Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts

Sunday, December 21, 2008

Obama Appoints Science and Technology Team

In contrast to the Bush administration's apparent campaign to limit scientific inquiry (please see the previous post), President-elect Obama has appointed a first-rate team of scientists to take up the challenges of the 21st century. Here is his video address from December 20, 2008:

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Environmental President? Ha!

Well, forget the notion that George W. Bush will be remembered as an environmental progressive. The sweeping motion to create hundreds of thousands of acres of maritime preserve has apparently been abandoned; at least I haven't heard any news about its passage. Instead, it's been replaced by a call for new offshore drilling to add to our nation's oil reserves. This is a wholly unneccessary endeavor, since the major oil companies are already sitting on thousands of 68 million acres of land, covered by signed lease -- oil-rich land that is being held for speculative purposes, presumably to be used to keep profits up if it becomes necessary. In addition, any oil discovered by new drilling off America's coasts, besides being environmentally risky, very likely won't show any influence on aggregate supply or retail gas prices until 2030.

This should teach us never to elect an administration that is as beholden to industry as Bush and Cheney.

(No links for this post; information is from a presentation by Sen. Barbara Boxer [D-CA] at a meeting of the Democratic Women's Leadership Council, broadcast yesterday on CSpan.)

Another factoid, from Rachel Maddow: the U.S. consumes 25% of the world's oil. We produce 2% of the world's oil. Even if we were able to increase our oil output by a factor of five (not likely, since all our refineries are already operating at capacity), we would still be able to produce only 10% of the world's oil -- while still consuming 25%! Seems to be time for some new thinking...

Monday, May 21, 2007

Waste-to-energy is here! Write your Senators

The idea of waste-to-energy has been around for a long time -- at least since the time I was a budding young failure of an ethical investor, many years ago. Now, it seems its time has come; actually, its time came a long time ago, when the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the earth's atmosphere started growing at an exponential rate, but the technology was still very much in the experimental stage. Now, however, there are 89 plants online nationwide, and more in development. The time that has now come is the time for us to write our governmental officials and make sure they are on the bandwagon, for waste-to-energy is destined to become an important part of our renewable energy picture.

Today's waste-to-energy plants provide efficient trash disposal of about 90,000 tons of solid waste nationwide every day, while converting the compounds contained therein into enough methane-free electricity to power 2.3 million homes across the country. In this regard, waste-to-energy plants actually provide a reduction in greenhouse gases over ordinary landfill disposal methods. Ferrous and non-ferrous metals are also recovered in a more energy efficient method than mining virgin ore, providing a further reduction in greenhouse gases. Carbon dioxide emission is also avoided by eliminating the need for the combustion of coal or oil in the energy generation process.

The Integrated Waste Services Association has just opened their Legislative Action Center, where you can contact your Senators and urge them to consider waste-to-energy as part of your state's overall energy profile. The IWSA website has far more information than I can possibly include here. Interesed people are encouraged to visit there to find out more about current trends and technologies.

Tuesday, May 8, 2007

Joint call from business for aggressive pollution cuts

From Environmental Defense:

Business Coalition for Climate Action Doubles


The unprecedented coalition calling for a cap and trade system to combat climate change, the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (USCAP), has more than doubled its membership.

In a move that transforms the political landscape, General Motors is the first automobile manufacturer to join the coalition of high-level corporate and environmental leaders. The group's mission is to urge the federal government to:

* cut greenhouse gas emissions 60-80 percent,
* create business incentives and,
* act swiftly and thoughtfully.

USCAP member companies represent industries critical to slowing climate change, including car manufacturing, utilities, chemical production and manufacturing. Twelve new companies join the original members, bringing the number of corporate partners to 22.

Read more at www.environmentaldefense.org

Monday, April 23, 2007

Karl Rove shows his true colors on the global warming issue

From Sheryl Crow and Laurie David, via HuffPo:

Last night Thelma and Louise drove the bus off the cliff or at least into the White House Correspondents Dinner. The "highlight" of the evening had to be when we were introduced to Karl Rove. How excited were we to have our first opportunity ever to talk directly to the Bush Administration about global warming.

more...

Saturday, April 14, 2007

New film takes aim at "An Inconvenient Truth", Al Gore, and liberals

Steven Hayward of the American Enterprise Institute, a Republican "think tank", was in San Francisco yesterday introducing his new film, "An Inconvenient Truth...or Convenient Fiction?" The movie goes after Gore as being an environmental extremist, but beyond that is meant to attack liberals more directly, and with a vicious slant. In doing so, Mr. Hayward displayed some of the Republican antipathy toward liberals that keeps the two parties at odds with each other.

Of those in attendance, he said:

“I don’t know how much of the enemy we have here tonight,” said a smiling Mr. Hayward, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, based in Washington. “San Francisco is usually a target-rich environment.”

"Enemy?" "Target(s)?" Are we the terrorists the country is at war with? Mr. Hayward, you agree there is a problem, and that human activity is at the heart of it. The only thing you disagree on is the matter of degree. Why not approach global climate change with a spirit of positive action, and not let the politics turn it into a federal case?

Dave