Better dead than Red!

Charles Krauthammer's column on environmentalism and climate change in the Post today is a good chuckle. I'm going to give it more space and attention than it really deserves, because it is so ludicrous, yet infuriating.

First of all, either Krauthammer doesn't really understand how "science" works, or he's pretending not to. I'll choose the latter since he's not a dumb guy. He writes,

Predictions of catastrophe depend on models. Models depend on assumptions about complex planetary systems -- from ocean currents to cloud formation -- that no one fully understands. Which is why the models are inherently flawed and forever changing.

Ummmm...that's how "models" work. The space shuttle flies based on models of the physical universe. We go to war based on models of the geopolitical universe. The Fed's decision to reduce interest rates again? Yup, that was based on a model too! Until someone can literally see the future, we're going to be basing policy on models. Ideally, models with strong scientific consensus behind them, like those predicting continued global warming from carbon dioxide emissions.

Secondly--communism? I guess that's why China has such strong environmental protections. Listen, equating "liberal" social change efforts with communism isn't going to work for much longer, guys. There are people in college right now who weren't even born by the time the Berlin Wall came down. You won. You defeated communism. Congratulations. Let it go.

Finally, it sure takes a power-hungry person to assume that the purpose of any group advocating some sort of social or economic paradigm shift is doing so in order to gain or consolidate political power for themselves. To put it bluntly, just because you're a selfish, greedy jerk doesn't mean everyone else is too, and assuming such only points to your own motivations.

As Krauthammer writes,

There's no greater social power than the power to ration...The Church of the Environment promulgates secondary dogmas as well. One of these is a strict nuclear taboo. Rather convenient, is it not? Take this major coal-substituting fix off the table, and we will be rationing all the more. Guess who does the rationing.

Ooooo, I know I know! Chairman Al Gore! I know that if it weren't for my desperate thirst to control the world by rationing energy, I would be 100% behind building nuclear plants everywhere they will fit.

Biofuel?

For Americans, it's hard to wake up in the morning without making a contribution to global warming. Almost anything you can imagine doing has a carbon footprint, from eating a muffin to buying the paper; Sun Microsystems has embarked on a project to calculate the carbon footprint of a single e-mail. (Business Green) (Which makes this blogger wonder: what is the carbon footprint of my very soul?)

Now it turns out there's one more American pastime for the carbon-conscious to worry about: liposuction.

Anything relating to the disposal of liposuction fat makes me think of that one scene in Fight Club, so I don't really like to think about it at all. But according to the City Paper, a couple of local cosmetic surgeons crunched the numbers and discovered that the incineration of liposuct-ed fat produces the carbon equivalent of driving 2 million miles each year. Now they're buying carbon offsets for their business.

And in case you were wondering, yeah, in theory, you could turn it into transportation fuel.

When in doubt, don't emit it

You'd think by now we would have figured it out.

Human beings pumping lots of anything into the atmosphere? Usually a bad idea. Acid rain, thinning ozone layer, global warming--we don't have a great track record.

So it's not too surprising that this idea of counteracting global warming by injecting sulfur in the atmosphere is getting the kibosh. (AP)

Also a bad idea? Pumping lots of anything into the ocean. See, for example, the dead-in-the-water plan to purposely spawn ocean plankton blooms to sequester carbon. (Fortune)

Eat the whales?

I am pretty sure that this is not what PETA and the Humane Society had in mind when they launched their ad campaigns linking meat eating with climate change.

OSLO (Reuters) - Eat a whale and save the planet, a Norwegian pro-whaling lobby said on Monday of a study showing that harpooning the giant mammals is less damaging to the climate than farming livestock. "Greenhouse gas emissions caused by one meal of beef are the equivalent of eight meals of whale meat," the study said.

Uhhh, there are some problems with this little study, and with most species of great whales on the edge of extinction, I'm not sure this is really a workable solution. But nice try, guys; appreciate the bloodthirsty spunk.

