Year 3, Month 1, Day 3: TSTS

Florida Today’s Randall Parkinson has a good analysis of our industrial policy paralysis:

This year, China surpassed the United States as the world’s largest investor in green technology.

The country is rapidly emerging as the world’s leader in clean-energy innovation and manufacturing. It now produces more wind turbines and solar panels each year than any other country.

This was accomplished remarkably fast because China recognized its rising economic power can be sustained only by ensuring access to abundant energy, food and water resources. This requires development of noncarbon-based energy and a stable climate.

Many other countries, like Japan, South Korea and India, also are facilitating the commercial development of green technologies.

Unfortunately, efforts to create a similar technology boom in the United States have paled by comparison, thanks to a very small group of lobbyists.

These merchants of doubt have convinced some members of Congress climate change is not real and the country’s long-term energy policy should focus on more, not less, fossil fuel exploration and production. As a consequence, we have ceded growth in green technology, jobs and related income to overseas companies that now profitably export their goods and expertise to the U.S.

I consider myself a proud American. Watching this shit go on (and on and on and on) is an utter embarrassment. Sent December 30:

Those same political candidates fetishizing American exceptionalism enthusiastically advocate policies that would permanently cement our nation’s status as an also-ran. Nowhere is this disconnect between rhetoric and action more evident than in our laggardly response to the challenge of global climate change. Although scientific evidence demonstrates to all but the willfully deluded that the greenhouse effect is wreaking havoc on the planetary ecosystems that sustain our species, self-styled “deficit hawks” relentlessly advocate for failure.

We must fail to develop new energy sources, to mount a robust response to a genuine existential threat, to retool our infrastructure to cope with the extreme weather events triggered by atmospheric warning, to educate our citizens about the dangers ahead, to take responsibility for our century of massive greenhouse emissions.

Why must we fail? The “fiscally conservative” answer: we can’t afford it. Meet the new face of penny-wise, pound-foolish American exceptionalism: too stingy to succeed.

Warren Senders

Year 2, Month 12, Day 16: It’s 20-20, All Right.

The L.A. Times:

REPORTING FROM WASHINGTON — Negotiators at a climate change meeting in South Africa struck an 11th-hour deal to avoid the collapse of international negotiations over global warming, averting the worst fears of environmental advocates but doing little to immediately advance the cause of limiting greenhouse gas emissions.

The agreement in effect would postpone new concerted global action on climate change for at least eight years. However, given the political realities, particularly in the United States and China, the accord probably offered the best chance to move the process forward, analysts said.

The mood at the United Nations gathering in Durban was somber as the talks ended just before dawn Sunday, participants said, largely because many questions remained unanswered and the risk of a catastrophic increase in global average temperature had not been reduced.

Under the deal, nations committed themselves to talks aimed at reaching a legally binding agreement by 2015 that would limit emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases that contribute to global warming. The limits would not go into effect until 2020 at the earliest.

Decrying the oppositional nature of these two cultures is an easy way out, but I don’t mind. Sent December 12:

Political and scientific realities are entirely different. Politics, the “art of the possible,” deems the recent agreement from the Durban climate conference to be a triumph — the result of tremendously difficult and complex negotiations, one that offers participating nations, and the world, a best way forward. Scientists, on the other hand, concern themselves with measurable facts and their implications — and the details of the general scientific consensus on climate change suggest that Durban’s “best way forward” is virtually certain to be too little, too late.

It’s time for a reality-based politics to emerge in our nation and the world. The fact that Republican presidential candidates can gratuitously dismiss scientific expertise should be a red flag: ideologies that must reject facts in order to survive cannot be successful in the long run — for in the long run, the laws of physics and chemistry will win. They always do.

Warren Senders

Year 2, Month 11, Day 23: Defund or Defend?

More on the IPCC report, this time from the Washington Post:

Climate change will make drought and flooding events like those that have battered the United States and other countries in 2011 more frequent, forcing nations to rethink the way they cope with disasters, according to a new report the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued Friday.

The report — the culmination of a two-year process involving 100 scientists and policy experts — suggests that researchers are far more confident about the prospect of more intense heat waves and heavy downpours than they are about how global warming is affecting hurricanes and tornadoes. But the new analysis also speaks to a broader trend: The world is facing a new reality of more extreme weather, and policymakers and business alike are beginning to adjust.

