Mandated: Ice Vests For All! (And a Carbon Tax)

The recent heat wave saw me tinkering with my latest invention: an ice-vest/chest personal cooling unit. Tinkering conceptually, at least ;-). But the ice vest is a symptom of a much larger climate concern.

Those with more power than I to affect change need to address it: Congress should mandate personal ice vests for everyone!

No, not really. Actually (or, maybe in addition to?), they need to adopt the economists' simple, one-page answer to climate change: tax carbon emissions.

Henry Jacoby, an economist at MIT's business school, says the one thing you need to do to solve the problem is to tax fossil fuels in proportion to the amount of carbon they release. That would make coal, oil and natural gas more expensive. That's it; that's the whole plan.

So simple but yet so effective. Then again, I'd probably want to add a phase in period of 10 years so as not to shock the economy too badly. Otherwise... let's get on this plan, Congress, pronto!

(Oh, and call me if you want more detailed plans regarding my the hybrid vest/chest air conditioner.)

Ecosystem Under Assault

What damage can the failed administration do in its last months in office?

Well, among other things, it can attempt to water down the Endangered Species Act.

The ecosystem totters under the assault of too many people reaching for middle class using last-century energy sources. This has put the environment and the components that make it up (living species) under continued and accelerating stress. Please ponder the fact that scientists who make the ecosystem their specialty field of study warn the next great extinction is happening now. Consider further the web-like connections you and I, and every person you know, share with the ecosystem. The planet, it's atmosphere, the creatures, plants, and insects that live their entangled lives upon it are like a woven piece of cloth. Only so many threads can be cut before the whole thing unravels.

Now is not the time to undercut the protections of the Endangered Species Act.

If you believe as I do, write Dirk Kempthorne, secretary of the Interior, to tell him please reconsider. (Click the link to find a the Center for Biological Diversity's easy method of contacting the secretary.)

Earth Day

It's Earth Day!

Give yourself an endorphin rush by doing something positive for the planet!

Generous acts aren't really selfless when you consider the biochemistry of the human brain. We are wired to feel good when we help others out. It may seem a tiny gesture to donate $10 bucks to the NRDC, to a pledge to turn the lights out when you leave a room, to buy a carbon offset for your car (from Terrapass, perhaps) or to try to work at home 1/week. (Or, to give up meat.)

But you can assure your pituitary and hypothalmus that when enough people are doing the same thing you are, it adds up. And then you get that feeling of, "Ah, yes, I belong to something bigger than myself!"

Wow, a feeling of belonging AND a feeling of being generous; that's two potential sources for your endorphin rush!

This message brought to you by too much caffeine on too little sleep.

Biofuels Bad News

According to two studies published this week in Science, when all relevant factors are accounted for, biofuels produce more greenhouse gas emissions than fossil fuels. From Wired:

Biofuels seemed so promising at first -- what could be cleaner than running our cars and factories on plants? But early prognostications were a bit thin on details. They didn't always account for the energy that would be needed to grow, harvest and refine the fuels. Most importantly, they didn't consider that greenhouse gas-gobbling vegetation would need to be cleared for fuel crops -- or, if these were planted on existing pastures, that new fields would be cleared to make space for displaced food crops.

Put these factors in the equation, and biofuels don't do much good at all.

Let's wrench ourselves away from this course before more tax and private money is spent. Let's let our political leaders know that being green requires a little extra research into outcomes.

If I had to guess the future for fueling the vehicle you buy 15 years from now, I'd guess a plug-in hybrid that get the vast majority of its energy from a grid run on these new, ultra-cool maglev turbines. Of course, thin-film solar panels on your own house will also be part of the equation.

Environmental Gut Check

Sometimes it's good to hear a realistic, straight-talking assessment of where the world stands. The dangers we actually face as peak oil production is reached are perhaps not something you think about a lot, or perhaps have never really thought about.

Well, Lester Brown has, and you can hear him talk about his conclusions, and the real problems we're likely to face in the next decade.

You can listen via a stream from these links (Real Media) (Windows Media) or download the MP3 here. (This audio is an interview conducted by Ira Flatow on NPR's Science Friday last week.)

I found it both alarming and hopeful.

Where The Candidates Stand

This incredibly slick little tool at Glassbooth will help you focus on issues, not hairstyles. Try this 2-part quiz, quick and easy, and discover where all the candidates are on the issues that really matter to you.

No matter which one of these quizzes I take, it seems like Kucinich is always most representative of my views (94% according to this tool). Sigh. He stands little chance of gaining the democratic nomination, methinks.

Of the 2 candidates that seem mostly likely to get the nod, Obama is 78% like me, Clinton 79%. Luckily, my top issue (energy and environment) ranked 'very similar' for both.

On the Republican side, the best showing was by McCain who was able to eke out a dismal 51% match with my beliefs, with not a single 'very similar' rating. Giuliani and Romney fare much worse, at 38% and 36%, respectively.

