| 100 clean energy jobs at closed auto plant? Looks good to Michigan Posted: 10 Sep 2009 07:46 AM PDT  Pretty much the only bright spot in the Michigan job market is clean energy jobs, as the NYT reported today:
Since 2005, the number of green jobs in Michigan has grown by 8 percent, while construction jobs have declined 20 percent and manufacturing jobs have fallen 14 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
And that explains the excitement over even a seemingly modest piece of good news: The announcement of a new plant employing just 100 workers might seem like a long shot to attract the chief executive of General Motors, two senators and a raft of state and local officeholders from across Michigan.But in a state that has lost 800,000 jobs this decade, 18 percent of its work force, the Aug. 13 official opening of a G.M. factory to build electric-car batteries in Brownstown, about 20 miles southwest of Detroit, was a can't-miss event.
The picture on the right is GM's CEO Rick Wagoner introducing the Chevrolet Volt battery pack at the North American International Auto Show on Monday. "The phrase 'new plant' isn't one we're used to hearing these days," said John Cherry, Michigan's lieutenant governor, as he stood inside the sprawling, empty building in this industrial town about 20 miles south of Detroit. Any new factory would be celebrated in this state, which has been hit harder than most by the recession. But the one in Brownstown held particular significance because it was another small step in Michigan's efforts to revive its economy with "green" manufacturing. The state has moved aggressively to offset the drain of traditional auto manufacturing jobs by promoting Michigan as the place to invest in alternative energy projects.
Of course, in the not too distant future the only jobs left will be green. That's why smart states like Michigan — and smart presidents like Obama — are pushing to ensure that the United States becomes the world leader in what will certainly be the biggest job creating industrial sector of the century. Here's more on what the state is doing:
By the end of July, for example, Michigan had already exhausted its full year's budget of $725 million in tax credits to attract new companies to the state. Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm has been asking state legislators to allocate more tax credits, specifically to help redevelop an old Ford Motor Company plant in the town of Wixom into a $1 billion green manufacturing center. The legislature is expected to approve an additional $100 million in credits as soon as this week.
Three companies, Clairvoyant Energy from California, Xtreme Power from Texas and Oerlikon Solar from Switzerland have committed to moving into the vacant Wixom plant if tax credits are available. Executives from the companies plan to join Ms. Granholm and Ford's executive chairman, William Clay Ford Jr., at the plant Thursday to celebrate the redevelopment project, which the state sees as a centerpiece of its green-oriented revival effort.
["Clairvoyant Energy, one of two companies invested in a $725 million project to refurbish an abandoned Ford plant in Woxom, has artist's renderings of what the company wants to do with the site."] The chief executive of Clairvoyant Energy, David Hardee, said Michigan was an ideal location for his solar-energy company because of the availability of so many skilled workers and its manufacturing background. Mr. Hardee said he also had been impressed by the state's determination to reinvent itself as an incubator of alternative-energy companies. "Maybe I'm just rooting for the underdog," Mr. Hardee said of Michigan. "This is exactly what renewable energy is all about." The Wixom project is expected to create about 4,000 jobs, which would be one of the biggest green-energy developments in the state so far. There have been other successes. A solar-panel manufacturer has resurrected a closed refrigerator plant in the small city of Greenville in western Michigan. Earlier this summer, General Electric said it would build a research center near Detroit, employing 1,100 workers on wind-turbine technology.
Now if only GE would quit the coal industry front group that is trying to block our clean energy future The Obama administration is supporting Michigan's efforts. Last month, the president announced $2.4 billion in financing for advanced battery and electric-vehicle projects across the country, with more than half of the money going to companies in Michigan.
State officials project that battery projects will create almost 7,000 jobs in the next 18 months, and 40,000 by the year 2020. The plant in Brownstown, while small, is G.M.'s first venture into assembling batteries for its own vehicles. With most battery production now concentrated in Asia, the G.M. facility is considered a step toward building a manufacturing base in the United States.
