Get Energy Smart! NOW!

Starting at 8 pm (east coast) tonight, starting in New York City, Al Gore is running another “24 Hours of Reality” — bringing searing (and searingly accurate) discussions of climate disruption reality, from a global perspective and, hour-by-hour, regional discussions. Whether scorched by hot temperature records, burned out of home by wild fires, sitting in darkened homes due to Derecho(s), digging out sand from Hurricane Sandy, paying higher prices for food due to crop failures, and …, we are all feeling the impacts of climate disruption in our daily lives: whether we realize it or not.

While the American political system teeters on collapse due to the created “Fiscal Cliff” crisis and pundits waxed endlessly about the need to avoid leaving such a debt to and creating future generations, the political elite remain mainly within their climate silence bubbles with too rare excursions into mentioning of “climate change” with rapid retreats to the comfort zone of battling over whether the poor, embattled multi-billionaires can handle a few tenths of a percent reduction in the tax subsidies for the real takers of 21st century America: the super-wealthy who want everything from government while seeking all tools to avoiding paying to maintain and improve the society that enabled them to amass such fortunes.

Amid the Do The Math tour (eloquently discussed here and here), this 24 hours of Climate Reality discussion is a tool to help spark the nation to focus on the real burden that we are creating for ourselves and future generations: the mounting risks of climate disruption driven by our fossil foolish energy practices.

[Read more →]

We can build seawalls, we can raise highways, but it’s a losing proposition if you don’t stop sea-level rise.

With Clean Break, a recommended 99 cent ‘Kindle Single’ purchase/read, Osha Gray Davidson has provided English speakers an enjoyable and illuminating look at Germany’s Energiewende — that wholesale societal shift commonly translated as “energy shift” and “energy transition”.   Despite its booming economy — in the powerhouse position of Europe — and the mounting role that solar power is playing in its electricity system, despite having the solar resources of Alaska, anti-clean energy attack sound machine (like too much of the Grand Oil Party) pound home misdirections and erroneous information about Germany’s move toward a clean-energy economy.  Clean Break, which reads like a collection of short essays, provides an easy-read counterpoint to that sound machine.

On flights around the United States, when coming into cities, I find myself looking for the (too) rare white roofed commercial structure and the even scarcer solar panel.  When arriving in Germany, even while prepared for this intellectually, the ubiquitous nature of ‘white roofs’ (energy efficiency) and solar panels (renewable energy) flabbergasted me.  Davidson had a similar experience:

The  pervasiveness  of  the  Energiewende was  driven  home  for  me  on  a  six-­hour   train  ride  through  the  German  countryside.  Gazing  out  the  window  as  the  train   raced  from  Hamburg  in  the  north  to  near  the  border  with  Switzerland  in  the  south,   massive  wind  turbines  and  rooftops  covered  with  solar  panels  were  seldom  out  of   sight.  A  couple  of  hours  into  the  journey  we  rounded  a  bend  and  the  scene  took  on  a   surreal  quality.  Yet  another  cluster  of  barns  and  outbuildings  came  into  view,  the   red  ceramic  roof  tiles  nearly  hidden  by  blue,  solar  photovoltaic  panels.  The  buildings   swam  in  a  sea  of  bright  yellow  rapeseed the  raw  material  of  biodiesel  fuel.  On  a   distant  slope,  the  long  thin  blades  of  three  wind  turbines  revolved  in  unison  as  if   choreographed.  I  was  suddenly  seized  by  the  desire  to  grab  the  well-­?dressed  man  in   the  seat  next  to  me,  who  was  engrossed  in  today’s  Die  Zeit,  and  demand  that  he  look   out  the  window  and  tell  me  if  this  Energiewende parade  is  real  or  a  moveable   tableau  staged  for  foreign  journalists.

In Clean Break, Davidson lays out that Germany’s Energiewende is no Potemkin village of feel-good activities, but a wide-ranging set of projects that are both loosely and tightly linked to the long-term objective of ending Germany’s reliance on fossil fuel and nuclear power electricity systems.

