insanity
-
Coal still has no place in clean development
You knew it had to happen: the World Bank now has the same climate sensibility as ... the Kansas House.
Scientist Jim Hansen, on the other hand, has requested a meeting with Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers, arguing for a moratorium on coal plants until carbon capture and storage technology is available. Even Wall Street looks on coal skeptically. Last Friday, the Kansas House failed to override Sebelius' veto of two new plants by only one vote. And the World Bank is considering funding a massive coal plant in India in compliance with the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism.
Yes, you read that correctly: a larger-than-ever coal plant in a developing giant is considered a mechanism for clean development. Why? Because it will burn more efficiently than other coal plants in India. In fact, it boasts 'supercritical' technology.
-
‘Heart-healthy’ pork from pigs with bad hearts
I live for this sort of stuff: Guys in white lab coats got to tinkering with pig DNA, hoping to conjure up pork rich in “heart-healthy” omega-3 fatty acids. Here’s what they did: A team from the University of Pittsburgh a first transferred the roundworm gene–fat-1–to pig foetal cells. After that, a team from the […]
-
Messing with nature more won’t fix the messes we’ve already made
This post is by ClimateProgress guest blogger Bill Becker, executive director of the Presidential Climate Action Project.
-----
[JR: Geo-engineering is to mitigation as chemotherapy is to diet & exercise. You can find some more specific reasons geo-engineering is unlikely to make sense at these posts: "Geo-engineering remains a bad idea" and "Geo-engineering is not the answer." I will be blogging again on this shortly. In the absence of strong mitigation efforts, geo-engineering will not stop catastrophic outcomes, like the end of most ocean life.]Time magazine has declared geo-engineering one of "10 ideas that are changing the world."
"Messing with nature caused global warming," Time wrote. "Messing with it more might fix it."
What are they thinking?
-
Peruvian Amazon under threat from oil exploration, illegal logging
There’s no better way to start off a Monday than with depressing news from the Peruvian Amazon, which is under threat from both fossil-fuel development and illegal logging. Despite protests from environmental and human rights groups, Peru’s government plans to auction off dozens of parcels of remote rainforest for oil and gas companies to explore. […]
-
Salmon fishing season in California and Oregon may be canceled
So few salmon are swimming in California and Oregon that salmon fishing season is likely to be canceled completely unless an emergency exemption is granted, according to the federal Pacific Fishery Management Council. The states’ salmon season, which traditionally runs from April to mid-November, has never been entirely canceled before. Even with a complete closure, […]
-
War ain’t good for the planet, says new report
It’s the time of year for thinking about shopping peace on earth, and an aptly timed new report carries a reminder of the impact of war not just on people, but on the planet. Modern warfare tactics cause unprecedented damage to natural landscapes, says a new article from the Worldwatch Institute. Think spraying of Agent […]
-
Prius easily beats Hummer in lifecycle energy use; ‘Dust to Dust’ report has no basis in fact
A study came out recently claiming to prove a Hummer has lower lifecycle energy use than a Prius. Because the result was so obviously bogus -- and in sharp contradiction with every other major lifecycle analysis ever done -- I didn't spend time debunking it.
But it made it into the comments of my blog and continues to echo around the internet, and the authors keep updating and defending it. A couple of good debunking studies -- by the Pacific Institute (PDF) and by Rocky Mountain Institute (PDF) -- haven't gotten much attention, according to Technorati, so let me throw in my two cents.
The study's title is revealing: Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles From Concept to Disposal, The non-technical report, from CNW Marketing Research, Inc. Yes, although lifecycle energy use is probably the most complicated kind of energy analysis you can do, this 458-page report is "non-technical" and by a market research company to boot.
Their website says the report "does not include issues of gigajuelles [sic!], kW hours or other unfriendly (to consumers) terms. Perhaps, in time, we will release our data in such technical terms. First, however, we will only look at the energy consumption cost."
Wouldn't want to confuse consumers with unfriendly technical stuff like kilowatt-hours, like those annoying electric utilities do every month. No, let's put everything in dollar terms so no one can reproduce our results. When you misspell gigajoules on your website -- and have for a long time (try googling "gigajuelles") ... you aren't the most technical bunch.
I am mocking this report because it is the most contrived and mistake-filled study I have ever seen -- by far (and that's saying a lot, since I worked for the federal government for five years). I am not certain there is an accurate calculation in the entire report. I say this without fear of contradiction, because this is also the most opaque study I have ever seen -- by far. I defy anyone to figure out their methodology.
-
Orville Redenbacher must be stopped
My latest Victual Reality column looks at how perfectly wonderful foods like corn and butter get twisted up by food-industry marketers and flavor engineers, confusing people and often sending them scurrying in search of dubious, unhealthy, artificial substitutes — which the food industry is only too willing to provide. As if on cue, out comes […]
-