Let's hope GM's new 230mpg Chevy Volt succeeds. Related Post: It looks like this new plant will be building batteries for the Chevy volt: |
| NOAA: "El Niño is expected to strengthen and last through the Northern Hemisphere winter 2009-2010″ Posted: 10 Sep 2009 07:19 AM PDT NOAA's National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center released its monthly El Niño/Southern oscillation (ENSO) Diagnostic Discussion: A weak El Niño continued during August 2009, as sea surface temperature (SST) remained above-average across the equatorial Pacific Ocean (Fig. 1). Consistent with this warmth, the latest weekly values of the Niño-region SST indices were between +0.7°C to +1.0°C (Fig. 2). Subsurface oceanic heat content anomalies continued to reflect a deep layer of anomalous warmth between the ocean surface and the thermocline, particularly in the central Pacific. Enhanced convection over the western and central Pacific abated during the month, but the pattern of suppressed convection strengthened over Indonesia. Low-level westerly wind anomalies continued to become better established over parts of the equatorial Pacific Ocean. These oceanic and atmospheric anomalies reflect an ongoing weak El Niño. A majority of the model forecasts for the Niño-3.4 SST index suggest El Niño will reach at least moderate strength during the Northern Hemisphere fall (3-month Niño-3.4 SST index of +1.0°C or greater). Many model forecasts even suggest a strong El Niño (3-month Niño-3.4 SST index in excess of +1.5°C) during the fall and winter, but current observations and trends indicate that El Niño will most likely peak at moderate strength. Therefore, current conditions, trends, and model forecasts favor the continued development of a weak-to-moderate strength El Niño into the Northern Hemisphere fall 2009, with the likelihood of at least a moderate strength El Niño during the winter 2009-10.
This should be enough to drive us to record temperatures, but there is typically a few month delay between an El Niño and the full global temperature impact. So if this is only a moderate El Niño but it lasts through the winter, then it may be 2010 that is the record. For more details on the implications, see here. |
| Clean Energy Works launches: New grassroots effort unites faith, labor, veterans, environmental, sportsmen, business, youth, farm, and community groups to fight for for clean air, clean water, clean energy job bill Posted: 10 Sep 2009 06:18 AM PDT The progressive and clean energy has finished putting together a major effort to fight for clean air, clean water, and clean energy jobs. I had first reported the first green shoots of this effort at the end of July. As the Washington Post now reports: A coalition of environmental, labor, veterans and religious groups formally launched a national lobbying campaign Tuesday aimed at mobilizing grass-roots support for passage of a Senate climate bill this fall. The group — dubbed Clean Energy Works — marks perhaps the most ambitious effort yet to enact legislation that would cap greenhouse gas emissions linked to global warming. The coalition has enlisted organizers in 28 key states to help build support for a cap-and-trade bill, and is scheduled to launch paid television ads this week.. It also plans to bring 100 veterans to Washington this week to lobby, and has held town halls and rallies in several states. "Public support for clean energy legislation is overwhelming," said David Di Martino, the group's spokesman. "Unfortunately, an army of special interests are doing everything they can to block comprehensive energy reform. This campaign will mobilize the voices of those millions of Americans who want to put us back in control of our economy, our security, and the future of our planet."
Many in the status quo media remain eager to spin even positive stories negatively. Here is the Politico:
Unions, environmentalists, hunters, farmers, veterans, and religious groups launched a major new campaign on Tuesday to push for congressional action on global warming this year. The powerful coalition forms as prospects for passing a climate bill have dimmed. The contentious health care debate is expected to take center stage in the Senate through the fall. And the Obama administration has signaled that passing health care reform should take precedence over a climate and energy bill.
Again, I don't see any evidence that prospects for passing a climate bill have dimmed. Still the same tough job it always was given the massive disinformation and lobbying campaign from Big Oil and the big corporate polluters. But now the side of clean air, clean water and clean energy jobs has a major champion to compete with those who don't want clean air, clean water, and clean energy jobs. Here is the press release: The Clean Energy Works campaign launched today, signaling a major new push for a comprehensive clean energy and climate plan that delivers more clean energy jobs, less pollution, and greater national security. The new coordinated campaign builds on the effort that passed the American Clean Energy & Security Act through the House of Representatives by assembling a broad array of organizations representing more than 12 million Americans. This unprecedented grassroots coalition includes faith, labor, veterans, environmental, sportsmen, farm, business, youth, and community groups. "Millions of Americans want more clean energy jobs, less pollution, and greater national security," said David Di Martino, Clean Energy Works Communications Director. "We send a billion dollars a day overseas to pay for our oil. It's time to invest that money here – in secure, renewable energy sources that are made in America, provide jobs for Americans and work for America." The Clean Energy Works campaign has deployed grassroots organizers in 28 key states to mobilize the tens of millions of Americans calling for urgent Congressional action on a comprehensive clean energy and climate plan.. The campaign's many activities at the state and national level include paid television, radio, print, and online advertising; contacting concerned citizens; grassroots organizing online and on the ground; an aggressive earned media campaign; public events; and bringing concerned citizens to Washington to speak to legislators. "Public support for clean energy legislation is overwhelming," said Di Martino. "Unfortunately, an army of special interests and their Washington lobbyists are doing everything they can block comprehensive energy reform. This campaign will mobilize the voices of those millions of Americans who want to put us back in control of our economy, our security, and the future of our planet." The organizations coming together to coordinate under the common campaign have committed to getting comprehensive clean energy legislation passed this Congress and will work with Clean Energy Works to galvanize public and political support for action in Congress. Alliance for Climate Protection * American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) * American Federation of Teachers, American Hunters and Shooters * American Values Network * Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) * Audubon * Blue Green Alliance * Business Forward * Campus Progress * Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good * Catholics United * Center for American Progress Action Fund * CERES * Chesapeake Climate Action Network * Clean Economy Network * Communications Workers of America * Defenders of Wildlife * Earth Ministry * Earthjustice * Economics for Equity and the Environment * Environment America * Environmental Defense Fund * Faithful America * Federation of Southern Cooperatives/Land Assistance Fund * Green Faith * Green for All * Laborers' International Union of North America (LiUNA) * League of Conservation Voters * League of Rural Voters * Live Earth * Marianist Environmental Education Center * My Rural America * NAACP * National Security Network * National Wildlife Federation * Natural Resources Defense Council * Ohio Interfaith Power and Light * Progressive Future * Restoring Eden * Service Employees International Union * Sierra Club * Sierra Student Coalition * Southern Energy Network * SustainUS * The Regeneration Project * The Wilderness Society * Truman National Security Project * Union of Concerned Scientists * United Steel Workers of America * Utility Workers Union of America * Veterans and Military Families for Progress * Veterans Green Jobs * VETPAC * Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy * Virginia Interfaith Power and Light * Virginia Organizing Project * VoteVets * Working America
Yes, CEW includes CAPAF, which supports my work. So I do have first hand knowledge that this is already a first-rate organization that will make a key contribution to the effort to pass the clean energy jobs bill that will clean the air, protect clean water, and preserve a livable climate while starting to take back control of this country from the greedy corporate polluters. |
| Sure Obama ended the Bush depression, cut taxes for 98% of working families, and jumpstarted the shift to a clean energy economy with a $100 billion in stimulus funds — but what has the green FDR done lately? Posted: 09 Sep 2009 03:42 PM PDT The Washington Post has yet another dubious spin on Obama today, "Environmental Groups Wait to See Definitive Action From Obama": The abrupt resignation Saturday of White House "green jobs" adviser Van Jones has focused new attention on one of the Obama administration's top priorities: the environment. While Jones was criticized as a left-wing zealot, the Obama team's record so far on the environment has been far from radical. The White House's main effort has been to undo several Bush-era policies on climate control, air pollution and the regulation of roadless forests. Those actions, combined with court decisions that have struck down other rules, have given President Obama a relatively blank canvas on which to redraw U.S. environmental policy. But the administration has been cautious, leaving key issues in limbo and questions unanswered about the way it would balance environmentalism and the economy.
Uhh, no, no, and no. Van Jones was the green jobs advisor. He was an ardent advocate for reducing pollution and poverty together with clean energy. So a media story that starts with his resignation can't utterly ignore the staggering achievements in both clean energy and greenhouse gas emissions that Obama has already attained — gains that exceed his four predecessors combined. Well I should said a story "shouldn't utterly ignore" since this story does. Obama's record so far on clean energy and the most important environmental issue — global warming — may not be politically radical, but it is unparalleled in U.S. history. Let's remember, for instance, that Obama will raise new car fuel efficiency standard to 39 mpg by 2016 — The biggest step the U.S. government has ever taken to cut CO2. And the Obama EPA declared carbon pollution a serious danger to Americans' health and welfare requiring regulation. The final EPA announcement should come this month, leading to the first ever national global warming regulations (at least for new power plants) — no matter what Congress does. Of course Obama helped get through the House of Representatives its first ever climate bill, which is also the first clean air bill in two decades — see The U.S. House of Representatives approves landmark (bipartisan!) climate bill, 219 – 212. Waxman-Markey would complete America's transition to a clean energy economy, which started with the stimulus bill. And then we have that amazing stimulus. Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight.com, in his post "Obama Has Cut Taxes for 98.6 Percent of Working* Households**" asserts, "One thing I don't quite get has been the White House's reluctance to highlight the non-infrastructure parts of the stimulus package." In fact, the White House hasn't done a very good job of touting the $100 billion in clean energy benefits of the infrastructure or most of its other energy and environmental achievements. Since the media, among others, seems to have forgotten, let me excerpt from my April 26 post, "The Green FDR: Obama's first 100 days make — and may remake — history": Obama has clearly demonstrated he has a serious chance to be the first President since FDR to remake the country through his positive vision. Indeed, if Obama is a two-term president, if he achieves even half of what he has set out to, he will likely be remembered as "the green FDR." As an interesting side note, President Reagan, who is held in some esteem with historians these days, will almost certainly be relegated to a second-tier, if not third-tier, president by the painful dual realities of global warming and peak oil. After all, it was Ronald Reagan who put conservatives strongly and permanently on the pro-pollution, anti-efficiency, anti-clean-energy side, where they remain today (see "Who got us in this energy mess? Start with Ronald Reagan" and "Why is our energy policy so lame? Ask the three GOP stooges" and "Hill conservatives reject all 3 climate strategies and embrace Rush Limbaugh"). It is Reagan, more than anyone else, who put the GOP on the self-destructively wrong side of scientific reality (though Newt Gingrich is a close second). Here is a partial list of what Obama has achieved in his first 100 days, laying the groundwork for him becoming the Green FDR: - Obama began the process of blocking the vast majority of new coal plants. The EPA has stopped one new coal plant in South Dakota (Obama EPA blocks South Dakota Coal Power Plant), reversed the Bush EPA's effort to ignore the Supreme Court decision that determined carbon dioxide was a pollutant (and hence that CO2 emissions from new coal-fired power plants needed regulating), and initiated the process of regulating greenhouse gases for the first time in U.S. history.