We are all totally screwed, as usual--especially you mollusks

Along with polar bear cannibalism and the giant heap of dying walruses, ocean acidification and warming have got to be some of the most viscerally icky consequences of climate change for critters.

According to a new UNEP report released today, half the world's corals may die by 2050 due to rising ocean temperatures. By 2100, mollusks will likely have trouble forming their shells because of ocean acidification from carbon dioxide emissions.

Winter lives

Yay! Snow!

Marathons: global warming casualty?

This past weekend's Chicago Marathon was only the latest to fall apart due to unseasonably high temperatures, though it did fall apart fantastically. It was 70 degrees at the 8 AM start--quite warm, but not impossible--but by 11:30, temperatures had hit the high 80s. Runners were collapsing, calling 911, and flooding aid stations in distress, and officials stopped the race. (This means the elite runners were all in, but many, many runners did not get to finish the race.) Worse yet, one man died during the race. (NYT)

Here in DC, there was also tragedy at the Army Ten-Miler that day. One runner died in the 80-degree, 94-percent-humidity conditions. (WP)

No one wants to bag a race after training for months and dropping a lot of money on travel and lodging. But after the bad experiences in Chicago, and in London earlier this year, I wonder whether more runners will think twice during the freak heat waves, cold snaps, and storms that are becoming more and more common.

Not what we wanted to hear

"Nations must fight climate change like terrorism, Rice says" (CNN)

Oy. You mean, by blaming some country we don't happen to like for climate change, and then invading that country based on trumped up allegations? And then there's the opportunistic expansion of presidential power and curtailment of civil liberties. Is that in the voluntary climate change plan, too?

They did it. They finally did it.

Sometimes you have one of those days when you realize that every post-apocalyptic sci-fi movie you've ever seen--including and especially the really bad ones--is a possible glimpse of the actual future.

LONDON - Global warming will create at least one billion refugees by 2050 as water shortages and crop failures force people to leave their homes, sparking local wars over access to resources, a leading aid agency said on Monday. (Reuters via Planet Ark)

Meanwhile, the Director of National Intelligence agrees that the government should prepare a national intelligence estimate on the possible geopolitical and national security impacts of global warming. (WP) I'll say.

How beer is going to save the world!

Foster's, Scientists Team Up To Generate Clean Energy from Beer-Making
May 02, 2007 — By Rod McGuirk, Associated Press

CANBERRA, Australia -- Scientists and Australian beer maker Foster's are teaming up to generate clean energy from brewery waste water -- by using sugar-consuming bacteria.

The experimental technology was unveiled Wednesday by scientists at Australia's University of Queensland, which was given a $115,000 state government grant to install a microbial fuel cell at a Foster's Group brewery near Brisbane, the capital of Queensland state. (AP via Boston Herald)

If this technology takes off, I think our mission as consumers is clear.

Industry lobbyist sweat

Phil Cooney, American Petroleum Institute lobbyist-cum-Bush CEQ appointee-cum-Exxon lobbyist, got grilled this morning by the House Oversight Committee. Mr. Cooney, of course, is the guy who edited and deleted global warming references in scientific government documents to downplay scientists' findings on the reality and likely consequences of global warming. You can see a few examples here in the Sierra Club magazine. During the hearing, Cooney was asked to read aloud some of the passages he had altered, compared to the final version.

The pursuit of truth and good public policy is what it's all about, but I gotta say, half the fun is the squirming.

Weird winter watch #2

Sighted today: many, many pansies and one brave little jonquil in full bloom along New Hampshire Avenue.

I love jonquils. They are so jaunty and yellow. But they are weird in January, which is why the little guy triggered a weird winter watch entry.

Bad cherry timing: Weird winter watch #1

The cherry trees are already beginning to bud out on the Mall, according to eyewitness reports. Presumably because of the freakishly warm weather.

