Paul Kelly tries talking sense to the all-or-nothing crowd over at Bart’s place. The usual suspects snarl and prance. The bloggy dialogue is set up by this op-ed in yesterday’s NYT, which Kelly refers to as a good example of effective science communication. It would be interesting to hear from climate scientists if they agree….Continue Reading…
In recent posts, I’ve wondered aloud if the stalled policy and political action on climate change presented a window for alternative proposals to gain a fresh hearing. After all, as Tom Yulsman, noting the groundhog day element to the most recent global talks, asks: Who was it who said that insanity is “doing the same…Continue Reading…
Deep in the “The Post Partisan Power Play” thread, there’s a fascinating exchange between two readers. I’m going to reproduce it here. First, the set-up: Lewis asks: So, the idea is to find a way forward that is politically acceptable. Whether the ideas of Pielke etc are old or spanking brand new is beside the point. Let…Continue Reading…
There’s a new climate & energy policy debate brewing. It could get interesting fast, judging by the crossfire that flew on wed alone. Here’s the abridged version: First comes the release of a bipartisan “white paper” that argues for public investment in energy innovation as the best way to end reliance on fossil fuels. It…Continue Reading…
If you look at the top of Climate Depot’s website (to the far left and far right), you’ll see the buzzwords in large type that Marc Morano unfailingly associates with climate science and global warming: FRAUD & CLIMATE CON. [UPDATE: I see that Marc removed his latest climate “fraud” headline off the top left banner.]…Continue Reading…
After Congress shelved the climate bill late last week, the conventional wisdom of green-minded opinionators was that future generations were doomed. A glum, dejected note sounded everywhere from Grist to the New York Times. This despairing attitude took on a ghoulish form when one environmentalist and prolific (but anonymous) blog commenter hoped in this thread…Continue Reading…
The headline says it all: Democrats Abandon Sweeping Energy Plan Let the recriminations begin. Reports the NYT: At a news conference, the [Senate] majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, blamed Republicans for refusing to cooperate. “We don’t have a single Republican to work with us,” Mr. Reid said. Which is true, but not the whole…Continue Reading…
An extraordinary op-ed by four climate scientists, headlined “The Science Behind Climate Science,” asserts: The urgent need to act cannot be overstated. Climate change caused by humans is already affecting our lives and livelihoods “” with extreme storms, unusual floods and droughts, intense heat waves, rising seas and many changes in biological systems “” as climate scientists…Continue Reading…
That was the story of oil’s birth, and it will be the story of its abrupt decline, predicts Stacy VanDeveer, a political scientist at the University of New Hampshire. In the interim, he offers some food for thought: What are the implications for the existing petro states if we actually do bend the curve on…Continue Reading…
The Economist, in a rather one-sided article, is dubious about the increasingly touted link between climate change and human conflict. It’s true that the “climate wars” narrative is starting to take on a life of its own. I’ve even used the term as a headline in a post. But it’s also obvious (from the comment…Continue Reading…