- He began the process of dramatically increasing the efficiency of our vehicles, by ordering EPA to quickly give California and a dozen other states the right to put in place tough emissions requirements for tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases — and by ordering the Department of Transportation to quickly issue and phase-in toughrt fuel economy standards to comply with the 2007 Energy Bill, the first overhaul of the nation's fuel efficiency standards in over three decades (see here).
- He appointed a first-rate Cabinet and then unleashed them to start inconvenient-truth telling to the public after 8 years of Administration denial and muzzling of U.S. scientists (see Steven Chu: "Wake up," America, "we're looking at a scenario where there's no more agriculture in California," and "This is a real economic disaster in the making for our children, for your children").
- In every single major speech, he has focused on the urgent need for the clean energy transition, for a price for carbon (cap-and-trade and "closing the carbon loophole"), and the unsustainability of our current economic system (see Obama gets the Ponzi scheme: "The choice we face is not between saving our environment and saving our economy. The choice we face is between prosperity and decline.")
- He signed into law the tax credits needed to achieve his ambitious goal of 1 million plug-in hybrids by 2015 — the key alternative fuel vehicle strategy needed to avert the worst consequences of three decades of successful conservative efforts to stop this country from dealing with the energy/economic security threat of rising dependence on imported oil and the inevitably grim impacts of peak oil (see "Why electricity is the only alternative fuel that can lead to energy independence"). He also enacted into law $2 billion in grants and loans for R&D into advanced vehicle batteries, a tenfold increase over current funding. Plug-ins and electric cars, of course, are a core climate solution, since electric drives are more efficient, easily powered by carbon-free energy and indeed far cheaper to operate per mile than gasoline, even when running on renewable power. In the longer term, plug ins and electric cars can also help enable the full renewable revolution.
- He signed into law a massive investment in mass transit and train travel — and laid out an aggressive vision for a high-speed rail network. The 70% boost in funding is a crucial effort needed to prepare this country for a time when air travel simply becomes too expensive for most people (and then a slightly later time when air travel is seen as simply too destructive of a livable climate) — a time not very far away — one that the vast majority of readers of this blog will live to see.
- He signed into law the tax credits needed meet his ambitious goal of doubling renewables in his first term (see "Another big win for renewables in the stimulus bill").
- He signed into law the funding needed to jumpstart a 21st smart grid that is critical to enable the renewable energy, energy efficiency, and plug-in hybrid revolution. He also made what may be his most important appointment, Jon Wellinghoff for Energy Commission Chief, who understands the future is not filled with new coal and nuclear plants (see "We may not need any, ever"), and who has already begun jumpstarting the new, green grid ("Huge 'Green Power Express' wind grid gains federal rate incentives").
- He signed into law the single biggest investment in the deployment of energy-efficient technology in U.S. history, along with strong incentives for state governments to fix their inefficiency-promoting utility regulations.
- For the first time in three decades, he more than doubled the annual budget for advanced energy efficiency, renewable energy, and low carbon technology after Reagan slashed federal efficiency and renewables investments 80% to 90%, which launched decades of vehement ideological opposition to clean tech by even so-called moderate and maverick conservatives (see "Is a possible 60th Senate seat worth a not-very-green GOP Commerce Secretary?" and "The greenwasher from Arizona has a record as dirty as the denier from Oklahoma").
