Climate Change

I’m killing two birds with one stone here (even though I’m a vegetarian).  I’m going to highlight some of the more important recent stories I’ve not gotten to while pointing out some of the blogs I consider to be in the top tier.

Gore kick starts sweeping program to slash U.S. carbon emissions is a headline from Tuesday from the comprehensive, always informative and eminently readable DeSmogBlog.  He’s getting $300 million together to convince those that yet need convincing that climate change is upon us, and needs to be mitigated sooner rather than later.  I’d be happy to have President Obama enlist the Nobel Laureate in a major effort to effect the changes we need.  (If President Clinton or President McCain wanted that, that’d be good too.)

More reasons to love Lieberman-Warner is one of the many useful things that are usually being represented at The Gristmill.  This cites an analysis by the Center for American Progress’s Dan Weiss and his colleague, Alexandra Kougentakis, that S. 2191, the current vehicle for an American cap-and-trade program, would mean thousands of new jobs.  (I worked with Dan way back when he was a staffer on clean air for the Sierra Club and I was an activist.)  The Gristmill is an always stimulating blog.

Antarctic ice breakup caught on tape reads the story from the impeccable Climate Feedback, a blog from the folks at “Nature,” one of the world’s preeminent science publications.  Here’s the poignant video clip they’ve got posted.

Bangkok Climate Change Talks 2008 is the lead from the Climate Science blog at the National Wildlife Federation.  This reports on the talks that are a follow on to the big meeting in Bali last December.

Soot in the Greenhouse, and Kitchen is from Andrew Revkin’s Dot Earth at the “NY Times.”  This highlights a story that caught my eye in which a new study identifies soot from industrial and transportation sources, and from developing world cooking practices, as having a significantly more potent impact on climate change than previously thought.  I wrote about solar box cookers, solar flashlights and innovative design for the developing world here last year.  Man, why aren’t we on that?  (That’s not a rhetorical question.  I’d like to know.  I’m going to be following up with some sustainable development folks before too long.) 

Yesterday, all over the world, people turned out the lights to dramatize their concerns about global warming.  See this video from the Earth Hour folks:

See also this slideshow, courtesy of Yahoo and Reuters.

Senate cloture bid on energy bill fails is the story this morning from “The Hill.”  With 60 votes necessary to close debate and proceed to a vote on the superb energy package that came over from the House yesterday, only 53 votes could be mustered.  Three Democrats, Byrd, Landrieu and Bayh voted against closure.  Byrd (coal) and Landrieu (oil) were predictable, but Bayh’s vote is a bit of a mystery, to me anyway.  On the Republican side, I can’t understand why some of these “Moderate” Republicans would vote against cloture, people like Sununu, Specter and Hagel, except that they need to stay on the “reservation.”  What’s completely inexplicable to me is why John Warner, coauthor of the climate change bill in the Senate, would vote against this energy package which should be considered a precursor and complement to a climate change package.  Back to the drawing board, as the Senate Republican pointman on energy, Pete Domenici, has promised, according to the article from “The Hill.”  Oh well, as I’ve said before here, it’s usually wise not to make the best the enemy of the good.  (“Le mieux est l’ennemi du bien.” – Voltaire.) 

Meanwhile, down in Bali, at the climate change talks, the head of the U.S. delegation has declared “…that neither a recent US Senate committee move to limit greenhouse gas emissions or the decision by Australia to ratify the Kyoto Protocol would influence their stance” on mandatory GHG reductions.  (See my post from Dec. 5 on the Senate’s action and this from Nov. 25 on Australia’s new PM and his signing of the Kyoto Protocols.)  See the story from Agence France Presse, US sticks to divisive climate change policy: official. 

As noted here on Dec. 2, at least the U.S. has what appears to be a constructive proposal on trade and fostering environmental goods and services.

Meanwhile, our brothers and sisters in Germany are leading the charge against global warming.  See another AFP story, Germany passes ‘ambitious’ climate change package, from yesterday.  Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel said:  “Germany wants to show that a developed country can reconcile economic growth with protection of the environment.” And Economy Minister Michael Glos said Europe’s biggest economy was aiming for “intelligent and ambitious climate protection.” Germany is shooting for a 25 to 30% share of energy production by renewables by 2020 — and we’re going to cut our 15% proposal loose to satisfy the utility industry.  As noted the other day, Scotland has set a target of 50% of all electricity from renewables by 2020,” according to the “Press Association” here.  More power, as it were, to them — and shame on us, or at least on our dysfunctional politics, so seriously flawed by special interest influence.

Is this shying away from our extraordinary potential to change the way we use energy and the way our economy is shaped an indication of the will of the American people?  Apparently not.  An analysis of recent international poll results not only indicate Robust Global Support For Increased Efforts to Reduce Emissions but that a majority of Americans (54%) disapproved of how the United States was handling global warming.