Climate Change

Friday, August 15, 2008

GREEN JOBS: Oregon creates hot jobs in green energy. The green energy sector in Oregon is an economic and environmental success story in an area hard-pressed for family-wage jobs, an example of "green collar" employment blossoming in reaction to high energy costs and concerns about global warming. Portland Oregonian, Oregon. 15 August 2008.

SOLAR ENERGY: Two large solar plants planned in California. The plants will cover 12.5 square miles of central California with solar panels, and in the middle of a sunny day will generate about 800 megawatts of power, roughly equal to the size of a large coal-burning power plant or a small nuclear plant. New York Times. 15 August 2008. [Registration Required]

ALGAE: Algae could help cut coal plants' carbon emissions. With international attention focused on carbon dioxide and its role in global climate change, power companies might find a hero in humble algae. Louisville Courier-Journal, Kentucky. 15 August 2008.

Friday, August 8, 2008

SOLAR HIGHWAY: Oregon installs first highway solar project. In an attempt to spur the spread of solar power, the Oregon Department of Transportation on Thursday unveiled the nation's first solar panel project on a major U.S. highway. Portland Oregonian, Oregon. 8 August 2008.

EMISSIONS TRADING: Boost for emissions trading scheme. European Union and United Nations systems for tracking the use of carbon credits will be connected before December, a move that should significantly facilitate emissions trading. London Financial Times, United Kingdom. 8 August 2008.

Friday, August 1, 2008

WIND ENERGY: Wind energy: Much potential, but also daunting challenges. Pioneers in the emerging wind-power industry are touting their product as The Next Big Thing as they chart a course to produce at least 20 percent of the nation's electricity in just over two decades. McClatchy Newspapers. 1 August 2008.

STATES/EPA - LEGAL: California moves ahead with plan to sue EPA. Fed up with the federal government's refusal to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, California announced it will lead five states and New York City in a landmark lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency. Long Beach Press-Telegram, California. 1 August 2008.

CALIFORNIA UTILITIES: L.A. utility wary of California's emissions strategy. Hailed as a step in the right direction to fight climate change, California's proposed greenhouse gas reduction policy has worried some of its most valued customers. Associated Press. 1 August 2008.

I was in Beijing last week and noticed the smog, of course, but as China grapples with Olympics and air quality I also saw something much more important. China is serious about energy efficiency and reducing greenhouse gases.

In recent months, the Chinese government has closed over 21 gigawatts of the dirtiest, most inefficient power plants. They didn't do this just for a temporary clean air benefit around Beijing - - it was done permanently all across the country. They also closed inefficient foundries, furnaces, and cement makers in huge numbers.

The government is in talks with major manufacturers, provincial leaders, and experts from places like California's Energy Commission (the agency that is largely responsible for making the Golden State 40% more energy efficient than the rest of America) to squeeze out all of the inefficient machinery, power generators, and heating/air conditioning equipment. They're also doing the obvious - - one official told me that the government will replace 2 billion incandescent light bulbs in the next year with more efficient ones.

  (By Sasha Abelson, Guest Blogger to the Climate Program)

Photo by Ira Meyer - http://irameyer.com/

The original subject for this blog was going to be a commentary on how the White House allegedly pressured the head of the EPA, Stephen Johnson, to reject California's request to implement stricter emission control laws.  Johnson defended himself stating the decision was "mine and mine alone".[1]  Now a group of democratic senators are calling for a perjury investigation into Johnson's comments.

I found this story shocking on several levels.  Firstly, the head of the EPA may have let his integrity be compromised by pressure from the executive office, and secondly, the President's (alleged) preference for a single emissions standard trumped the state's attempt to regulate greenhouse gas emissions (remember global warming?).

I began writing and was in midsentence when yesterday the above photo was presented to our office.  I stopped writing.   

Friday, July 18, 2008

HYDROGEN CARS: Hydrogen cars could rule road by 2050, slash oil need. A government-backed study says America could nearly eliminate its need for gasoline for cars, pickup trucks and SUVs by 2050 if the government helps build a market for hydrogen fuel cells and other technologies. McClatchy Newspapers. 18 July 2008.