It’s late at night in a hotel room in Madison, Wisconsin. I’ve got a big day tomorrow — four hours of classroom teaching and a concert, so I figured I’d get the letter out of the way before I went to sleep. Sent November 18:

As the case of Dr. Richard Muller case demonstrates, a responsible scientist changes his or her mind when confronted with factual evidence. The past few weeks have seen a plethora of studies demonstrating over and over again that the reality of human-caused climate change is no longer deniable. The newly released report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change offers an ominous look at a post-greenhouse-effect future in which extreme weather is the norm, with concomitant effects on agriculture, infrastructure and geopolitics that range from inconvenient to outright terrifying.

Scientific ethics compelled Dr. Muller to revise his opinion once he confirmed the validity of worldwide temperature measurements. Confronted with the same data, conservative politicians would resolve the problem differently — by defunding the IPCC and any other scientific organizations with the temerity to report facts as they are. In Republican politics, electoral exigencies trump the truth, every time.

Warren Senders

Year 2, Month 11, Day 17: If We Stop Giving Money To The Oil Companies…

The NOAA has more exciting news for connoisseurs of impending doom:

Greenhouse gases are building at a steep rate in the atmosphere, the nation’s top climate agency reported, renewing concern that global warming may be accelerating.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Annual Greenhouse Gas Index, which indexes the key gases known to trap heat in the Earth’s atmosphere, rose 1.5% from 2009 to 2010, the agency reported.

The reported rise comes on top of an analysis by the Energy Department last week saying that global emissions of carbon dioxide, a key, long-lived greenhouse gas, had jumped by the biggest increment on record in 2010. The figures showed a 6% increase from the year before, a steeper rise than worst-case scenarios that had been laid out by climate experts four years before.

This started out as a revision of the letter I sent to the Boston Globe a few days ago. It’s always fun to mock Rick Perry a bit, so that wound up as the lede. Sent November 13:

It was just a few days ago that Rick Perry finally — oops! — remembered his intention to defund the Department of Energy — coincidentally, the agency responsible for one of the most alarming recent reports on climate change. Can anyone doubt that every single Republican presidential candidate would enthusiastically endorse a similar response to the NOAA, whose Annual Greenhouse Gas Index is reporting equally bad news?

The NOAA report is terrifying to anyone willing to read the numbers. The consequences of such drastic increases in GHG emissions include devastating storms, droughts, out-of-season precipitation and other forms of extreme weather — all leading inevitably to disrupted agriculture and infrastructure on the regional level. Climate change’s geopolitical effects include resource wars and increased political instability, according to both military and CIA analyses.

In the GOP’s world, bad news disappears when you stop paying for it. If only it were that easy.

Warren Senders

Year 2, Month 11, Day 3: A Truffle!

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution runs another article on Muller’s epiphany:

WASHINGTON — A prominent physicist and skeptic of global warming spent two years trying to find out if mainstream climate scientists were wrong. In the end, he determined they were right: Temperatures really are rising rapidly.

The study of the world’s surface temperatures by Richard Muller was partially bankrolled by a foundation connected to global warming deniers. He pursued long-held skeptic theories in analyzing the data. He was spurred to action because of “Climategate,” a British scandal involving hacked emails of scientists.

Yet he found that the land is 1.6 degrees warmer than in the 1950s. Those numbers from Muller, who works at the University of California, Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, match those by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA.

Notice that this guy was fooled by “Climategate.” He wasn’t paying too much attention, I guess. Sent on October 30:

Richard Muller’s capacity for intellectual integrity will cost him dearly among those who’ve used his earlier stances to bolster their rabid denial of climate change. After an exhaustive study partially funded by two arch-denialist billionaires, he’s concluded that all the other researchers on the issue were right: the earth’s atmosphere is warming. Perhaps in his subsequent research, he’ll tackle the question of whether human beings are responsible for the burgeoning greenhouse effect that is triggering extreme weather all over the planet — and eventually come around to the conclusion already shared by the overwhelming majority of the world’s climate scientists: human civilization is indeed the driving force behind global warming. In the meantime, Dr. Muller is about to learn that his erstwhile sponsors couldn’t care less for scientific integrity; the Koch brothers and their political allies in the GOP only support skepticism when they stand to benefit from it.

