Green Job for Hilda Solis

Congresswoman Hilda Solis as the new Labor Secretary sends a clear message that Barack Obama is serious about green jobs, according to Hill Heat. In her words:

Our nation is at a crossroads right now. We can choose to transition to a clean energy economy that secures our energy supply and combats climate change or we can continue down the same old path of uncertainty and insecurity that we’re currently in. Current economic conditions, particularly for under-served, under-represented minority communities underscore the need to transition to clean energy technology.

Hill Heat also notes that Solis also wrote pioneering environmental justice legislation. These appointments are very encouraging.

On another note, my posting this season has been terrible and I am sorry. The holidays are here and I am also putting together an art show for January 10 that will be taking most of my time til then. The posts will keep trickling in but won't be normal for a few weeks. Thanks for your patience.

Stabilize at 450 ppm for free

ClimateProgress has a post up today reviewing the 2008 McKinsey claim that atmospheric gases can be stabilized at 450 ppm for free. I know you are also asking yourself what we are waiting for and the answer is common sense.

New satellite tech shows alarming ice melt

CNN reports that

Between 1.5 trillion and 2 trillion tons of ice in Greenland, Antarctica and Alaska have melted at an accelerating rate since 2003, according to NASA scientists, in the latest signs of what they say is global warming.

Using new satellite technology that measures changes in mass in mountain glaciers and ice sheets, NASA geophysicist Scott Luthcke concluded that the losses amounted to enough water to fill the Chesapeake Bay 21 times...

NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, or GRACE, mission uses two orbiting satellites to measure the "mass balance" of a glacier, or the net annual difference between ice accumulation and ice loss.

"The best estimates are that sea levels will rise about 18 to 36 inches by the end of the century, but because of what's going on and how fast things are changing, there's a lot of uncertainty," [Jay Zwally, ICESat Project Scientist] said.

So there you have it. 18 to 36 inches this century. On a related note, to see a sea level rise map for the Chesapeake region, see NWF. For any region, visit this application on Google Maps and plug in 1 meter.

global warming holiday gifts

This post is not a list of global warming-related holiday gifts that you should give to someone- check out the sidebar for that. No, this is a list of what I have already been given from my dear friends who think of me as something of a special case:

• a card with an Al Gore cutout on it with a bunch of sticker quotes;
• a necklace with an earth pendant on it that opens up and has a special wish tied up with ribbon inside;
• this card:

Thanks, friends.

Power plants can emit CO2

EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, who should have quit a long time ago in disgust at himself, is up to his old tricks again. From the Washington Post:

The Environmental Protection Agency ruled yesterday that new power plants are not required to install technology to reduce carbon dioxide emissions...

The ruling, in a memorandum signed by EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson, turns on a seemingly arcane regulatory question that could govern the future of new fossil fuel-burning buildings and power plants under the Clean Air Act.

During the Bush administration, the EPA has rejected the idea that greenhouse gases should be regulated like soot, smog precursors and other kinds of air pollution, despite an April 2007 Supreme Court ruling that said carbon dioxide fit the definition of a pollutant that could be regulated under the Clean Air Act.

The case at issue yesterday began in 2007 when the EPA issued a permit to a new coal-fired power plant in Bonanza, Utah. The Sierra Club, an environmental group, filed a legal challenge, saying that the permit should have required the plant to control its output of carbon dioxide...

The case revolved around the question of whether carbon dioxide was required to be controlled or simply monitored.

The appeals board, a kind of appeals court for EPA rules, found on Nov. 13 that the rule was unclear. Johnson's memo yesterday sought to make it plain. Major industrial corporations have been pressing the Bush administration to issue a ruling in the case...

It was unclear yesterday what the ruling's real-world impact will be. The EPA says that about 50 plants -- either new or significantly remodeled -- must obtain a permit under this provision every year. But Meyers said he does not know if any are positioned to receive final approval before President-elect Barack Obama takes office on Jan. 20.

