Get Energy Smart! NOW!

In a confused editorial on energy policy, the Los Angeles Times incorrectly creates much equivalency between the two presidential candidates when it comes to energy and global warming policy. While not complimentary to either, this editorial clearly points to how the McCain campaign’s effortst to McBlur the differences in these arenas continues to work, despite selection of global warming denier Sarah “Energy Expert” Palin to the McCain-Pain ticket.

That’s why it’s doubly disappointing that neither Barack Obama nor John McCain has a responsible energy plan. In pandering to voters in swing states, both have backed dangerous, dirty energy sources in contradiction of their own principles.

This places the two candidates and the two campaigns on an equal footing when it comes to energy policy. This is simply not the case.

A more appropriate characterization might be that:

I absolutely do not think it appropriate to say that Obama does not have a “responsible energy plan”, even if the amount of ethanol and the discussion of clean coal (for example) are bad news items within his plan.

The McCain-Pain ticket’s approach is basicially “drill, baby, drill” with some radioactivity thrown into the mix.

[Read more →]

A few days ago, guest poster Jill Richardson brought us exciting news with the question “Can Organics Save Us from Global Warming?” Jill excitedly brought news of a new study from the Rodale Institute entitled REgenerative ORganic Farming: A Solution to Global Warming. After now having taken the time to read this report, it seems Jill’s excitement might not be so worth seconding, and actually to perhaps seek to dampen it a little bit.

The report lays out what seems to be a sensible explanation a path toward a far more climate friendly, a much more profitable, and somewhat more productive agriculture system. There long-term research provides quite real and substantive information about productivity implications in the fields; the financial benefits for going ‘organic’; the potential large scale benefits; and core challenges to achieving greater results.

Perhaps the greatest challenge arena: knowledge and education:

Rodale Institute’s experience in training thousands of farms from around the world has proven that the shift to regenerative farming practices is both doable and practical. It’s the decision to change that’s hard.

These words could fit for almost every arena of the challenge for moving toward an Energy Smart future, as the obstacles are almost always not the real, ‘number-crunching’ implications but creating the pressure and momentum for change to more efficient energy technologies and practices.

Government farm policy must be transformed in a way that incentivizes farms and drives behavioral change toward wide-scale adoption of regenerative farming practices. Success requires a sustained, multi-faceted national public education campaign, training for farmers in regenerative agricultural methods and legislative action.

Again, all too familiar a set of challenges.

Now, to be clear, this does not look to provide “a solution” (not a Silver Bullet) but Rodale’s work seems to provide a clear statement as to something that could be “part of the solution path” (e.g., a Silver BB) toward Global Warming and other challenges before us.

The problem, however, is that there is competing work and competing analysis. Being reminded of this, as quoted by Joe Romm, “Tillage and soil carbon sequestration–What do we really know?” (pdf)

In essentially all cases where conservation tillage was found to sequester C[arbon], soils were only sampled to a depth of 30 cm or less, even though crop roots often extend much deeper. In the few studies where sampling extended deeper than 30 cm, conservation tillage has shown no consistent accrual of SOC [soil organic carbon], instead showing a difference in the distribution of SOC, with higher concentrations near the surface in conservation tillage and higher concentrations in deeper layers under conventional tillage.… Long-term, continuous gas exchange measurements have also been unable to detect C gain due to reduced tillage. Though there are other good reasons to use conservation tillage, evidence that it promotes C sequestration is not compelling.

Okay, so it is clear that organic / conservation tillage makes sense for many reasons, there is uncertainty (however) as to whether carbon sequestration benefits are part of this.

[Read more →]

This morning, Virginia Governor Tim Kaine (D) and former governor/former senator George Allen (R) acted as surrogates for the Obama and McCain campaigns in an energy forum. From a live-blogging account, it seems clear that the two did a reasonable job as surrogates.: Obama’s policies came out as sensible (even if not aggressive enough) and Allen accurately reflected McCain’s DisDain for the realities of the challenges and opportunities before us on energy issues.

And, notably, astroturfing organizations made their presence felt at the event. For example, this photo is of George Allen receiving a “clean coal” baseball cap from an ACCCE, which is a coal-industry astroturf group.

