environment Politics: Barack Obama Big Coal Big Oil denialists economics Mitt Romney Renewable Energy Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 9, Day 24: You Never Give Me Your Money…
The Macon, GA, Telegraph runs a story on the role of climate questions on the campaign trail. Several paragraphs are devoted to the cognitive dissonance of Republican environmentalists. Let’s all quiet down and stop giggling.
Romney has said previously that he believes climate change is occurring and that human activity is a contributing factor. During the Republican primary season, though, he said he didn’t believe it was the right course to spend “trillions and trillions” to reduce carbon emissions. More recently, he said in a questionnaire submitted to Science Debate, a non-profit organization focusing on science issues in the presidential campaign, that he believes human activity contributes to global warming and that policymakers should consider the risk of negative consequences.
Frank Maisano, a lobbyist whose firm represents energy interests and who has been involved in climate change discussions for 15 years, cautioned not to read too much into Romney’s dig about the rise of the oceans. It was designed to show Obama is “a little bit out of touch,” he said.
“Right now, you need someone who cares about you rather than these larger, soaring rhetorical issues,” Maisano said.
Jim DiPeso of ConservAmerica had the same reaction.
“(Romney) acknowledged that science has shown there is a human role in global warming,” said DiPeso, who represents a national grassroots organization of conservation-minded Republicans who would like to see a fiscally conservative approach to capping carbon emissions.
DiPeso said he hopes Romney’s acknowledgement will give Republicans lower down on the ticket the freedom to talk about climate change, an issue that once had Republican support. Policymakers may differ on how to address emissions, but carbon dioxide molecules are apolitical, he said.
“Because we’ve gotten to the point where a good Republican can’t acknowledge the real science that backs up climate change without being cast as some sort of infidel, or somebody who’s not a real conservative,” he said.
Poor puppies. Sent September 17:
I wouldn’t read too much into Mitt Romney’s statements about the human causes of climate change; the erstwhile Massachusetts governor is widely known for his ability to take multiple contradictory positions on any issue. And while it’s good to know that there are some conservatives out there who are genuinely concerned about the looming climate crisis, it must be hard for them to reconcile their free-market fetishism with the tough transformations the next century will demand of America’s energy economy.
The grotesquely inflated subsidies and tax breaks for the fossil fuel industry need to end. These taxpayer dollars would be far better spent on preparing American infrastructure for a century of devastating storms and increasingly unpredictable weather, and our national investment in renewable energy needs to increase by many orders of magnitude over the next decade. These requirements won’t be solved with the economic pixie-dust of the “free market,” but through the collective will of hundreds of millions of Americans demanding that their government work once again in their best interests, instead of the corporate welfare recipients in the oil and coal industries.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: assholes Barack Obama denialists idiots Republican obstructionism
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 9, Day 17: Reality Bites
The Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette reprints a WaPo editorial on Arctic ice melt, under the headline “Ice Melt Fuels Need For Climate Change Action.” True enough:
The Arctic is getting warmer faster than almost anywhere else on Earth. The latest evidence came in an announcement from the University of Colorado’s National Snow and Ice Data Center saying that, as of Aug. 26, the Arctic sea ice cover shrank to 1.58 million square miles this summer, the smallest area since satellite measurements began in 1979. The trend is expected to continue in the next few weeks.
Over the past three decades, the average extent of the Arctic sea ice has declined by 25 to 30 percent, and the rate of decline is accelerating. In the past, older, thicker ice would drift away and be replaced by seasonal ice. But now more of the older ice is melting in the Arctic, a phenomenon that had been relatively rare. Also, less seasonal ice is replacing it.
What’s alarming is that in recent years scientists have detected a feedback effect: The seasonal sea ice melts more quickly, and the decline results in more heat absorption by open
I pivoted from this to a direct “Republicans suck” letter. Sent September 10:
Democratic cowardice on the issue of climate change should remind us that there is nothing praiseworthy about inaction in an emergency. But when it comes to moral turpitude on a planetary scale, nothing beats the current Republican stance on energy and global warming. Yes, President Obama’s recent fleeting reference was probably too little, too late — but that’s a far cry from openly mocking the crisis, as Mitt Romney did in his corresponding speech in Tampa.
Today’s GOP is a group of anti-science radicals who would institute policies based not on verifiable reality, but on their own corporatist fever dreams. Science, however, doesn’t do wishful thinking, and the laws of physics and chemistry are immune to Mitt Romney’s celebrated charm (sic) or Paul Ryan’s equally celebrated candor (sic). Democrats are far from perfect, but in the fight against climate change, the Republican dreamworld is a nightmare in the making.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: Barack Obama media irresponsibility scientific consensus
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 9, Day 12: There Is No Gravity; The Earth Sucks.