Warren Senders

Year 2, Month 10, Day 30: Sometimes These Letters Just Walk Up And Beg To Be Written

Eugene Robinson writes in the October 25 Washington Post about the logical consequences of the Muller/UC study:


For the clueless or cynical diehards who deny global warming, it’s getting awfully cold out there.

The latest icy blast of reality comes from an eminent scientist whom the climate-change skeptics once lauded as one of their own. Richard Muller, a respected physicist at the University of California, Berkeley, used to dismiss alarmist climate research as being “polluted by political and activist frenzy.” Frustrated at what he considered shoddy science, Muller launched his own comprehensive study to set the record straight. Instead, the record set him straight.

“Global warming is real,” Muller wrote last week in The Wall Street Journal.

Rick Perry, Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann and the rest of the neo-Luddites who are turning the GOP into the anti-science party should pay attention.

Sharp learning curve ahead for Muller, who is going to find himself stigmatized as a leftist DFH within a few days. Sent Oct. 25:

In a sane political environment, the release of Dr. Richard Muller’s study confirming the reality of global climate change would be a game-changer of huge proportions. When a study administered by a leading “skeptic” and largely funded by arch-denialists the Koch brothers comes down conclusively on the other side of the debate, it should change a few minds.

And in a sane world, it would. But the people who funded Muller’s study aren’t interested in facts; they share a political philosophy with those who evinced disdain and contempt for the “reality-based community” during the previous administration. Corporate climate denialists and the politicians they subsidize have combined nihilism and solipsism in a toxic package: they care not for the continued survival of our species, because they (as a Bush official said to Ron Suskind) “create their own reality.”

And that’s why the Muller study won’t matter to Republican lawmakers.

Warren Senders

Year 2, Month 9, Day 26: Stupid Is As Stupid Does

The Sept. 22 edition of the Cypress Times (TX) notes the idiotic readiness of conservative voters to reject climate change and evolution in one fell swoop:

WASHINGTON, D.C.—While nearly 7-in-10 (69%) Americans believe there is solid evidence that the average temperature on earth has been getting warmer over the past few decades, and nearly 6-in-10 (57%) Americans believe humans and other living things evolved over time, a new survey finds that approximately half of Americans who identify with the Tea Party reject both (50% reject global warming and 51% reject evolution).

The new PRRI/RNS Religion News Survey was conducted by Public Religion Research Institute, in partnership with the Religion News Service, amid back and forth among Republican presidential candidates on religion and science, especially the issues of climate change and evolution.

I guess I just felt like lecturing them a bit on how dumb they’re being. Note the Old-Testament metaphor in my final sentence. Sent Sept. 22:

That many Republican primary voters enthusiastically repudiate evolutionary theory and global climate change is a sad indicator of the state of education in America. These same voters are perfectly ready to endorse scientific results when they’re ideologically neutral — just ask any “tea-party” member to give up antibiotics, chest x-rays, air travel, telephones or the internal combustion engine and see how far you’ll get. It’s also acceptable when science is used to support conservative policy objectives, as in the application of the latest and most advanced war-making technology — all developed by researchers applying the scientific method.

This method — the testing of falsifiable hypotheses — has created an understanding of the world overwhelmingly more accurate than any other in human history. To reject scientific results when they’re ideologically inconvenient — as in the case of climate denialists — is to bow before the golden calf of willful ignorance.

Warren Senders

Year 2, Month 9, Day 24: The Punch Line Is A Punch In The Face

The Seattle Times runs an AP story on Bill Clinton’s Global Initiative, which handles the Big Dog’s remarks rather tamely:

Former President Bill Clinton’s annual philanthropic conference will get under way in New York City with a discussion about climate change.

The Clinton Global Initiative is set to begin Tuesday morning with an opening session focused on addressing global climate challenges in coming years. The session will be co-hosted by Mexican President Felipe Calderon and South African President Jacob Zuma.

They left out his characterization of GOP climate denialism as making the US into a “joke” in the eyes of the world:

Former President Bill Clinton has some tough words for Republican climate-change deniers: quit making the U.S. “look like a joke.”

Kicking off his Clinton Global Initiative in New York, the former president said Americans should make it “politically unacceptable” for people to engage in climate change denial, according to Politico.

“I mean, it makes us — we look like a joke, right?” Clinton said. “You can’t win the nomination of one of the major parties in the country if you admit that scientists are right?”

