News: Archive for February, 2015
‘(Reuters) – A significant majority of Americans say combating climate change is a moral issue that obligates them – and world leaders – to reduce carbon emissions, a Reuters/IPSOS poll has found.’
via Most Americans see combating climate change as a moral duty | Reuters.
‘Water officials in Kern County discovered that oil producers have been dumping chemical-laden wastewater into hundreds of unlined pits that are operating without proper permits.’
via Hundreds of illicit oil wastewater pits found in Kern County – LA Times.
Feb 18, 2015, Berkeley
“It’s better for us economically to address climate change than not. …when people say it’s too expensive to address, they’re kidding themselves. It’s too expensive not to address” ~ Tom Steyer
Green philanthropist and investor Tom Steyer spoke in Berkeley at the International House, moderated by former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, now a Distinguished Adjunct Professor with the event’s sponsor, the Goldman School of Public Policy. Steyer lauded President Obama’s recent moves to address climate change and praised California as doing the ‘best job of any major government in the world’ on climate. He highlighted the University of California’s ambitious goal of carbon neutrality by 2025. Steyer also stressed the importance of getting out the vote, advocating focusing on climate issues locally to best motivate voters: “as soon as you start talking about global impacts you lose voters”.
Excerpts: “It’s not how you vote, it’s whether you vote. Because when we look at 2014 and try to understand what happened, it was a very simple turnout issue. Democrats turned out at the lowest levels since 1942. Republicans turned out at approximately the same percentages that they turned out in 2010, and that made all the difference.”
“I think California has proved that this is not a choice between having a healthy environment and having a healthy economy.” ~ Steyer
“From a polling standpoint, from a demographic standpoint, Democrats looked fantastic. But if you don’t show up at the polls, then all the other things really don’t matter, and we didn’t show up at the polls in 2014 in the way that we have to to reflect both who we are and what we think.”
Governor Jennifer M. Granholm
“One thing that has changed very significantly over the last two years is where Republicans are. Two years ago it was very standard for them to deny climate change, and that has become a political liability. Basically people believe you have a right to your opinion, but if you want to be an elected official from a high position you can’t deny basic science, so it’s really not about climate change, it’s about trust. Would you want someone in a really high position who goes against all the scientists? And for a lot of Americans that just doesn’t make any sense.”
“There’s a billion dollars standing to support the candidacies of people who do not want to do
anything about carbon pollution. And that is an overwhelming political fact.” ~ Tom Steyer
“…The problem is the Republicans haven’t found a safe place to go on this. I think if you watched leading Republican politicians use the line for several months, and some of them are still using it, saying, I am not a scientist”
“… that that worked for a short while, but I think that after a while people realized they’re also not Ph.D. economists. They don’t have a Ph.D. in health care management or an M.D., They don’t have a Ph.D. period. So when they say they’re not a scientist, if that disqualifies them from talking about climate, they’re disqualified from talking about virtually all of the things that they talk about all the time. So I think that that is not going to be a place where they’re going to end up, because I think that people will start to think that that is as silly as arguing science with scientists.”
“The political issue is very very far from settled. I think it is very unwise for us to forget that very large carbon polluters have promised to put up a billion dollars in 2016 in the elections. And that’s not something that is a rumor, that’s something they put it on the front page of the Wall Street Journal, front page of every paper in the United States of America. There’s a billion dollars standing to support the candidacies of people who do not want to do anything about carbon pollution. And that is an overwhelming political fact.”
“But what our challenge is, is to turn the voices and the opinions of people who agree with us, which is the overwhelming number of Americans, into votes. Because the thing that politicians respond to is votes. Even the money is just a means to get votes, it’s very expensive these days to run in the United States of America, and because of some of the rules, money has more influence than it ever has. But the fact of the matter is politicians are trying to figure out how to get reelected and how to get votes.”
“…And for that it’s a question of urgency. Do we care enough to go to the polls, do we care enough to change our votes, for people who are not doing the right thing. And if we don’t, we won’t have any impact, but if we do, we will solve this much faster than anybody else. As my friend Kate [?] likes to say, opinions are nice, but votes change our country.”
Report by James George
‘French President Francois Hollande said Thursday that a landmark climate deal may not be reached in Paris in December if wealthy countries don’t commit adequate funds to help poor nations fight global warming.’
via Hollande Says No Climate Deal If There Is No Climate Fund – ABC News.
‘The Prince of Wales has compared the planet to a “sick patient,” warning it could face its “death certificate” at the hands of climate change.’
Jan 14, 2015, San Francisco
Rajendra Pachauri, Ph.D., Chair (former), Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change appeared at the Fairmont Hotel in San Francisco last month along with Lisa Jackson, Vice President, Environmental Initiatives, Apple and Former Administrator of the EPA to be interviewed by Greg Dalton of Climate One of the Commonwealth Club. Subsequently Pachauri has resigned his position as IPCC chair amidst accusations of sexual harassment in Delhi. Excerpts of Dr. Pachauri’s comments:
“…if you look at the increase in emissions between 2000 and 2010 … we’ve been adding one gigatonne per year over previous levels in this ten year period. That goes counter to what the UN framework convention on climate change requires”
text transcription (from 20:14 onwards):
“Well, I think that if you really want to limit warming to 2 degrees Celsius, then the peak in global emissions should really not come after 2025. Earlier preferably, because otherwise the cost of mitigation will go up substantially, and the feasibility of coming up with solutions and technologies would go beyond our reach. So I think the sooner we act, the better it will be, and of course we’ll have to act quite decisively, because unfortunately, if you look at the increase in emissions between 2000 and 2010, in 2010 the world was emitting 49 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent [GtCO2eq], in the year 2000 it was emitting 39 gigatonnes, so that means we’ve been adding one gigatonne per year over previous levels in this ten year period. That goes counter to what the UN framework convention on climate change requires.”
“So I think that we need to move very quickly, and the big thing is you can actually save money in a number of cases by taking the right kind of actions. I mentioned co-benefits. I also want to mention that we have found that the cost per year would be 0.06% of global GDP or global consumption if we were to pursue a path takes us to no more than 2 degrees Celsius. So it’s not an expensive proposition. It’s difficult because we’ve got accustomed to very very high rates of growth in emissions, so the turnaround is difficult, but once we decide to do that the cost is not high at all”
Report by James George
‘…The influence of atmospheric CO2 on the balance between incoming energy from the Sun and outgoing heat from the Earth (also called the planet’s energy balance) is well established. But this effect has not been experimentally confirmed outside the laboratory until now.’
via First direct observation of carbon dioxide’s increasing greenhouse effect.
‘(Reuters) – President Barack Obama on Tuesday, as promised, swiftly vetoed a Republican bill approving the Keystone XL oil pipeline, leaving the long-debated project in limbo for another indefinite period.’
via Obama vetoes Keystone XL pipeline, leaving it in limbo | Reuters.
‘Sea levels north of New York City rose by 128mm in two years, according to a report in the journal, Nature Communications.’
via BBC News – US sea level north of New York City ‘jumped by 128mm’.
‘WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama Tuesday vetoed legislation that would have approved the Keystone XL pipeline, a project that is a top priority for congressional Republicans and a touchstone issue for environmentalists and the nation’s booming energy industry.’