Meanwhile, I don't see any freezing predicted in DC in the near future, which means that we may actually see cherry blossoms in January. I am pretty sure this is the eighth sign of the apocalypse. A pretty one, but a sign nonetheless.

Dinner down under!

Gidday!

Tonight me 'n' me mates fired up the barbie. Cracked a tinnie and ran around in a T-shirt like I had kangaroos loose in the top paddock. It was bonzer!

Except for this is the Northern Hemisphere and it's seven days 'til Christmas.

WTF?

Next week I'm going surfing off the coast of Ohio!

What are you implying, Amazon.com?

Buy The Weather Makers : How Man Is Changing the Climate and What It Means for Life on Earth and get Ready or Not - A Disaster Survival Handbook at an additional 5% off Amazon.com's everyday low price.

The climate's changing. The cause matters.

At first glace, it seems the Bush administration has taken a huge step forward in acknowledging the problem of climate change and the need to find solutions. Time was, this administration was systematically editing the merest mention of climate change out of agency documents and stifling employee discussion of the topic. But last week, the president called climate change a "serious problem." (AFP) What a change of heart!

Errr...not quite. Here's the rest of the quote:

"There's a debate over whether it's manmade or naturally caused...we ought to get beyond that debate and start implementing the technologies necessary to enable us to achieve a couple of big objectives..."

Of course, there is less debate over whether climate change is caused by human activity than Mr. Bush suggests. But putting that aside, doesn't the question of whether the phenomenon is "manmade or naturally caused" have direct bearing upon what solutions we should adopt? Doesn't that tell us a little something as to how much control we have over the future course of the problem, and what the most effective solutions might be?

Everything's OK

Earth's Climate Warming Abruptly, Scientist Says
Tropical-Zone Glaciers May Be at Risk of Melting (WP)

Planning to Cool Earth
Futuristic ways to fight global warming, including sunshades in space, are being considered. (NYT)

Pssh. If Technology can make a Pop Tart taste like a strawberry, I'm pretty sure Technology can halt global warming.

Apocalyptic, much?

Where "sadness" and "existential dread" intersect, you find...polar bears eating each other because of starvation triggered by habitat loss from global warming. (AP via Seattle P-I)

It's just awful.

Relive the drama

I am planning a staged reading of the Congressional Record for the 109th Congress. In this scene, the part of Rep. Don Young (R-AK) will be played by Alan Rickman. The part of Rep. David Obey (D-WI) will be played by George Clooney.

House of Representatives chamber, U.S. Capitol, Interior.

Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I knew we still had charter members of the Flat Earth Society walking around this country. I didn't realize there were quite so many in the United States Congress.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. (Sneering) I am just curious, were you referring to yourself?

Mr. OBEY. The rules don't allow me to say who I was referring to.

The gentleman says we should have studies, we should have hearings. Your party has controlled this Congress for 14 years. The time for studying is over. The time for studying is past... He may be right, and you may be right. If you are right, then moving to deal with this problem costs us very little. If he is right, not moving costs us everything. The gentleman refers to an ice age.

(voice rising to a crecscendo)

If you shut down the ocean currents' conveyors, you are going to have an ice age in one heck of a hurry. So I would suggest the gentleman has committee responsibilities. If he does not want this committee to meet our responsibilities, as we have tried to do, then it is about time you meet yours and actually do something about it rather than denying that this is a real problem.

(with authority) Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

(Congressional Record)

Global warming = stronger hurricanes

Says article in Science. It's what you would expect. Do we go there during this national period of mourning? I say yes.

"Fuel For Global Warming Debate" (CBS)
"Experts say global warming is causing stronger hurricanes" (USA Today)

It would also seem that NOAA has a meteorologist working for them named Christopher Landsea, who was quoted in the CBS article. Cool. I like it when people's names match their occupations randomly. For example, the director of my college's Dining Services (my boss during the dish-washin'-for-tuition years) is named Stu Orifice.