The Obama administration is likely to review the case, and Democratic officials close to the president-elect's team say that the Supreme Court ruling and the EPA's power to regulate carbon dioxide can serve as powerful levers to bring corporations and other parties to a bargaining table about broad framework for controlling greenhouse gases.

Holiday odds and ends

My posting schedule has been horrible, for various reasons. So I thought I would do another one of my periodic rambling posts to let you know I am still out here in global warming land.

Things are looking good for addressing global warming, right? Our incoming President has aligned all of his initiatives to address the problem- down to a remake of the auto industry. He has announced nominations for appointments to positions that suggest innovation and a respect for the future. I am feeling really, really good about this, because not only do we have an ally, we have a practical one who wants solutions to work for the economy. We will not have shoes thrown at our leaders anymore. It's going to be good. My only concern is that Salazar as Interior Secretary not try any funny business with polar bears. I am keeping my eye on you. But on the other hand we get Chu and for that I am grateful- hope he's as good with business as he is with applied science because we need markets for these new energy products. And we get Bill Richardson as Commerce Secretary, who is in favor of the most stringent of cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. Merry Christmas to me!

The lights on my tree died. I had replaced all of the strands but one with LED lights and of course the old one pooped out. I am kind of glad because it gives me an excuse to take them off the tree and get new ones that are LED. Have you noticed that some of the LED lights out there are so dazzling that they look weird?

We're falling on hard times and that is troubling to see. The silver lining is that there is a message out there to focus more on what matters. Like friends and family and experiences instead of stuff. Unfortunately this message combined with the credit crunch is causing the world economy to collapse. Life is complicated.

All of the carbon offset retailers have been inundating me with their holiday product lists, which are really cool gifts that come with carbon offsets. My favorites are at Native Energy, but I also like Carbonfund and TerraPass.

I am excited about the future and I hope you are too.

Shannon

Dreaming of a green Christmas?

Some tips from Newsweek:

• It's better to buy a real tree..."Buy live trees from a farm as close to home as possible so you cut down on emissions for transportation. If you can find a tree that's both local and organic that's even better."
• "If you send a tree that still has tinsel on the branches … your tree will probably go straight to the landfill."
• Conventional incandescent lights...burn up to nine times more energy than light emitting diode lights (LEDs.) Though they cost a bit more, LEDs produce less heat, last longer and shine brighter from one holiday to the next.
• Those shiny new glass balls and plastic reindeer figurines might be relatively cheap to buy, but when you tally up the raw materials, manufacturing and (usually international) transportation they require, they're environmentally costly. If your tree is bare, you're better off buying local, trimming the tree with homemade ornaments or scouting for natural decorations by hanging painted pinecones or berries.
• Some alternatives to fancy wrapping: use newspaper or old cereal boxes to conceal gifts. Danny Seo, author of "Simply Green Giving" suggests using brown paper bags decorated with red, black and white electrical tape. With a little creativity and craftiness, he says "the end result looks like Burberry gift wrap."
• Use LED candles instead. "They're difficult to break, last a long time, and they don't get as hot as conventional bulbs so they're less likely to cause fires."
• Inflatable lawn ornaments...require a constant stream of electric-fan power to remain upright. According to the nonprofit green consulting firm, Efficiency Vermont, it's best to cut the electricity when dark falls, let Santa deflate overnight, and plump him back up again in the morning.

Green jobs coming to Virginia

Saw this and it put a smile on my face:

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine announced a new initiative Thursday that he said will get much of his attention in 2009: Renew Virginia.

The program will involve additional spending, legislation and executive orders all aimed at environmental protection and energy issues.

As part of that effort, Kaine said a newly formed task force will suggest ways to attract more alternative-energy companies to Virginia and create "tens of thousands" of green jobs by 2025.

"Our goal is to position the commonwealth as a leader in alternative-energy generation, energy conservation, and research and development," Kaine said at a media event at the Greater Richmond Convention Center, which itself is a "green building," constructed to save energy.