I Wish My Chemistry Teacher Was This Cool

When my friends and I reminisce back to high school, some of our biggest laughs come when we recall how insanely poorly equipped our chemistry teacher was for teaching. I wish this guy had been our teacher.



(hat tip to Steven Sullivan for this heads-up)

Monied Interests Vs. Humanity

Monied corporate interests are demanding their puppet politicians sabotage the EPA's authority to regulate CO2 as a pollutant. This hasn't yet happened, but some are trying to give DOT authority over fuel economy – which would also strip EPA of authority to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions that the Supreme Court recently declared was within the EPA's purview.

"It is a poison pill that, in the dark of night, would reverse the landmark decision by the US Supreme Court affirming EPA's power to regulate global-warming pollution," says Ms. Patton of Environmental Defense.

Read all about the unfolding battle here in this excellent Christian Science Monitor article.

Who's Got Environmental Policy

This post by Adam Stein is so good, just go here to terrapass's blog and read it.

But if you've got click-fatigue, read on:

Thomas Friedman is one of the most important national writers on green issues – maybe the most important. Which is why this quote from a recent column is so confusing:

[N]one of the leading presidential candidates has offered an energy policy that would include a tax on oil or carbon that could trigger a truly transformational shift in America away from fossil fuels.

The column is framed as a mock assessment of America's security program from the point of view of an Iranian intelligence agency. It's a clever enough conceit, and in the middle of it Friedman drops in the line about carbon taxes to underscore the point that America isn't serious about energy independence.

The problem here is that the statement isn't true. Of the three leading Democratic candidates, 100% have offered strong plans for taxing carbon emissions in the form of cap-and-trade programs. On the Republican side, it's a bit hard to figure out who's leading these days, but two candidates (McCain and Huckabee) have at least endorsed the idea of a cap-and-trade system. This is pretty thin gruel, but it's not nothing. McCain has actually pushed for passage of such legislation in the Senate.

There are surely differences between a straight carbon tax and a cap and trade system, but the distinctions aren't really strong enough to support the column's contention. And it's true that the line is just a small piece of an article that covers a lot of ground, but I think this sort of thing matters.

Here's why. It's good to hold politicians' feet to the fire, particularly during a campaign season. But there's a flip side to this: when politicians actually take bold positions, it would be nice to see them rewarded for their courage. Otherwise, why should they stick their necks out? Several leading candidates have great -- even transformational -- energy plans. They should reap the political benefits.

Which raises a secondary, related problem with the column: the careful evenhandedness. A lot of candidates don't have great, transformational energy plans. And that so-called "green gap" is a perfect place for a columnist with Friedman's megaphone to focus his attention.

US Still Puts Profits over Climate Change

I guess we need a few more shocking disasters to hit our shores before politicians in the US will wake up. It seems the upcoming CAFE standards will continue to allow the SUV loophole where cars and light trucks are categorized separately.

Actually, as long as politicians are allowed to take money from corporations whose profit motives push aside moral considerations, I question whether we really have the ability to respond to real, actual pressing needs in this country anymore. Sure, we can respond to fabricated needs, needs fabricated by those few set to make big bucks on cost-plus contracts. I suppose if Haliburton were in the business of wind, solar, and biomass energy production we'd see more of an Apollo-project-like fervor on this topic, as opposed to what we've currently got, which essentially amounts to lip service.

Ok, here's something positive about to balance the negative points of the previous 2 paragraphs: it looks like the professionals may have taken about enough from their commander and chief--the CIA downgraded Iran's nuclear threat, throwing cold water in the administration's latest drumbeat for a new war in the mideast. Apparently, Bush only found out last week.

Prius Tips

Do you have a Prius? I usually get about 45 miles per gallon in the summer, and about 38 miles per gallon in the winter. I've heard about people using special techniques to achieve much better mileage than than, but I've just now discovered what those techniques actually are (click here to see).

I'm going to give these techniques a shot and see if I can't raise my mileage to 80+, even in the rainy winter. I doubt I can get to 100 mpg with the resistance the rain offers, but I guess it'll be an experiment!

Bussard IEC Fusion Rockets

Bussard IEC Fusion Rockets are the sort of break-through propulsion technology that could actually reasonably/affordably put up a constellation of solar-power satellites that, in turn, could turn the tide on the energy-demand avalanche that is crashing down on our environment in a slow-mo, decades-long disaster.

More Whitehouse Climate Censorship

I'm about ready to blow a gasket. Apparently the White House eviscerated a climate report from the CDC to a Senate committee, cutting 10 pages of details on how climate shift will exacerbate disease.

What the hell is going on? Here we sit with southern California burning, and the White House Office of Management and Budget sees fit to chop the teeth out of this report that attempts to warn against potential biological disasters as bad or worse as drought-caused wildfires.

Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.

This, on top of all the previous climate censorship successes perpetrated by the Bush Administration, is beyond the pale.

Global Warming A Hoax?

Maybe I'll have to rethink my position now that I've seen this.