There are several key elements to the ‘story’:

• The Energiewende is structured for economic benefits and strength at all economic levels.  The individual can ‘make money’ through solar or wind or biomass power even as large exporting industries are being protected from near-term cost premiums for the move to a cleaner energy structure.
• Perhaps it is German culture, but the ‘energy transition’ is being done with a mindset for success.  Thus, for example, the need for storage and power management to deal with solar and wind intermittency isn’t a “problem” but a task to be solved.
• Germans are having success with “tasks” that America can learn from to help move forward EE/RE programs.  Even with union labor and higher wages, Germans can install solar systems for a fraction of the cost that Americans will find. Streamlined paperwork, standardized packages, volume of projects, and otherwise mean that a German installation might come at half the cost of one in the United States.
• Germany and Germans found great inspiration in the United States (Jimmy Carter) and leveraged US investments (including buying up patents) that Ronald Reagan threw into the dustbin of history.  Germany is racing to an 80 percent renewable energy system — and likely 100 percent or better (exports) — by 2050 on the backs, in no small part, of US investments and US strategic thinking.

Germany’s Energiewende was put into legal framework with comprehensive legislation in 2000.  On reading this book, my mind turned to the Supreme Court and Florida in December 2000 with an alternative history questioning as to whether President Gore might have forged a trans-Atlantic Energiewende … Ah, the “could’ve been moment” … Twelve years later, with a Democratic Party candidate (again) elected President without an opening for Supreme Court disruption of the election results, perhaps Clean Break,will provide a useful tool for moving the conversation toward accelerating such a trans-Atlantic power shift in the coming years.

NOTE:  Tuesday, 13 November, the author and commentators will be giving a two-hour presentation at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, from 0900-1100.

Today’s core GOP (accurately called the Grand Obstructionist Party) can be easily summarized as:

• Pale
• Male
• Stale, and
• Addicted to the Tall Tale.

The first three are quite well understood and are a key part of the chattering class analysis about the reasons for Republican Party failures yesterday and their inevitable failures in elections to come. With a political base that is significantly older white males , the Republican Party is leveraging and relying on a demographic that is a dwindling part of the overall population. This is not a path toward electoral success. As Markos put it today:

George W. Bush won 40 percent of the Latino vote in 2004. John McCain won 31 percent of it. Mitt Romney won 21 percent. The trend is unmistakable.

Thirteen percent of the vote was African American, 10 percent was Latino, 3 percent was Asian. In 2008, it was 13 African American, 9 percent Latino, 2 percent Asian. Whites went from 74 to 72 percent of the vote. They’ll be under 70 percent in 2016.

Pollsters assumed that non-whites would stay home last night. They didn’t. But they’re still not voting at their percentages of the overall population. Democrats need to keep registering those voters and getting them politically engaged. It’s already exceedingly difficult for Republicans to win the White House without non-white, heavily male vote. It will be virtually impossible.

The fourth, “addicted to the tall tale,” is as critical a description of the core Republican base:

• Sufferers of anti-science syndrome, with denial of climate science and promotion of “creationism” (and denigration of the Theory of Evolution) as examples were the Republican base (and GOP elected officials) are at odds with the general population
• Absorbing of out-right lies and deceit about political adversaries. (President Obama as socialist, Muslim, born in Kenya … and equivalents can be described for almost every Democratic politician out there.)
• And …

“Reality-based politics” is something at odds with a significant share of the Republican Party base. And, perhaps just as inevitably as the other descriptors, this is something that will make it harder and harder for Republicans to win elections in the coming years.

How many non-Tea-Hadists were captured by asserting that Obama wasn’t born in the nation?

With all the disastrous weather of 2012 (heat records broken, drought, wildfires, Derecho, Hurricane Sandy), how many fewer Americans were sympathetic to the Global Warming denial of the Republican Party machine? And, as climate disruption ever-more seriously impacts our lives, how many will be in the future?

