'm looking instead for a clear representation of what can be done about the problems facing us and how I (we do live in a me, me, me world) can take part. Of course, continuing in the me-me vein, the American public may latch onto MyPyramid because it ostensibly provides guidance for individual improvement (lose those pounds), while the benefits that came from following the wise advice of the as-of-yet undiscovered green graphic would accrue more to society. But, hey, I'm just trying to riff on something topical!

In closing, let me repeat this exceptionally moving (contain yourself) "Tip of the Week" from the USDA site:

MyPyramid: Do it for you. Make one small change each day for a healthier you.

OK, maybe these folks (on loan, by the way, for a steep price from the food-industry world) aren't such smarties after all.

And there’s massive demand.

Holy smokes! Mike Millikin reports that pre-orders for the wee-little ZAP "Smart Car" have topped $750 million. That's pretty amazing. Apparently the U.S. Department of Transportation has signed off on it, so as soon as ZAP finds a U.S. distributor, the candy-cars are on their way. I want one!

For more on the Smart Car, see these two previous posts by Mike.

Huh?

There's a good interview with Christie Whitman over on Environmental Science & Technology. I go back and forth about Whitman, but she definitely puts her best -- and by "best," of course I mean, "most sympathetic to my own views" -- foot forward in this interview.

I found this a bit bizarre though. When asked about climate change, she says:

In fairness, I think we can do more. I think we can get a cap on carbon that would give utilities time to reach it without so dislocating the industry that it will drive the costs of energy out of sight. And I think, ultimately, we will have a cap on carbon. But you also have the studies, I think two years ago, from NASA showing the impacts of land change.

So there are still scientific differences on where to focus the dollars. The president has acknowledged that climate change is occurring. But then Michael Crichton, who is enormously popular, writes a book [State of Fear] saying that it's not happening. And that sets you back. So it is not as widely accepted as it should be.

Michael Crichton: single-handedly thwarting the social consensus on climate change that President Bush so desperately wants.

And then later:

It’s not just a partisan issue. I haven’t read the book, but Michael Crichton cites studies that show climate change is natural and that we are not in immediate danger. Then you have that movie, The Day After Tomorrow, where the world is coming to an end immediately if we don't do something tomorrow. When you have those two images in the popular media, it's hard for the people to figure out what's right. That's one of the reasons the administration hasn't been that engaged, and why they haven't felt any pressure.

Hm ... what do they call it when an administration champions an issue of great import that isn't receiving enough public attention ... oh, right!

Leadership.

Models and rock bands are overrated.

A while back I drew attention to Gil Friend's "Sustainable Business: A Declaratin of Leadership," a handy (and colorful!) capsule summary of what sustainable biz is all about. Now that much-blogged-about document has its very own website, where you can download a poster-sized version. Put it on the wall of your dorm room!

None of the sub-pages work yet, but I'm assuming Gil is all over that.

L.A. tries to get itself out of its sprawled mess.

Well, from the LA Times, at least. 

The paper's had a series of guest editorials about traffic, transit and urban planning -- specifically, how sprawling, congested LA can get itself out of the fix it's put itself into over the last 60 years or so.  The LA area is surprisingly dense, but the population is spread out fairly uniformly over a large area -- which makes it very hard to service the region cost-effectively using transit.  At the same time, building new roads has become both exhorbitantly expensive and politically unpalatable.

Sounds a little like much of the rest of urban America, no?

To summarize...

Read Chris Mooney’s two recent columns on climate-change skeptics.

Chris Mooney is on a roll lately. I finally got around to his piece in the latest issue of Mother Jones, and it's an absolute must-read. Lots of people have the vague impression that there's a sort of climate-skeptic cottage industry out there, funded largely by a few large financial interests, particularly ExxonMobil. Well, they're right -- check out this chart.

There's nothing wrong, of course, with industries trying to advance their views on economic and policy issues, but this is a coordinated attempt to "do science," or rather, create the illusion of scientific controversy around an issue on which there is in fact overwhelming scientific consensus.

Also check out Mooney's latest column in the American Prospect, which highlights some of the more obvious absurdities in James Inhofe's recent speeches on "Four Pillars of Climate Alarmism." In particular, Inhofe is cherry-picking from a report that draws heavily on another report he hated so much he tried to sue to block its release.

Inhofe faces this predicament because of his, and the right's, cavalier treatment of serious scientific documents. If climate-science reports are deemed too "alarmist," as the "National Assessment" was, they are viciously denounced. If the reports are subtle and contain plenty of language about scientific uncertainty that can be quoted out of context, they are misrepresented as throwing the scientific consensus into question.

Clown town.

Update [2005-4-19 12:41:23 by Dave Roberts]: If you get tired of seeing the same old oft-debunked climate-skeptic arguments used again and again, stay entertained with Deltoid's Global Warming Skeptic Bingo! Fun for the whole family.