Get Energy Smart! NOW!

Bjorn Lomborg is eloquent, articulate, suave, debonair and recklessly dangerous. Lomborg’s disingenous truthiness provides a fourth category to “lies, damned lies, and statistics” which might referred to “Lomborg statistics“. He struck again with a Times opinion piece calling into question UK investment plans to fight global warming.

It is hard, almost, to account for all of Lomborg’s deceptions within this article. He speaks of costs, for example, of renewable power systems without seeming to account, in any way, for the value of the energy that they would produce. He focuses on the United Kingdom, isolating its efforts from any other nation in the world when this is “global warming”, not “UK warming”. His cost figures as to the risks of Global Warming are, to be polite, absurd and discount (do not count, actually) the cost value of low probability but very high impact events. (And should carry a disclaimer.) And, of course, his account uses net present value (NPV) terms, which highly discount the value of tomorrow relative to today.

But, don’t worry, the global warming denial wing of the flat-earth society will lap Bjorn Lomborg up as some form of gospel even as Lomborg writes “Let’s be clear. I’m not contesting the existence of global warming. Doing so is silly.”

[Read more →]

If we are going to take serious steps to change our reckless drive over the cliffs, in a sad version of Thelma & Louise but in a belching hummer rather than sexy convertible, we have to get serious about facts. And, well, the fact is that “Clean Coal” is not fact , it is powerpoint slides, promises, and 10s (probably 100s) of millions of dollars of advertising and influence efforts. In a more honest world, it might be called “Somewhat Less Deadly Coal”.

Sadly, there are all too many signs that influence campaigns backed by such huge sums of money work. The Vice-Presidential debate between Senator Joe Biden and Governor Sarah Palin provided such an example.

Senator Biden seemed effusive in his support for Clean Coal as did, with little surprise, fossil fool Sarah.

To give one feel for the relative import of various energy options in the debate, here are a few word counts (including Gwen Ifil, Joe Biden, Sarah Palin)

This is not a comforting emphasis and, the discomfort doesn’t only come from the nation’s leading energy expert, Sarah Palin.
[Read more →]

A month ago, Google CEO Eric Schmidt gave a speech outlining a plan for (nearly) eliminating fossil fuels from the US electrical grid in 20 years, stating that it would be a $2.7 trillion dollar effort. Anyone interested in a better energy future would like to hear Eric give this talk in person. (Another slide show to turn into a movie???) Google announced Clean Energy 2030 formally on 1 October with a focus on three core elements:

Not a bad focus, in terms of changing the energy picture in the United States — not just in electricity but in driving down personal transportation reliance on fossil fuel.

Clean Energy 2030 was put up as a Google “Knol” and is already generating some quite thoughtful commentary. There is much to seize on and support in this proposal. But, as is stated there,

Our goal in presenting this first iteration of the Clean Energy 2030 proposal is to stimulate debate

This is a “first iteration” and it merits “debate”. Hopefully, Eric Schmidt and Google will consider putting resources to bring attention to their viable concepts like T Boone Pickens has put into promoting the ‘Good, Bad, Ugly’ Pickens’ Plan.

Now, something to note, the price has gone up in a month. Eric Schmidt said “$2.7 trillion” as to price tag. Clean Energy 2030, according to its summary, would have a price tag of $4.4 trillion, in 2008 dollars. That over 50 percent increase in just one month is rapid price growth, even by government standards. But, far more importantly,

Although the cost of the Clean Energy 2030 proposal is significant (about $4.4 trillion in undiscounted 2008 dollars), savings are even greater ($5.4 trillion), returning a net savings of $1.0 trillion over the 22-year life of the plan.

And that profitability occurs even though it looks as if some quite significant value streams (health, productivity) might not be accounted for in the discussion.

Anyway, for a quick overview …

[Read more →]

Obviously, the United States should be in a phase of precipitous falls in gasoline prices.

Yesterday was “Energy Freedom Day“, as the restrictions on offshore drilling disappeared with the new federal fiscal year.

“Drill Here! Drill Now! Pay Less!”

There are no government restrictions in face of the Republican demands now.

No obstacles to the nirvana of economic boom times with offshore drilling leading to lower prices.

Let me know: How is their solution working in your neighborhood?

We have all become armored against advertising and the claims of “save $26” (or more) on a CFL package are hard to believe. In addition, in our culture, we focus on the cost to buy (CTB) rather than the cost to own (CTO). Thus, in a weird perversion of Benjamin Franklin, we focus on the $0.99 purchase price rather than the cost through the years that we might use something. These factors combine to make it difficult for most Americans to pursue energy efficiency choices, such as CFLs.

This reality of condominium structures worsens this situation. With shared utility costs (electricity, water, gas), but individual owners controlling purchases within their own units, it is hard to capture savings opportunities. Let us say that a $1 investment in an individual unit would save $2 every year. While the “savings” would be quite real, the individual home owner making the investment would see very little of the benefits ss this savings would be split between hundreds of owners. (With 200 owners, the $1 investment would reap $0.01 in savings for all 200 owners, including the one who put in the investment themselves.)

This is an example of a very common Catch-22, where the person “buying” something doesn’t directly pay for the “cost” of running it. We see this with builders vs the building buyer, the landlord versus the tenant, the employee with a personal lamp vs the employer, etc … It is time to break through the Catch-22 and arrive at sensible solutions, to work for real solutions to real problems.