The Republican base’s addiction to tall tales doesn’t just make it a laughingstock, it will increasingly reduce the odds of Republicans winning elections — if we work to make it clear to voting Americans how Republicans live in a fantasy-land that, if allowed to influence actual policy, fosters creating nightmares in the real world.

And, until it changes, the Republican Party’s strategy of reliance on the pale, male, stale and leverage of the tall tale will increasingly fail in the American electoral system.

And, as the President was speaking in front of the cameras, youth climate activists were speaking in front of the White House:

Last week’s Bloomberg Businessweek made news with its cover.

That title, “It’s Global Warming, Stupid”, created waves post-Sandy’s devastating storm surge waves and certainly upset those who the magazine’s editor directly challenged as “stupid”.

With great uncertainty as to the political reality in America come tomorrow, the title suggests something beyond the connection of Global Warming and severe weather events. When it comes to American electoral politics and tomorrow’s political reality, most people don’t seem to realize that ‘it’s the climate, stupid’.

This post won’t seek to analyze or detail every aspect of meaning for this, but let us consider …

• If, as most predict, President Obama wins reelection, a telling (and decisive) moment might have been the effective Federal response to Hurricane Sandy’s devastation, the President’s calm and capable engagement (to the point of earning (and receiving) praise from major Romney surrogates, like Governor Christie).  Thus, perhaps, President Obama might owe global warming’s impacts on extreme weather events for tipping the election.
• Related, almost certainly, to the magazine cover:  independent New York Mayor Bloomberg’s endorsement, just last week, heavily emphasized the stark differences between President Obama and Mitt Romney (and their respective parties) on climate change issues.  Did Mayor Bloomberg’s endorsement carry any weight in these final, frantic, days of the election season?
• The two parties have been united in their determined climate silence. The Obama White House determined, back in early 2009 (if not earlier), that talking about climate change was a losing political issue and thus focused on “green jobs” and discussed solar/wind/other clean energy without any serious discussion of climate-change issues.  The Romney campaign team seems to clearly understand that the climate science denial required to win the Republican nomination plays poorly with the majority of Americans.  While Mitt played to the anti-science friendly audience at the Republican National Convention with a joke about climate change, his advisors seem to clearly understand that President Obama’s responding line at the Democratic National Convention played much better with the electorate (especially undecided voters).  What Republican operatives seem to understand better than Democratic Party political operatives:  a forceful and thoughtful Democratic Party engagement on climate issues increases Democratic Party base enthusiasm, sways independent voters, and is essentially irrelevant to Republican base voters.  Combining taking the wrong lessons from the 2009 Cap & Trade fight and ‘micro-targeting’ efforts to win coal-supporting voters in Pennsylvania and Ohio, Democratic political ‘pros’ seem to have coordinated with Romney’s political advisors to keep climate change off the Presidential political landscape.
• Today will almost certainly end with the Republicans continuing to hold the majority in the House of Representatives.  The DCCC’s climate silence has, in fact, even been more stunning than the Obama-Biden campaign’s.  Analyzing tight race situations and examining smart climate change political engagement, a very reasonable question to ask:  Would serious discussion of climate change throughout the election year have flipped enough seats to have Nancy Pelosi return as Speaker of the House in 2013?  And, with that in mind, should it be a central focus for 2014?

As for that last bullet discussion, consider 2012 in the United States when it comes to climate disruption:

• Massive record breaking heat waves across most of the United States, with hot temperature record after hot temperature record falling almost too fast for the computing systems to keep track.  Unless we have a shockingly cold November and December, this will likely go down as the hottest year in U.S. temperature records. (And, remembering that this is ‘global’, amid what is going to be one of the hottest years (if not hottest) in global recorded temperatures.)
• The major drought, which continues despite Sandy in many states, devastating agricultural production with billions of dollars of economic impacts.
• The Derecho that did damage through much of the Mid-Atlantic and shut down the Federal government.
• Record-breaking wildfires, worsened by climate disruption driven droughts and trees sickened in part due climate change driven conditions.
• Hurricane (‘Frankenstorm’) Sandy’s devastating impact across a large swath of the eastern United States, with mounting numbers of dead (both directly and indirectly during clean-up and deaths due to inadequate heating/otherwise) and perhaps more than $50 billion of damage.