Despite the financial crisis, Kaine said, it is important for state leaders not to retrench, but to innovate. "By developing a green energy industry here," he said, "we will not only move toward a more environmentally responsible approach to addressing our growing energy needs, but we will also help stimulate Virginia's economy."...

The governor said he likes what other states have done to create incentives for home-owners and businesses to use more solar energy, and he praised existing efforts in Virginia to convert barley and algae into biofuels.

"We're doing some good things on a smaller scale," he said, "but we need to go further."

The governor's Commission on Climate Change last week recommended mandatory goals for energy conservation and efficiency and urged Virginia to cut its emissions of greenhouse gases by 80 percent by 2050.

Yesterday at my job at Frederick County DPW, the Director of Public Works spoke to us in a staff meeting about the economic crisis, and it was a very sober talk. The high note was that Obama may be directing money to public infrastructure. You are seeing the makings of a new Green Deal.

Obama's enviornmental regulators to be named

From the Washington Post:

Democratic sources say Obama plans to name Carol M. Browner, a former administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, to a new position overseeing energy, environment and climate change policy from the White House. He will choose Lisa P. Jackson, who headed the New Jersey environment agency, as head of the EPA.

And, sources said, he will name Nancy Sutley, a deputy mayor in Los Angeles, to chair the White House Council on Environmental Quality. The president-elect is expected to announce the appointments next week.

Along with Steven Chu -- a Nobel Prize-winning physicist who sources say will be named secretary of energy -- the three will form the core of Obama's environmental team.

Word of their appointment was greeted enthusiastically yesterday by some environmental groups. The League of Conservation Voters called the group a "green dream team."

Industry groups were more cautious. At the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Vice President William Kovacs said the group worried that the new officials would use their power to limit greenhouse-gas emissions and impose painful new costs on energy use.

OMG no way! They are going to do something about climate change! But that's terrible! Okay, I am SO SICK of hearing from this Chamber guy in relation to climate change. Kovacs, just do this: work with businesses to prepare for and take advantage of the changes that are coming that are necessary to protect our world...and its businesses.

A cool side note:

Two years ago, Browner was part of a group of former EPA leaders that called on the Bush administration to impose caps on greenhouse gases. Now, she will probably be called on to help Obama do that. The president-elect says he wants to reduce emissions to 1990 levels over 12 years.

Endangered species left out of ESA?

Hey, I thought the Endangered Species Act was supposed to protect endangered species. Apparently not. My friend Anne found this in the New York Times and sent it to me with the words, "this makes me so mad I can not even speak":

The Interior Department on Thursday announced a rule that has largely freed federal agencies from their obligation to consult independent wildlife biologists before they build dams or highways or permit construction of transmission towers, housing developments or other projects that might harm federally protected wildlife.

The rule, quickly challenged by environmental groups, lets the Army Corps of Engineers or the Federal Highway Administration in many cases rely on their own personnel in deciding what impact a project would have on a fish, bird, plant, animal or insect protected under the Endangered Species Act.

In announcing the rule, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne said his main intention was to ensure that the 1972 law was not used as a “back door” means of regulating the emission of the gases that accelerate climate change. Without this rule, Mr. Kempthorne said, his decision last summer to list the polar bear as threatened because of the loss of sea ice caused by the warming of the climate could be used to block projects far from the bear’s Arctic habitat.

“The Endangered Species Act was never intended to be a back door opportunity for climate change policy,” he said.

Tell that to the Arctic species. I am sure they would love to debate the finer points with you, Dick.

Secretary of Energy: Chu

My friend Denis sent me this today from the Washington Post, saying "things are looking up these days":

Chu, the son of Chinese immigrants, won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1997 for his work in the "development of methods to cool and trap atoms with laser light." But, in an interview last year with The Washington Post, Chu said he began to turn his attention to energy and climate change several years ago. "I was following it just as a citizen and getting increasingly alarmed," he said. "Many of our best basic scientists [now] realize that this is getting down to a crisis situation."