[Read more →]

Amid the absurdities of trying to pawn Sarah “Pit Bull with Lipstick” Palin off as the nation’s top energy expert (http://climateprogress.org/2008/09/03/note-to-media-pork-queen-palin-is-earmark-expert-not-energy-expert/, here, or here) the simple reality is that neither John McCain nor Sarah Palin can get their energy facts right.

The latest: John McCain stated that “the world’s largest oil reserves are in the United States of America.” (video)

Huh …

Double-take …

Okay, let’s revisit reality.

According to the latest data on oil reserves (yes, understanding that many of the specific figures are highly dubious), the United States is not number one, but in a weak position as #14, with 22.5 billion barrels of reserves and #15, China, registered with 18.3 billion barrels. #1? Saudia Arabia with 262.7 billion barrels of stated reserves, or more than 10 times the US figure.

We need to be wondering whether this is simply arrogant ignorance in support of drillusion or whether something else is going on.

[Read more →]

Grimly he watched America walk by.

A precipice that we might have already passed.

Who were these people who could live so placidly while the world fell into an acute global environmental crisis.

Permafrost bubbling methane.

Experts at denial.

Acidification of the oceans.

Experts at filtering their informatioon to hear only what made it seem sensible to behave as they behaved.

Ever more extinct species.

Many of those walking by went to church on Sundays, believed in God, voted Republican, spent their time shopping and watching TV.

Disrupted agriculture globally.

Obviously nice people.

Melting glaciers and dwindling ice caps.

The world was doomed.

Ever faster increases in the growth of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Sometimes fiction gives voice best to our concerns.

The quote above come Kim Stanley Robinson’s We are at a precipice.Forty Signs of Rain, the first book of a trilogy dealing with the challenges of Global Warming.
[Read more →]

There are going to be millions of words already and coming out about the debate in Ole Miss. Thus, to add a few into the pile. Whether captured or not, the facts will show that John “Truthiness” McCain showed up in force this evening. We could discuss Senator McCain’s failure to fight for funding veterans’ programs in the past few years. We could discuss the mixed reality of Senator McCain’s efforts regarding torture. We could discuss, well, many issues. But, let us take a moment to look at one arena: renewable energy.

The Republican nominee for President, John McCain, suggested some great level of support for renewable energy amid the debate, calling out wind power and solar energy. (Mea culpa … no transcript for me yet and the notes aren’t tight.) This fits within the McCain truthiness, using wind-turbines in ads, that John McCain is some form of great supporting of green energy.

The truth … the truth from John McCain is often great words when it comes to renewable power. Let us be clear, if John McCain had simply shown up, done his job as a Senator, and acting to support “green technologies” like he claims, we would have a far more robust renewable energy industry moving into 2009. On more than one occasion in the past year, bills to support renewable energy failed to pass the Senate by a vote of 59-40-1, with a requirement of 60 yes votes to pass. Who was the AWOL Senator? Senator John “Truthiness” McCain!

And, in reality, John McCain has a long record of not supporting renewable energies. At least 50 times, John McCain voted against renewable energy, against clean energy.

While John McCain likes to speak of the criticality of global warming, he chose a global warming denier as his Vice Presidential candidate.

While McCain ads have shown wind turbines, McCain-Palin have embraced “Burn, Baby, Burn” with a passion typically reserved for a lover.

My key impression from John McCain’s performance at Ole Miss: a level of truthiness that Stephen Colbert must envy.

[Read more →]

Both Barack Obama and campaign-suspended John McCain spoke at a session of the Clinton Global Initiative annual meeting.  Some have already called John McCain’s comments “the height of hypocrisy.”  Reading McCain’s speech and considering John McCain’s spinning out of control flip-flopping on energy and global warming issues over the past year, it is hard to disagree with this evaluation.

John McCain’s words merit examination against his action. Not for the first time, but perhaps with the strongest words, McCain spoke out forcefully re Global Warming

We now know that fossil fuel emissions, by retaining heat within the atmosphere, threaten disastrous changes in climate. No challenge of energy is to be taken lightly, and least of all the need to avoid the consequences of global warming.

“Disastrous changes in climate” threaten us (and the U.S.), changes driven by “fossil fuel emissions”.

With this in mind, how can anyone consider these words with a straight face in light of McCain’s selection of Sarah (Global Warming denier) Palin for the Vice-Presidential slot and the embrace of “drill, baby, drill” as a (if not the) core element of the Republican Presidential campaign?

Truly, in these spaces, I strive to remain civil. Truly. With great restraint, hypocrite is the politest word that I can conjur for John McCain this morning.

[Read more →]

DeSmogBlog has a magnificent project, a call for letters to one’s descendents a hundred years from now.

Sharon Moore offered an apology:

Most of all I want to tell you I am sorry for how short-sighted we were. I thought I was doing all that I could to leave a good world for you to inherit, but it turns out I could have done more.

Kevin Grandia offered hope.

Many people were scared of the massive changes that needed to happen, and many more refused to move on. But I’m glad to say, that in the end the world made the right decision and that’s why you today, way into the future, are enjoying a quality of life that I can only dream of.

I sought to offer both. Even though a bit late, it seemed time to post my thoughts here … and perhaps provoke others to think.

[Read more →]