Consider the situation in spring 2012, politically, as Mitt Romney fought for and won the Republican nomination with an embrace of anti-science global warming denial.  The Democratic Party, as a political entity, engaged in climate silence.  And, for month after month, since then, the nation underwent searing climate disruption influenced (caused …) conditions while the Democratic Party continued diligently to engage in climate silence.  And, on the eve of the election, a massive storm influenced (caused …) by climate disruption create massive damage and seized (legitimately) the nation’s attention.  And, the Democratic Party — as a political entity — remained locked in its determined policy of climate silence.  Climate Change — the respect for and understanding of science, the need for government as a tool to respond to such large challenges, the relationship of climate change to a need for changed energy policies and practices, etc … — is one of the most glaring differences (even more than taxes, for example) between the two political parties.  With heat waves, drought, Derecho(s), wildfires, hurricane, and other climate disruption-related events hitting the vast majority of Americans in 2012 and growing numbers of Americans understanding the links between climate change and extreme weather events, Democratic Party political operatives left this glaring difference between the two parties on the cutting room table because they (seemingly) failed to understand that not just is this an important issue, not just is this a basic moral and ethical issue, but that discussing and engaging on climate issues is a winning political issue for the Democratic Party and Democratic Party candidates.

With a home for a Democratic Congress to support President Obama come January 2014, let us hope that Democratic Party political operatives learn this critical lesson from the 2012 election season.

Representative Steve King (R-IA-5) has made quite a name for himself over the years for many reasons, such as his violent case of anti-science syndrome.  This author remains particularly stunned, months later, with King’s gleeful bragging about wasting taxpayer money.

Many Americans had their eyes open with what some term as the “King foot-in-mouth disease” in the past week as Representative King made what easily ranks as one of the most heartless statements by a major politicians as millions of his fellow citizens suffered amid the devastation post Hurricane Sandy. Some nickname Steve King “The Emperor of all Morons” with comments like the one that he made about aid to Hurricane Sandy victims:

“I want to get them the resources that are necessary to lift them out of this water and the sand and the ashes and the death that’s over there in the East Coast and especially in the Northeast,” King said during a Tuesday evening debate in Mason City, Iowa. “But not one big shot to just open up the checkbook, because they spent it on Gucci bags and massage parlors and everything you can think of in addition to what was necessary.”

It is hard to believe that any Iowan (whether farmer, manufacturer, teacher, retiree, or otherwise) is proud of or thrilled with the attention that King brought to the state like the following:

King’s comments got under my skin — as they did many Americans — and a thought came to me:

What would Iowans have thought if Steve King were a Congressman from Long Island and made some comment about farm disaster aid?

Just imagine Iowan farmers looking at brown fields amid a devastating heat wave and drought (like 2012) and turning on their TV to hear thoughtful Representative Steven King (R-NY) pontificate with thoughts along the lines of “Well, I’m all for providing aid to these farmers but we better have someone following up on every check to assure that they’re not buying alligator-skin boots or an air-conditioned tractor …”  Have to believe that this would ring pretty sour to Iowans’ ears.

The Golden Rule provides a pretty good rule of thumb:

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Iowans have put Steve King into a position where his voice is listened to, even when he so insults fellow Americans facing desperate situations.  We should all hope that no members of Congress are so disdainful of Iowans’ needs in times of disaster as King  has been of citizens of New York, New Jersey, and other Sandy victims, but Iowans should keep in mind what they “do unto others” by electing Steve King to his soapbox.

The option remains to take King off his throne and send thoughtful Christie Vilsack to Washington instead.

If that occurs, American commentators and comedians will have to look elsewhere than Iowa’s Fourth District for outrageous statements that provide reason for outrage and comedy.