[Read more →]

When elected into Dennis Hastert’s old seat, Bill Foster raised real hopes that Illinois-14 would have a substantive and positive voice in the nation’s energy discussion. Foster once self-described himself as a “Scientist, Businessman, Democrat” but no longer, he is a “Scientist, Businessman, Independent Solutions”. The self-description isn’t the real problem, it is the policy that justifies it.

As part of his platform for the special election, in 2007, Foster made a point of emphasizing that “Ultimately, however, we cannot drill our way out of the energy crisis.” As the political winds seemed to be shifting, in the face of “Party of Stupid” Republican dishonesty and drillusion, building on Newt Gingrich’s truthiness, Bill Foster chose to follow an easy path of deception rather than seeking to educate and lead. In August 2008, as Republicans played stuntsmanship about Drillusion in a darkened House chamber, Foster made a point of emphasizing drilling for the general campaign.

As a former businessman, Bill knows the importance of finding efficient and affordable answers to our energy questions. Providing relief to high gas prices while alternative sources of energy are being developed is important. That is why Bill supports expanded domestic drilling that would increase the amount of oil produced in the United States.

While there is also discussion of efficiency and alternatives to gasoline, drilling merited first mention. First mention without an explanation that drilling is a 1 cent, 1 percent, 20 year from now ameliorative to today’s real problems.

A question for Bill: Is this “independent solutions” or simply pandering to drillusion?

[Read more →]

A series of unWise energy decisions and projects are moving forward in Virginia. Whether the unWise Power Plant or a high-power transmission line to connect Northern Virginia with polluting out-of-state coal-fired electricity, Dominion Virginia Power is working its turthiness magic in the halls of Richmond to foster a fossil fool future for Virginians that will cost more money while wrecking more havoc on the environment.

In a recent article on the power transmission line’s approval, the Washington Post basicallly dismissed out of hand opposition to the power line as NIMBYism, with scant credit given to alternatives. After repeated comments about the growing power demand in the area, the article finishes

the decision also comes among heightened environmental awareness, especially about global warming. Opponents of the line have proposed a combination of demand-response programs, which help consumers monitor and reduce their electricity use, and small-scale cleaner power plants to alleviate the need for the line. They also have accused Dominion of exaggerating the need and seeking to profit by selling excess energy to New York and New Jersey.

And, there is zero examination of the legitimacy of these comments even though several weeks earlier the American Council for an Energy Efficiency Economy (ACEEE) had released a report weeks earlier detailing how energy efficiency could obviate the need not just for the power line but also the unWise coal-burning power plant.

By investing in energy-efficient technologies, the Commonwealth of Virginia can reduce its electricity needs by one-fifth; deliver cleaner, less-expensive power to Virginia consumers; create thousands of new jobs; and better position the state to more cost effectively meet its future energy requirements

The report,
Energizing Virginia: Efficiency First, provides an 11-point strategy for “meeting” 20 percent of electricity requirements via efficiency, cutting utility bills by about $15 billion, and creating about 10,000 jobs. (Hmmm … a program for job creation that would save tax payers money … should sound good to everyone, no?)
[Read more →]

In South Carolina, the “Democratic Party” candidate is Bob Conley, who must be mentioned was recently a Republican, on a county GOP committee until winning the Democratic Party primay, and Ron Paul supporter. On the Repulbican side, Lindsey Graham. In this race, Saturday’s debate could well be a telling one for anyone who cares for science and issues of Global Warming.

Conley, in Inhofe-scale like terms, very “firmly proclaimed his denial of global warming science”. In face of a question as to whether Global Warming is real (come off, is this a real question people?), Conley’s response:

CONLEY: It really is the arrogance of man to think that we are having any effect. I’m an engineer. So I understand that we don’t have constant things in the physical world. We have a lot of fluctuations.

And when we see, looking back how we have had fluctuations in temperature over time. And when we see how when I was a child we were told whether it was global cooling. We’ve been told in recent years well there’s global warming. Well then last year was the coldest — the coolest record in the recent trend. It’s something. I don’t think we ought to be making really haphazard statements of policy or trying to change policies on this side.

Okay, this is a man who shouldn’t be allowed to give a talk to a High School science class let alone be in the US Senate.