- He put forward, the first sustainable budget in U.S. history, one that invests in clean energy, included cap-and-trade revenue, and seeks repeal of fossil industry subsidies. Yes, he made a serious tactical mistake by tentatively pursuing the possibility of trying to pass a climate bill through reconciliation, which allowed conservatives to score some meaningless tactical political victories and thereby confuse the media into thinking Obama was himself not serious about this issue (see George Stephanopoulos, Nate Silver, and Marc Ambinder all seem confused about global warming and budget politics and Obama says his energy plan and cap-and-trade "will be authorized" even if it's not in the budget "and I will sign it" — Washington Post confused. In fact his budget and every thing he has done as president shows the reverse is true, that he understands the fate of his presidency and the health and well-being of the American public rests on his success in passing serious energy and climate legislation.
Years from now, long after the economy has recovered, this may well be remembered as the time that progressives, led by Obama, began the climate-saving transition to a sustainable low-carbon economy built around green jobs. Of course, it's entirely possible that this history-making first 100 days won't remake history. It's more than possible that we won't stop catastrophic warming. But if we don't stop the 100s of years of misery, of Hell and High Water," that will almost certainly be because the conservative movement threw their entire weight behind humanity's self-destruction (see "Anti-science conservatives must be stopped") — because conservative in both chambers refuse to conserve anything, including a livable climate, and willingly sacrificed the health and well-being of the next 50 generations of Americans for their ideology. But even if we fail to stop the catastrophe, there is no escape from Americans, indeed, all humans, ultimately having a low-carbon, low-oil, low-water low-natural-capital lifestyle. And thus the vast majority of Obama's initiatives will be recognized by future generations and future historians as the point at which the U.S. government embraced the inevitable and started down the sustainable path that presidents either chose to embrace voluntarily in time to avoid the worst impacts or were forced to embraced by the collapse of the global Ponzi scheme. Obama is the first president in history to articulate both the why and how of the sustainable vision — and to actively, indeed aggressively, pursue its enactment. And that is why he is likely to be remembered as the green FDR. The Post claims the administration has left "questions unanswered about the way it would balance environmentalism and the economy." I don't think so. Obama has reiterated his view at every chance — and followed through with serious policies: "The choice we face is not between saving our environment and saving our economy. The choice we face is between prosperity and decline… We can allow climate change to wreak unnatural havoc across the landscape, or we can create jobs working to prevent its worst effects…. The nation that leads the world in creating new energy sources will be the nation that leads the 21st-century global economy."
Obviously, if Obama fails to get a serious climate and clean energy bill through the Senate and onto his desk in 2010 — and thus fails to get a global climate deal — then he won't be remembered as the green FDR. So that must remain a top priority, and I expect it will. But it is absurd to say today that Obama has been anything less than a top tier president on both clean energy and the most important environmental issue we face. |
| Huge wind and ocean energy project planned for offshore North Carolina Posted: 09 Sep 2009 02:56 PM PDT 
While some are still building new climate-destroying coal plants in North Carolina, the Outer Banks Ocean Energy Corp. sees clean energy potential in the windy "First in flight" state.. The Energy Daily (subs. req'd) reports: Feeling the wind at its back following its recent formal chartering as a new company, the Outer Banks Ocean Energy Corp. announced plans Tuesday to develop a giant wind- and ocean-powered renewable energy project off North Carolina's coast.. The Outer Banks Ocean Energy Corp. (OBOE) said it is in the early stages of developing the North Carolina Hybrid Energy Preserve, a predominantly wind-based project planned to generate between 200 and 600 megawatts of renewable energy in federal waters up to 25 miles offshore of the Tar Heel State.
But OBOE sees more opportunity for clean energy that never runs out than just offshore wind: 
OBOE says it plans to eventually supplement the project's wind turbines with underwater turbines and other technology to alternately harness steady Gulf Stream wave and current power. In the meantime, the newly incorporated company says it is preparing to apply by early 2010 with the Energy Department's Minerals Management Service to initially site the project as an offshore wind farm to be built on four federal lease blocks covering about 24,000 acres.
 North Carolina ranks third among states (after Louisiana and Florida) that have the most area in jeopardy from a 5 foot sea level rise — and would lose the equivalent of a Delaware, including, of course, Kitty Hawk where "the Wright brothers made the first controlled powered airplane flights December 17, 1903."