The L.A. Times records both candidates’ responses on climate change issues from the online Science Debate:
WASHINGTON — At the Republican National Convention last week and in at least one stump speech over the weekend, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney used climate change as a laugh line ridiculing President Obama’s priorities.
But in comments to the Science Debate website Tuesday as part of an online debate organized by a consortium of scientific organizations, the Republican candidate took another position, similar to the more moderate stance he struck last year, when he conceded that the planet was getting warmer.
“I am not a scientist myself, but my best assessment of the data is that the world is getting warmer, that human activity contributes to that warming, and that policymakers should therefore consider the risk of negative consequences,” Romney said in response to a question about climate change.
Obama for his part seldom utters the words climate change, although his administration has taken several significant steps to combat it. Yet, as he has worked the last few weeks to draw clear contrasts between himself and Romney, the president has talked about climate change to younger audiences, often at colleges. To Science Debate, Obama identifies climate change as one of the most pressing concerns of the era and lists the steps he has taken during his term to mitigate it — and what he might do next.
“Climate change is one of the biggest issues of this generation, and we have to meet this challenge by driving smart policies that lead to greater growth in clean energy generation and result in a range of economic and social benefits,” Obama said.
We are soooooo fucked. Sent September 5:
In a political environment dominated by scandals du jour and the demands of the chattering class, it is inevitable that science in general — and climate science in particular — will get short shrift. However, it is fascinating to observe the responses from Mr. Romney and President Obama to questions about climate change.
While Mr. Romney typically says one thing to his scientific interlocutors and something else to his tea-party constituency, who regard any acknowledgement of global warming as apostasy, one can only speculate about the President’s reluctance to use climate change as a campaign issue. He may be correct in feeling that a crisis unfolding over decades lacks the emotional immediacy required for a modern electoral campaign. Perhaps as planetary extreme weather intensifies, the greenhouse effect’s epiphenomena will no longer fall outside the purview of the 24-hour news cycle. That would be good news — of a very bad kind.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: anarchy Barack Obama scientific consensus sustainability Tar Sands
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 21: Tangled Up In Blue
James Hansen is (justifiably) shrill:
GLOBAL warming isn’t a prediction. It is happening. That is why I was so troubled to read a recent interview with President Obama in Rolling Stone in which he said that Canada would exploit the oil in its vast tar sands reserves “regardless of what we do.”
If Canada proceeds, and we do nothing, it will be game over for the climate.
Canada’s tar sands, deposits of sand saturated with bitumen, contain twice the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by global oil use in our entire history. If we were to fully exploit this new oil source, and continue to burn our conventional oil, gas and coal supplies, concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere eventually would reach levels higher than in the Pliocene era, more than 2.5 million years ago, when sea level was at least 50 feet higher than it is now. That level of heat-trapping gases would assure that the disintegration of the ice sheets would accelerate out of control. Sea levels would rise and destroy coastal cities. Global temperatures would become intolerable. Twenty to 50 percent of the planet’s species would be driven to extinction. Civilization would be at risk.
I revere Hansen, but I am not so certain about the phrase “game over.” Sent May 10:
Scientists are not known for their extreme language, so when a respected (and unjustly maligned) authority like James Hansen uses words like “apocalyptic” it should be a huge flashing warning light for the rest of us. But “game over for the climate” carries a host of misleading implications.
Earth’s climate is not a sport, and the human species isn’t going to get another chance in next year’s playoffs. Neither is it a video game; we’re not going to yawn, stretch, get another handful of chips, and begin again. When we hear Dr. Hansen’s phrase, we need to imagine a planet-wide version of the football riots in Egypt that killed nine people and injured thousands earlier this year.
Recovering from the inevitable consequences of our profligate consumption of fossil fuels will take hundreds of years; halting the potential disasters likely by mid-century will demand civilizational transformations.
This is not a game.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: apocalypse Barack Obama eschatology idiots Republicans theocrats
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 9: Please Don’t Wake Me, I’m Only Sleeping
The Fort-Wayne Journal Gazette runs the same WaPo editorial that has surfaced here before:
In his interview, the president expressed frustration that “internationally, we have not made as much progress as we need to make.” Surely, though, the inattention from leaders such as Obama has contributed to the slow progress at home, which is a major reason for the slow progress abroad. As a 2007 Foreign Affairs article explained, strong U.S. action is critical to international efforts to defeat this “epochal, man-made threat to the planet”:
“As the world’s largest producer of greenhouse gases, America has the responsibility to lead. While many of our industrial partners are working hard to reduce their emissions, we are increasing ours at a steady clip. … We need a global response to climate change that includes binding and enforceable commitments to reducing emissions, especially for those that pollute the most: the United States, China, India, the European Union, and Russia.”