Link

So I mentioned it in my letter, sent September 20:

In his opening remarks at the Clinton Global Initiative, Bill Clinton spoke forcefully about Republicans’ rejection of science, saying that their unwillingness to admit the existence of global climate change makes the U.S.A. “look like a joke” to the rest of the world.

Indeed. When a huge slice of our country’s population is represented by petroleum-funded, science-denying, reality-phobic politicians who value the petty exigencies of political gamesmanship over meaningful policy responses to genuine emergencies — well, it means trouble any way you look at it.

It’s trouble for our country, as much-needed investments in renewable energy and conservation are blocked by GOP legislators. It’s trouble for the planet, as America continues to emit more CO2 per capita than any other country in the world. With Republican obstructionism blocking our response to the climate crisis, our country may look like a joke — but no one’s laughing anymore.

Warren Senders

Year 2, Month 9, Day 10: How’s That Pray-For-Rain Thing Working Out?

Anne MacQuarie has an excellent op-ed in the September 7 issue of the Carson City-based Nevada Appeal. It’s great:

…it’s been interesting to watch the Republican presidential candidates refine — if I can use that word for so blundering a process — their views on climate change.

Current wisdom — backed by some polls — is that the Republican base thinks human-caused climate change is a bunch of hooey and that we can’t do anything about it anyway. Candidates are falling all over themselves to, instead of lead, agree. Here’s a rundown of some of the candidates’ views, including current frontrunners Perry and Bachman.

Rick Perry believes “the issue of global warming has been politicized” and “scientists have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling in to their projects.”

Regarding doing anything at all to alleviate or halt climate change, Perry says he doesn’t want America “to be engaged in spending that much money on still a scientific theory that has not been proven and from my perspective is more and more being put into question.”

It’s a fine thing to be able to slap Rick Perry around a bit. He must never be allowed anywhere near national governance. Think Bush was a disaster? Perry will make us nostalgic for Dubya. Sent Sept. 7:

When Republican politicians discuss climate change, the projection is thick on the ground. Rick Perry’s assertion that scientists have manipulated data for financial gain offers a window into the mindset of people who’ve specialized in greed-driven data-manipulation for years. These are the same folks who cherry-picked intelligence to sell the American public an unnecessary (albeit profitable) war, remember? That they ascribe the same motives to others should be no surprise.

Scientific method is the best tool we have yet found for arriving at verifiable truth in reporting and analysis. While there are unethical scientists who are driven by pecuniary motives, they are a decided minority; most researchers are propelled by intellectual curiosity — a state of mind completely foreign to the GOP mindset.

Let’s agree, however, that there are some climate scientists who are decidedly guilty of data manipulation for personal gain. They’re on big oil’s payroll.

Warren Senders

Year 2, Month 9, Day 3: If wishes were horses, there would be lots of wish-poop on the street.

The August 30 Kansas City Star reprints a column from the LA Times by Eugene Linden, called “Betting The Farm Against Climate Change.” Good stuff:

Leon Trotsky is reputed to have quipped, “You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.” Substitute the words “climate change” for “war” and the quote is perfectly suited for the governors of Texas, Oklahoma and New Mexico, all of whom have ridiculed or dismissed the threat of climate change even as their states suffer record-breaking heat and drought.

In his book, “Fed Up!” Texas governor and presidential aspirant Rick Perry derided global warming as a “phony mess,” a sentiment he has expanded on in recent campaign appearances. Susana Martinez, the governor of New Mexico, has gone on record as doubting that humans influence climate, and Mary Fallin of Oklahoma dismissed research on climate change as a waste of time. Her solution to the extraordinary drought: pray for rain (an approach also endorsed by Perry).

Heh heh heh. Sent August 30:

The exigencies of Republican electoral politics have been biased toward the surreal for decades, but the current season is by far the most bizarre. Even at their most anti-intellectual moments, GOP aspirants have always offered some form of glib lip-service to American scientific achievement and technological progress. No more; the new standard is a vehement rejection of anything that requires logic, analysis or the interpretation of facts. The irrelevance of actual data to conservative philosophies of governance is unsettling; traditionally, politics is called “the art of the possible” — surely a reality-based way of putting it.

While these politicians don’t believe humans are influencing the earth’s climate, they’re absolutely certain that the inconvenient reality of catastrophic global warming will vanish if we deny it strongly enough. If refusing to accept facts actually makes them go away, perhaps we should all deny the existence of Republican politicians.

Yeah. That oughta work.

Warren Senders