So perhaps wind and wave and current power might be better for the state. |
| EPA blocks permit for giant mountaintop removal mine Posted: 09 Sep 2009 02:31 PM PDT  In a letter issued last week, the Environmental Protection Agency "moved toward revoking the largest mountaintop-removal permit in West Virginia history." Citing "clear evidence" of likely damage, the EPA has asked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to "suspend, revoke or modify" the permit it granted in 2007 to Arch Coal to dig a 2,278-acre coal stripmine and fill six valleys and 43,000 linear feet of streams with the toxic debris:
The EPA asked the Army Corps to "suspend, revoke or modify the permit," for the Spruce No. 1 Surface Mine in Logan County, according to the letter. "Recent data and analyses have revealed that downstream water quality impacts have not been adequately addressed."
Obama's EPA has granted most of the mountaintop removal permits it has reviewed. "It's not the death of mountaintop coal mining," said Mary Anne Hitt, deputy director of the Sierra Club's campaign to limit the use of coal, told Bloomberg News. "But it's clear that it's not just going to be blanket approval of anything the Corps wants to do, which was essentially the case under the Bush administration." This is a Wonk Room repost. |
| NSIDC: Arctic sea ice extent falls below 2005 minimum, now third lowest on record Posted: 09 Sep 2009 01:11 PM PDT 
The National Snow and Ice Data Center reports: Atmospheric circulation patterns in August helped spread out sea ice, slowing ice loss in most regions of the Arctic. NSIDC scientists expect to see the minimum ice extent for the year in the next few weeks. While this year's minimum ice extent will probably not reach the record low of 2007, it remains well below normal: average ice extent for August 2009 was the third-lowest in the satellite record. Ice extent has now fallen below the 2005 minimum, previously the third-lowest extent in the satellite record.
Not a big surprise — see "NSIDC: Record low Arctic ice extent unlikely in 2009." Since the 2009 arctic extent AREA is no longer that close to 2008 levels, which set the record for minimum ice VOLUME, it seem unlikely 2009 will set a volume record (see "Will we see record low Arctic ice VOLUME this year?"). The long-term trend remains the same (see "Human-caused Arctic warming overtakes 2,000 years of natural cooling, 'seminal' study finds") and hence the medium-term also remains the same (see North Pole poised to be largely ice-free by 2020: "It's like the Arctic is covered with an egg shell and the egg shell is now just cracking completely"). NSIDC has some good analysis of the summer 2009 melt seasons to put this in some context:
Conditions in context In the beginning of August, the rate of ice loss was fairly slow. In the middle of the month, the loss rate sped up, and then slowed again. On average, the decline rate was close to the 1978 to 2000 average for past Augusts. Ice extent declined by 55,000 square kilometers (21,000 square miles) per day during August, compared to 66,000 square kilometers (25,000 square miles) per day in August 2007 and 79,000 square kilometers (31,000 square miles) per day in August 2008. But because of the higher-than-average rate of ice loss in July, average ice extent for August 2009 was still far below the 1978 to 2000 average extent for the month. On September 2, Arctic sea ice extent dropped below the minimum extent for 2005. This year is now the third-lowest ice extent in the satellite record, with one to two weeks left in the melt season. The minimum ice extent for the year will probably occur in the next two weeks. NSIDC scientists are closely monitoring conditions and will report the minimum when it occurs.
August 2009 compared to past years Arctic sea ice extent for August 2009 was the third lowest August since 1978, continuing the downward trend observed over the last three decades. Only 2007 and 2008 had lower ice extent during August. The long-term trend indicates a decline of 8.7% per decade in August ice extent since 1979…. Winds spread ice, enhance melt The pattern of high pressure over the Beaufort Sea that had characterized much of the summer broke down in early August. The August atmospheric pattern was dominated by low pressure over the Beaufort and Chukchi seas, and high pressure over Greenland and the Atlantic side of the Arctic. This pattern led to winds blowing from the south and southwest into the Beaufort Sea, contributing to melt and poleward ice motion in this area. By contrast, winds from the north favored a drift of ice towards the Siberian coast. Studies by Mark Serreze, Masayo Ogi, and other researchers have shown that low-pressure patterns promote spreading of the ice pack, a process known as divergence. While ice divergence increases extent, it can also accelerate melt because there are more dark, open-water areas between the floes to absorb the sun's energy, promoting melt on all sides of the floes.