The writer was Sen. Barack Obama.
So I figured, since it’s in the Christian heartland and all, perhaps the paper wouldn’t mind a little eschatology. Sent April 30:
Anyone who’s paying attention knows that fossil fuel interests use their massive financial resources to co-opt media voices and redirect the energies of legislators away from policies that would hurt their profitability. But when it comes to the issue of climate change, President Obama’s dilemma is complicated by a factor that is rarely if ever discussed in polite company: religion. The uneasy alliance of corporate and theocratic conservatives has brought about a situation where a significant percentage of Americans and their representatives in Congress are actively and eagerly anticipating Apocalypse, finding a Biblical rationale for inaction in the face of a rapidly mounting crisis. While religion may provide solace for many, it should not become the vehicle for an irresponsible failure to plan for possible disaster.
“Wait for the Second Coming” is not a valid environmental policy. If we are to achieve sustainability in America, we must repudiate the Rapture.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: assholes Barack Obama denialists idiots Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 7: Joyous Free And Flaming Youth Was Mine…
The Toledo Blade speaks sooth in a guest editorial titled “Serious On Climate Change”:
In an interview that Rolling Stone magazine published this week, President Obama said he thinks climate change will be a big issue in the coming election and that he will be “very clear” about his “belief that we’re going to have to take further steps to deal with climate change in a serious way.” That would be a welcome switch.
Dealing forthrightly with the world’s rising temperatures has been far down the list of priorities in Washington. The President has shown little willingness to stick his political neck out on the issue.
Mr. Obama’s attempts to revive the Democrats’ cap-and-trade plan during the 2010 election season quickly led to nothing. White House rollouts on energy policy have focused mostly on energy independence or green jobs but not on the global threat of warming.
Republicans deserve blame for stifling fair discussion of the issue. And Mr. Obama can cite some achievements: He pushed through landmark fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks. He invested in renewable energy sources and energy efficiency through the stimulus. The Environmental Protection Agency has worked on greenhouse-gas rules.
But these won’t adequately attack the big problem: how Americans produce and consume energy, particularly electricity. That requires a robust, economy-wide solution, such as a carbon tax or a simple cap-and-trade program.
A generic “we better do something soon!” letter…not much time today, as I was dealing with a sudden influx of lumber from an unexpected source. Sent April 28:
Hamstrung as he is by obstructionist Republicans and a national media determined to downplay the urgency of the crisis, it’s remarkable that President Obama’s been able to do anything about climate change at all. He surely deserves credit for a re-energized EPA, more stringent fuel efficiency standards, and multiple other initiatives that have largely gone unnoticed in the hysteria attendant on the 24-hour news cycle and an impending presidential election.
But the laws of physics and chemistry don’t care about the daily polls, and despite the denialist rhetoric of conservatives who only accept scientific findings that support their ideological biases, the greenhouse effect is real. Mr. Obama’s readiness to speak out on this issue during the upcoming campaign is very welcome — but global warming isn’t subject to a majority vote. If our leaders cannot address the crisis, we’ll all be the losers regardless of the outcome this November.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: Barack Obama Even a blind pig finds a nut
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 4: Would You Like An “N” With Your BLT?
The Washington Post notices:
IN AN INTERVIEW that Rolling Stone published Wednesday, President Obama said that he thinks climate change will be a big issue in the coming election and that he will be “very clear” about his “belief that we’re going to have to take further steps to deal with climate change in a serious way.”
Maybe they should stop publishing George Will? Sent April 25:
President Obama’s recent willingness to engage with the reality of climate change is welcome news for everyone, even science-rejecting denialists who vociferously decry policy any initiative smacking of environmental responsibility. The accelerating greenhouse effect has undoubtedly been a factor in the sudden proliferation of extreme weather reported everywhere around the globe during the past year, and this has surely been a factor in the public’s changing attitudes toward the problems of global heating — and in the President’s new tone on climate.