He sought and won the top job at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in 2004, leaving the Stanford University faculty to focus on energy issues. Chu was in London last night and unavailable for comment, but the physicist has been, in the words of his Web site, on a "mission" to make the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory "the world leader in alternative and renewable energy research, particularly the development of carbon-neutral sources of energy."

Obama to meet with Goracle today

President-Elect Obama and former VP Gore will meet today in Chicago to talk about climate change, according to the Washington Post. Obama's position on global warming is very similar from what I can tell to Gore's: that global warming is unequivocal, that we need to completely revamp energy in order to address the climate challenge, and that we must commit to international treaties. But the question on your mind is- will Gore be in the Obama administration?

There are no indications that the three would be discussing a job for Gore in
the Obama administration, Democratic sources said. In a statement, Obama
spokesman Nick Shapiro said Gore, Obama and Biden would "discuss energy and
climate change and how policies in this area can stimulate the economy and
create jobs."

Gore is a lightning rod in that the right, for whatever reason, hates him. Because of this, his dedication to the climate issue has been slandered for numerious reasons; his need-to-save-the-world liberal ego, for example. I consider Gore to be courageous and outspoken on an issue that desperately needs attention. He may have sacrificed his political career, but numerous awards and world recognition later, he may not need it. My instinct is that Obama will select nose-to-the-grindstone people with low profiles to address climate change. These people will be in charge of removing obstructions to regulating greenhouse gases, updating the electricity grid, updating the country's fleet, negotiating a climate treaty, and providing incentives for clean energy investments.

Greenhouse gas emissions rose 1.4% in 2007

Remember how Bush bragged last year about how the U.S. reduced greenhouse gas emissions in 2006? But bloggers said this was just because we had a warm winter and didn't use as much heating fuel? But then he said "but we've reduced energy intensity in production" and then we bloggers said "set some emissions reductions goals already!"

And then Bush sent Harlan Watson to humiliate the U.S. to the rest of the world by rejecting real greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and instead sell energy intensity goals? And then we got told by a representative from New Guinea to "lead, or if you are unwilling to lead, please get out of the way?"

Yeah, I remember that too. Fast-forward to today where the Energy Information Administration reports that the US in 2007 increased its greenhouse gas emissions 1.5% from 2006 levels. If Bush were to rise from anonymity right now on this issue, he would likely brag that "greenhouse gas emissions intensity reduced by 0.6% in 2007." I hope Bush will not even bother to say anything this year. Get out of the way. I'll consider it a holiday present.

Wilkins ice shelf cracking apart in Antarctic

The Wilkins Ice Shelf in the Antarctic is on its last legs, according to the European Space Agency.

New rifts have developed on the Wilkins Ice Shelf that could lead to the opening of the ice bridge that has been preventing the ice shelf from disintegrating and breaking away from the Antarctic Peninsula.

The ice bridge connects the Wilkins Ice Shelf to two islands, Charcot and Latady. As seen in the Envisat image above acquired on 26 November 2008, new rifts (denoted by colourful lines and dates of the events) have formed to the east of Latady Island and appear to be moving in a northerly direction.

U.S blasted for inaction at climate talks

The headline story at msnbc this afternoon is that the United States is being verbally whipped at the climate talks in Poland for its obstructionism and inaction.

POZNAN, Poland - Environmentalists criticized the United States and other rich countries Tuesday for failing so far to make meaningful commitments at a U.N. conference on climate change.

Some 190 countries are meeting in Poznan, Poland, for talks that are part of the attempt to reach a new climate-change treaty in the Danish capital of Copenhagen next year.

But activists warned of failure at the Poznan talks, which last through Dec. 12, saying industrialized countries are resisting setting long-term targets for cutting the emission of greenhouse gases unless developing countries make a similar sacrifice..

Harlan Watson, the chief U.S. delegate, said Monday he expected no agreement on specific global targets for emissions cuts by 2020 at Poznan.