As noted over at Think Progress,

Of course, the reality is that the international scientific consensus, as embodied by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has assessed that there is a 90 percent certainty that human activity contributes to global temperature increases. Even a White House climate report has acknowledged this fact.

By the way, as to cold 2007? According to NASA,

The year 2007 tied for second warmest in the period of instrumental data, behind the record warmth of 2005, in the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) analysis. 2007 tied 1998, which had leapt a remarkable 0.2°C above the prior record with the help of the “El Niño of the century”.

Membership in the global warming denial know-nothing wing of the Flat-Earth Society merits condemndation and ridicule, no matter the letter after a candidate’s name.

And, while far from a leading defender of the planet, Lindsey Graham showed himself closer to reality than Conley.

[Read more →]

Paul Krugman, the winner of the 2008 Nobel Prize for Economics, penned an article a few months ago: “Know-Nothing Politics“.

the debate on energy policy has helped me find the words for something I’ve been thinking about for a while. Republicans, once hailed as the “party of ideas,” have become the party of stupid.

For Krugman, the Republican embrace and promotion of Drillusion exemplified how “know-nothingism” had become revered within the Republican Party. “The party’s de facto slogan has become: “Real men don’t think things through.”” ANd, “In the case of oil, this takes the form of pretending that more drilling would produce fast relief at the gas pump.”

Krugman called the Republican leadership to task for promoting a policy that flew in the face of facts and expert knowledge. His real fear was the power of this “dumb” approach to energy when it came to potentially swaying votes. Looking at this debate and the difference between lying and confusion, Krugman came to this generalized conclusion:

In any case, remember this the next time someone calls for an end to partisanship, for working together to solve the country’s problems. It’s not going to happen — not as long as one of America’s two great parties believes that when it comes to politics, stupidity is the best policy.

Last evening, PBS and Frontine had a “sneak preview” of the documentary HEAT in Washington DC. This looks to be a worthwhile show to watch. Associated with the preveiw was a discussion of climate change with representatives (or surrogates) from the two campaigns and other energy and climate experts. Reportedly (I was unable to attend), part of the evening went like this:

Question: How do the two campaigns differ on climate change?

McCain representative: Really, there is little substantive difference between the two campaigns. For example, Obama supports a target of 80 percent reductions by 2050 and McCain 58 percent. This is far off and fungible, a difference in details not substance.

David Sandalow, senior fellow, Brookings Institution, author of Freedom from Oil, advisor to Obama campaign:

I guess I could sum that up in two words: Sarah Palin. … I think that has to give pause to anybody who cares about this issue

My sources state that Sandalow received a loud round of applause with this line.

More substantive reporting by Kate Sheppard at Grist.

The various fossil fuel industries have been spending hundreds of millions (if not billions) of dollars to influence the national discussion this year, from campaign contributions to Santa Claus giving out ‘clean coal’ at the Metro exits closest to Congressional offices to sponsoring presidential debates throughout the election cycle. This fossil foolish promotion of a carbon-heavy, civilization-unfriendly seems to be putting money in many pockets, including public communications companies and broadcast companies.

For example, CNN has been earned much from coal industry sponsoring of debates, CBS from ExxonMobil, and ABC has aired Chevron greenwashing Human Energy ads just after debates.

One has to wonder whether this funding has affected ABC’s decision to deny the We Campaign’s Repower America advertisment (video of the ad) that criticizes the money that big oil and lobbyists are spending to insure that Americans reman “stuck with dirty and expensive media”.

ABC recently refused to run our Repower America ad, even though they run ads from oil companies that mislead the American people about the role fossil fuels play in the climate crisis.

[Read more →]

Jill Richardson is an extremely interesting, provocative, and fresh voice on the web in the arenas of food and agriclture. She is a founder of La Vica Locavore. This is, with permission, a cross-post of her latest piece.

Last weekend, I visited the Rodale Institute as part of the 2008 Community Food Security Coalition Conference. I think I’m in love. The Rodale Institute is wonderful. The work they do is wonderful. And nature and the earth are wonderful. Why doesn’t everyone else (cough cough Collin Peterson) get it?
I highly recommend everyone check out Rodale’s report on global warming and how agriculture can help. But just in case you want to get the 5-minute version of the report, I’ll summarize below.

[Read more →]