This guest post comes from Dean Baker who, in a sane world, would be on (or chairing) the White House Council of Economic Advisors.  Who knows, perhaps there is hope that the United States will turn to sanity in Sandy’s wake on climate change and other issues …

When Gov. Romney gave his acceptance speech at the Republican convention he quipped that President Obama wants to slow the rise of the oceans and that he, by contrast, wanted to help American families. It would be interesting to see if Romney would care to repeat this line today.

Perhaps he wants to tell the people of New York and New Jersey who have seen their homes — and in some cases lives — destroyed by the rise of the oceans, how silly President Obama is for taking steps to counter global warming. These people will surely get a good chuckle from the Governor’s sense of humor as they wait to have to electricity restored or their home rebuilt.

It is remarkable that the Democrats have not been harsher in holding Romney in contempt for his comments in these final days leading up to the election. Imagine if the shoe were on the other foot.

Imagine a world where we had not seen the Sept. 11 attacks and a Democratic challenger to President Bush’s reelection in 2004 had mocked the money that Bush had spent on defenses against terrorism. If the country had then been hit by a terrorist attack in the week before the election would the Republicans be shy about going after their challenger’s bad sense of humor?

Beating up Governor Romney is not just a question of cheap politics. Global warming is serious business. Over 100 people died last week in New York and New Jersey because of Hurricane Sandy. People have been and will be dying all around the world because of weather events related to global warming.

[Read more →]

This guest post comes from meteorologist Paul Douglas.  His simple, powerful, and straightforward conclusion is one that we hope American voters follow this Tuesday.

elect politicians who still respect sound science.

Were you impacted by “Nor’easter-cane” Sandy?” Statisticians will debate whether it was a 1 in 100 year storm — or something worse. Insurance companies will calculate how many tens or hundreds of billions of dollars were lost. It will be a big number, probably the most expensive storm clean-up and recovery in American history. It’s “media hype” until it injures your loved ones, cuts the power, floods your home, or shuts down your small business.
[Read more →]

This guest post comes from scientist FishOutOfWater.

The north Atlantic ocean is heating faster than all the world’s oceans because of the increased flow from the Indian ocean to the Atlantic ocean.The rapidly strengthening greenhouse effect produced by exponentially increasing human emissions of greenhouse gases is affecting earth’s climate unevenly. The North Atlantic ocean is heating the fastest of the world’s oceans. The rapidly increasing heat content of the north Atlantic ocean is fueling the rapid increase in weather related disasters in the United States. This increase in disasters is not a cyclic phenomenon. Because the north Atlantic is at the end of the great “conveyor belt” of the global circulation of salt and heat – the thermohaline circulation – it accumulates heat the fastest of the oceans when the earth is heating up. Since 1995, the north Atlantic has been heating at a record rate.

Gulf Stream loop ahead of Hurricane Sandy, Oct. 25 sensed by very high resolution radiometry. Sandy’s record low pressure was fueled by record oceanic heat content.

Likewise, because of its deep connection to the Arctic ocean, the North Atlantic cools the fastest when the earth cools. In fact, the north Atlantic and Arctic oceans are treated as a single entity by some models. The extreme sensitivity of the Arctic ocean and the north Atlantic to slight changes in the earth’s radiation balance make the north Atlantic, north America and western Europe very sensitive to changes in global average temperature. That is why minor orbital variations brought continental glaciers to north America and Europe. Minor changes in radiation balance were amplified by increasing amounts of snow and ice. This quirk of climate and geography makes the United States is the global hypocenter of climate change.

Superstorm Sandy has awakened NBC into asking the right questions to the right experts. This 2 minute clip gets the basics of the connections of climate change to extreme weather right.

Hurricane Sandy 3:40pm EDT Oct 27. Sandy can be seen interacting with a cold front running from the Florida panhandle to Lake Ontario. Sandy was a hybrid tropical/frontal storm at this time, maintaining its strength despite very strong wind shear.

[Read more →]