Why has it taken so long? The President seems by nature to be a careful incrementalist: the sort of chief executive who’d have recoiled from hasty actions like the previous administration’s rush to unnecessary war. That’s all well and good, but perhaps as America prepares for a long, hot summer full of breaking weather records, he, and we, will decide that the time for careful incrementalism is over.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: Barack Obama Keystone XL Tar Sands
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 2, Month 11, Day 7: We Break It, We Buy It
The Washington Post notes that President Obama is going to “take ownership” of the decision on the Keystone XL project:
President Obama said Tuesday that he will decide whether to approve or deny a permit for a controversial 1,700-mile Canadian oil pipeline, rather than delegating the decision to the State Department.
The proposal by the firm TransCanada to ship crude extracted from a region in Alberta called the “oil sands” to Gulf Coast refineries has become a charged political issue for the White House. Labor unions and business groups argue that it would create thousands of jobs in the midst of an economic downturn. Environmentalists — who plan to ring the White House in a protest on Sunday — say the extraction of the oil will accelerate global warming and the pipeline itself could spill, polluting waterways and causing severe environmental harm.
Anything is better than our hopelessly corrupt State Department. And anything is better than writing another damn letter about Richard Muller. Sent November 3:
In his November 2008 election-night speech in Chicago, Barack Obama offered a vision of the country that extended a century into the future, contrasting the life of a centenarian voter with the lives his two young daughters could expect to lead.
It is depressingly rare to find national leaders in our country who are capable of thinking beyond the next election cycle; America’s great historical figures, by contrast, are the ones who have risen above political exigency to address the needs of our longer-term future. That night in Grant Park, our president-elect showed himself capable of thinking in centuries.
We must remind Barack Obama to start thinking long-term once again when it comes to the oil of the Canadian tar sands. If he addresses the needs of the coming centuries rather than those of the fossil-fuel industry, he’ll recognize that the Keystone XL pipeline is a multi-generational disaster in the making.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: Barack Obama corporate irresponsibility
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 2, Month 10, Day 20: Thoughts On Not Wanting To Not Do Something
The New York Times’ Elisabeth Rosenthal writes about the disappearance of the term “climate change” from our political discussion:
IN 2008, both the Democratic and Republican candidates for president, Barack Obama and John McCain, warned about man-made global warming and supported legislation to curb emissions. After he was elected, President Obama promised “a new chapter in America’s leadership on climate change,” and arrived cavalry-like at the 2009 United Nations Climate Conference in Copenhagen to broker a global pact.
But two years later, now that nearly every other nation accepts climate change as a pressing problem, America has turned agnostic on the issue.
I recycled a letter that got published by the Boston Globe this past April, filed off the serial numbers, and sent it in on October 16:
Environmentalists are entirely justified in their frustration at the Obama administration’s pusillanimity on the issues of energy and climate. Climate change’s factuality is now beyond dispute, and the positive economic ramifications of a transformed energy policy are likewise subject to wide agreement across the ideological spectrum. Why, then, does a president whose campaign pledged a transformation in our nation’s climate policy seem so reluctant to fulfill some of the promises that got him elected in the first place?
Simple answers are easy and convenient, but as H.L. Mencken pointed out, they’re wrong. It’s unlikely that Mr. Obama is deliberately betraying his core constituency on environmental issues; he is, after all, a politician of considerable skill. Rather, the administration’s paralysis on energy and climate policy must be considered diagnostically — they’re symptoms of chronic long-term exposure to toxic levels of petrochemicals and their financial byproducts. Our political system has been poisoned.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: Barack Obama EPA Tar Sands
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 2, Month 9, Day 12: Who?
The President gave his September 8 speech on jobs, and it was a good one. There were even some en passant words about environmental regulation, as Daily Kos diarist roubs makes clear in this piece.
The Boston Globe ran an article on the speech, and I used that as the hook for a LTE as suggested in the DK piece (which it turns out was partially inspired by a diary I wrote a little while back). Cool.
Sent September 9:
President Obama’s jobs speech to Congress was noteworthy in many respects. Particularly noteworthy was his statement that America “shouldn’t be in a race to the bottom, where we try to offer the cheapest labor and the worst pollution standards.” Implicit in this sentence is the notion that short-term economic gains must not come at the expense of the environment; trading jobs for environmental degradation is unacceptable.
Well said, Mr. President! Respect for the planetary ecosystems that support us all is essential to a sustainable Ameican future — a vision that is impossible if polluters are given free rein.
Last week’s suspension of new EPA regulations on air pollution, and the possibility of administration approval for the environmentally devastating Keystone XL project, are indicators of an unfortunate disconnect within the administration when it comes to environmental issues. President Obama should heed his own words, and block the tar sands pipeline.
Warren Senders