|
| Nicholas Stern, world's top climate economist, endorses 350 ppm as "a very sensible long-term target." Posted: 09 Sep 2009 11:32 AM PDT The great environmental writer and founder of 350.org, Bill McKibben, is the guest blogger.  Nicholas Stern is the most important climate economist in the world. After a stint as chief economist at the World Bank, he was asked by the government in his native Britain to conduct the most thorough review of the economics of global warming yet undertaken. Released in October of 2006, the Stern Review drew praise from many of his brethren in the field–and it also drew gasps of shock and horror from anyone who bothered to read it. It laid out, quite clearly, the cost of doing too little or moving too late on climate change: economic damage that would be greater than WWI, WWII, and the Great Depression combined. In April, he published a powerful popular account of his work, Blueprint for a Safer Planet, and he's been one of the leading forces preparing for the Copenhagen meeting. So that's the background. Today in Berlin, a reporter from one of the city's papers, Daniel Boese, asked him about the 350 target–which goes well beyond the numbers he was using in his book even in April.It's a sign of how quickly the tide is shifting, and also of Stern's intellectual integrity, that he said: "I think it's a very sensible long-term target." He went on to explain: "People have to be aware that is a truly long-term target. We have already passed 350ppm, we are at 390 ppm of Co2 and at 435 ppm of Co2-equivalents right now. It is most important to stop the increase of flows of emissions short term and then start the decline of flows of annual emissions and get them down to levels which will move concentrations of CO2 back down towards 350ppm." Stern is right, of course–even if we do everything right at Copenhagen, we won't be back at 350 soon. But unless we do everything right we'll be back at 350 never ever. His call will help stiffen the push for real measures at the conference. And in case you're keeping score, here's where we are at the moment. The world's foremost climatologist, James Hansen, first calculated this number with his NASA team. The world's foremost climate politician, Al Gore, endorsed it nine months ago. The UN's chief climate scientist, and with Gore the only other man to win a Nobel for work on climate, India's Rajendra Pachauri, endorsed it late last month. And today the world's foremost climate economist. But here's the thing: none of this would have happened if you hadn't endorsed it–if you hadn't worked to build the largest movement about climate change ever. Onward! Related Posts: JR: For the science behind 350, see "Stabilize at 350 ppm or risk ice-free planet, warn NASA, Yale, Sheffield, Versailles, Boston et al." Since the science is preliminary and it is not not yet politically possible to get to 450 ppm, let alone 350, my basic view, as expressed in that post, is Let's start working now toward stabilizing below 450 ppm, while climate scientists figure out if in fact we need to ultimately get below 350. Either way, this is what needs to be done technology-wise: "How the world can (and will) stabilize at 350 to 450 ppm: The full global warming solution (updated)." The difference between the two targets is that for 450 ppm, you need to do the 12-14 wedges in four decades. For 350 ppm, you (roughly) need 8 wedges in about two decades plus another 10 wedges over the next three decades (and then have the world go carbon negative as soon as possible after that), which requires a global WWII-style and WWII-scale strategy (see "An open letter to James Hansen on the real truth about stabilizing at 350 ppm"). |
| ACCCE takes on water: Alstom quits scandal-ridden coal industry front group, joining Duke and Alcoa — time for GE and Caterpillar to jump ship, too Posted: 09 Sep 2009 10:47 AM PDT When we last left the flagship of the coal industry efforts to stop the clean air, clean water, clean energy jobs bill, it was fast taking on water (see "Duke Energy quits coal front group over climate bill"). Sure some otherwise sane passengers had joined the crew's efforts to patch up the holes (see "GE fights for change from the inside … of a scandal-ridden coal industry front group!") — for now (see below). But the smart ones, like Alcoa, had quietly gotten on one of the few remaining lifeboats. Today Greenwire (subs. req'd) reports: Another member of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity is leaving the coal-and-utility trade group, citing concerns about whether the alliance wants to obstruct legislation to cap greenhouse gas emissions. Alstom Power, a French company that makes parts for power plants and is working on carbon sequestration, said it is leaving ACCCE immediately. "We have resigned from ACCCE because of questions that have been raised about ACCCE's support for climate legislation," said Tim Brown, an Alstom spokesman. The French company, which is partnering with U.S. utilities on power-plant projects, said that it wants to "remove any doubt about our full support" for a climate bill.
The move comes less than a week after Duke Energy Corp. said it was withdrawing from ACCCE because of powerful members of the group that are unwilling to support climate legislation. Alstom's decision also shrinks ACCCE's membership as the Senate returns and ACCCE lobbies the Senate on its version of climate legislation….
Both Alstom and Duke belong to the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, an alliance of businesses, environmental groups and other organizations lobbying Congress to mandate cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. U.S. CAP in its blueprint for action urges Congress to "quickly" enact legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. There are now just two companies that belong to both ACCCE and U.S. CAP: Caterpillar and General Electric Co.