IMPACTS: Antarctic icebergs scouring seabed are new threat to marine life. Antarctic marine life is coming under increasing threat from icebergs that are scouring the seabed and destroying their habitat, a new study by the British Antarctic Survey has found. London Daily Telegraph, England. 18 July 2008

EPA STUDY - IMPACTS: Climate change puts U.S. way of life at risk: EPA. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, under fire for apparently discounting the impact of climate change, on Thursday said global warming poses real risk to human health and the American way of life. Reuters. 18 July 2008.

Scanning the news for stories on climate change can be depressing. For example, I read this week about a report put out by the Green New Deal Group that says that humanity has only 100 months or less to stabilize concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere before we hit a potential point of no return. According to a BBC report the group says that rising greenhouse gas emissions, combined with escalating food and energy costs, mean the globe is facing one of its biggest crises since the 1930s.  When I saw the headline it made me pause. 100 months - that's a little over eight years.  Not much time in my opinion.

Then I read another article (actually several) - that the G8 leaders had agreed to back a 50% cut in GHG emissions by 2050 without identifying any specific or binding medium-term targets. Yikes.  After all, it is widely agreed that we must reduce GHG emissions by at least 25-40% below 1990 levels by 2020 if we are to have any chance of beating back the worst of climate change. Based on the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), this consensus holds that preventing global mean temperature from rising above the critical threshold of 2 degrees centigrade in the 21st century will require radical cuts in greenhouse gas emissions of 80-90% by 2050. The 25-40% below 1990 levels reductions is an intermediate target on the path to achieving this goal. The G8 "commitment" of about half of this 2050 target is, quite frankly, a joke.  

Sometimes it is good to provoke an unconventional thought. I'm wondering whether Al Gore's energy speech, which Senator Obama has not yet fully embraced, could be picked up by Senator McCain to upset the curious balance between the two candidates and secure the win in November.

Let me start at the beginning. In his path-breaking address yesterday, Al Gore shook loose the bonds of political gravity and finally proposed a key element of any new American grand strategy: 100% carbon-free electricty by 2018.

Saying "100%" about anything in the context of sustainability in America is nearly impossible in Washington, but the former Vice President seems to understand what McCain and Obama have yet to fully grasp: the nation is hungry for a decisive, bold step towards a new economic engine for the United States.

I attended Governor Crist's Florida Summit on Global Climate Change a few weeks ago, and Lord Adair Turner, Chairman of the United Kingdom Climate Change Committee, discussed climate change and economics.  He said there has been a concern that cutting greenhouse gas emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050 (which is California's law) is a "threat" to the American way of life.  He went on to prove why that is not true (which I will discuss later in this blog).

But first I want to ask what happened to the "land of opportunity," to the country where "the sky's the limit?"  Where has America's hope gone, and why are we hesitant to seize the opportunity?

Actually, I know-the people that are putting out the message about the "threat" are those who feel threatened...ie. oil companies.  Yeah, things don't look good for them if our country needs to change our lifestyle and implement new technologies for energy.  But things don't look good for the entire world if we don't.  So who do you want to protect (hint: 2 answers are correct):

a. the incredibly rich oil company executives, whom if they retire now will have plenty of money for themselves and their families for generations to come

b. the poor child living in the African nation of Chad (who emits 1/2000 of carbon emissions/year of what an average American does)

c. ourselves. 

Governor Charlie Crist hosted a Climate Summit in Miami 2 weeks ago and here are a few observations from the front row...

- In his opening keynote, Gov. Crist showed the value of leadership - - just one year ago, he challenged his state to tackle climate change and the result was a massive energy bill that will dramatically increase renewables (solar, wind, etc), improve energy efficiency (the cheapest power comes from the power plant you don't have to build!), and greenhouse gas reductions.

- Ray Anderson, founder and Chairman of Interface, a billion dollar American carpet company, told us how he had slashed energy consumption and greenhouse gases 60% in the past 10 years while doubling profits. Any doubts that we can be both environmentally and economically sustainable simultaneously were erased from the minds of 800 in attendance that night!

- Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger delivered a knock-out punch of sorts - - he said the politicians who claim they can lower gasoline prices by drilling offshore or investigating oil companies are "blowing smoke". He challenged us to do the job ourselves, by inflating our tires properly, driving a bit slower, tuning up our engines, and using other simple methods to improve MPG by as much as 20% overnight. He made other suggestions of things we can do to take our economic and environmental destiny into our own hands - - great point - - we can't wait for politicians to do it!