If we wait long enough, 2020 will pass us by. It's discouraging to see the country dragged through the mud for the sins of its current leadership just as we are becoming optimistic about what our future leaders will do. By the way, is msnbc being overtaken by activists?

Secretary of...Climate Change?

The Democratic Party platform asserts that global warming is an issue for national security ("With these policies, we will protect our country from the national security threats created by reliance on foreign oil and global insecurity due to climate change."). Why, then, would the leader of the Democratic Party choose a National Security Adviser in Ret. General James Jones who has advocated for fossil energy interests above climate change realities? I think the answer is that Obama is setting up a cabinet that is across the political spectrum, but is going to cherry-pick advice from people. I was watching Hardball last night, and I agree with Chris Matthews that Obama is setting up a centrist government so that he can govern from the left.

Joe Romm has a more sophisticated take on this particular example of the issue: Obama's selection of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State trumps the NSA selection on issues of climate change. Here is the analysis, from ClimateProgress:

Some enviros are annoyed that PEBO chose a national security adviser (NSA), retired Marine Gen. James Jones, who has emphasized energy security concerns over global warming — see, for instance, this lame transition report on energy Jones just oversaw for the US Chamber of Commerce...

Let’s be clear here: Of the national security team, the NSA is all but irrelevant on the key issues of climate and domestic energy policy. Only the Secretary of State (SOS) really matters — and here PEBO chose a grand slam home run for climate science advocates (CSAs)...

Indeed, the National Security Council didn’t insert themselves in these issues when I was in government — and now it seems likely that Obama will have some sort of energy czar operating out of the White House who will explicitly oversee interagency disputes on this subject.

If anyone doubts Clinton's positions on global warming, Obama's platform arose out of of them. Both are consistent with the Democratic Party platform. During the campaign, I did a comparison of the two and found that they were essentially the same:

• Clinton and Obama support 80% reductions of 1990 levels of greenhouse gases by 2050 and are supporters of cap-and-trade legislation.
• Both Obama and Clinton believe in 100% auction for greenhouse gas emissions.
• Obama is neutral on nuclear and has not ruled out subsidies. Obama would consider a moratorium on new coal plants without sequestration technology. He believes in subsidies for "clean coal". Hillary is against subsidies for nuclear and "clean coal" but is not against either per se. Both are for subsidizing the development of alternative energies like biodiesel, wind, solar, and geothermal.
• Hillary and Obama would set standards for renewable portfolios.
• Both believe in improving fuel efficiency standards and energy conservation, and have specific goals and programs laid out.

Though you will hear the pundits and bloggers complain, I think Obama's power structure suggests that he is very serious about action on the climate change issue.

Happy CRAG Day!

You are probably wondering what the heck CRAG Day means. Today is the end of the first year for our Carbon Reduction Action Group and the beginning of the next year. Our group spent the past year tracking personal use of the following resources and will calculate the emissions after all is said and done:

• gasoline/diesel for personal use of vehicles
• use of home heating and cooking fuels
• electricity use
• plane trips

For more about the Maryland CRAG, visit here. For more about calculating your personal carbon emissions, go here. To learn how to save energy, save money, and save greenhouse gases, go here.

How does this all work? When you burn fossil fuels, they emit greenhouse gases that cause global warming. These gases are measured in carbon dioxide equivalents. A unit of each type of fuel will emit a certain mass of carbon dioxide equivalent. For example, a gallon of gasoline emits 19.56 pounds CO2e when combusted in an automobile. We only count things that are easily measured. For example, even though food production and transport create emissions, we don't track those because we don't have good numbers for them.

Maryland's emissions goal for this past CRAG year was 24,089 lbs/year, 10% below the US average of 26,766 lbs/yr for energy use. We predict that every person in our group, including kids, will save an average of $300 on energy bills from this past year and 2,677 pounds of greenhouse gases just by reducing energy use. Over the next month or so, we'll get our final bills in and will be able to calculate how we did. Wish us luck!