C'mon Caterpillar and GE — do you really want to go down with the ship? Like the Titanic, the good bad ship ACCCE is coal-powered and steaming too fast in the wrong direction:
The whole effort should be sunk to Davey Jones Locker. Greenwire has more on Alstom, Caterpillar, and GE: Alstom had been considering leaving ACCCE "for a while," Brown said, but decided now based on "the questions about ACCCE's support that have been raised over the last several weeks." The decision by Duke, Brown said, "is part of the reason why we looked at it, why we looked at the pros and cons" of staying in ACCCE. Alstom now will put more energy into its U.S. CAP involvement, Brown said. "We can focus our resources on supporting groups that are 100 percent aligned with our policy objectives, such as U.S. CAP," Brown said. Caterpillar did not respond to a request for comment. GE, which is involved in energy production, transmission and distribution, said there are differences between its goals on climate legislation and those of ACCCE. But for now, the company is keeping its membership in the trade group. However, the company is "looking at our membership in ACCCE on a regular basis," GE spokesman Peter O'Toole said. "If it's not in the best interest of shareholders for us to be a member, then we won't be a member. "We're having discussions within GE and ACCCE right now," O'Toole said. O'Toole would not say specifically how GE's goals on climate policy differ from those of ACCCE but said that "ACCCE doesn't reflect our view on climate legislation." "We want something done now," O'Toole said. "Maybe it's an issue of urgency." ACCCE does "want something to happen," O'Toole added. "It's a very difficult operation with very different constituencies that represent mammoth parts of the economy. Getting it right for all those different sectors is very difficult."
Yes, ACCCE does "want something to happen" — it's called catastrophic global warming, dirty air, polluted water, ruined climate, and loss of clean energy jobs to China. Sierra Club spokesman Josh Dorner said the rejection of ACCCE by Alstom shows that "their extreme policies are making them too radioactive for these corporations. They're using questionable tactics and are outside the mainstream of the debate."
It is also "more evidence," Dorner said, that ACCCE does not want a climate bill. "The right bill for ACCCE is no bill at all. It's hard to envision a bill that they'd support."
|
| Energy and Global Warming News for September 9th: Salazar says U.S. climate bill remains high on agenda; Boxer vows to introduce bill by month's end; First Solar to build 2000 Megawatt plant in China Posted: 09 Sep 2009 10:11 AM PDT Salazar says U.S. climate bill remains high on agenda Despite Washington's nearly single-minded focus on healthcare reform, the Obama administration still expects the U.S. Senate to pass climate change legislation, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said on Tuesday. "Right now we are focused on this crusade for healthcare reform for the country and that's where our time and energy will go for the days ahead," Salazar said during an interview at the Reuters Global Climate and Alternative Energy Summit. Even so, he added, "We want both (healthcare and climate bills). The president has been very clear that these are two big issues for the United States and for our time"…. If Congress fails to produce a climate bill for President Barack Obama to sign into law, Salazar noted, the White House could direct executive-branch offices to go ahead with new regulations controlling carbon pollution. The Environmental Protection Agency already has started that process. But Salazar also pointed out: "It (climate change) will not be addressed in a complete and long-term manner unless there is congressional action." While public support for healthcare reform has slipped in recent weeks, polls indicate that the public still backs Obama's efforts to expand solar, wind and other alternative energies and to wean the United States off its reliance on foreign oil…. Without tough new steps, environmentalists fear worsening droughts and floods, the spread of disease and melting ice caps that would contribute to dangerously rising sea levels.
For the media, it's always "environmentalists fear worsening droughts." How about "Without tough new steps, the top scientists of the world and every major government project worsening droughts and floods, the spread of disease and melting ice caps that would contribute to dangerously rising sea levels"? But even Reuters prefers the political drama to straight reporting. Boxer Vows to Introduce Energy Bill by Month's End
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who heads the Environment and Public Works Committee, insisted Tuesday that her panel will introduce sweeping energy reform legislation by the end of the month.
"The bill will be introduced this month, and we're going to be marking it up shortly thereafter," Boxer said. The Californian, who has been working alongside Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.) on the bill, tossed aside suggestions that the Senate's overwhelming focus on health care reform will curtail its ability to also tackle energy policy this year. Boxer and Kerry were originally slated to introduce a bill this week, but the Aug. 25 death of Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), coupled with Kerry's hip surgery in August, contributed to the delay. Kerry is also a member of the Finance Committee, which is expected to take up a massive health care bill in the coming weeks. Six Senate committees have jurisdiction over climate change: Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry; Commerce, Science and Transportation; Energy and Natural Resources; Environment and Public Works; Finance; and Foreign Affairs. Boxer maintained Tuesday that jurisdictional issues over which committee is responsible for certain portions of the energy bill will not be an issue. "I think all the committees will do their work. We'll do our bill, the others will do their bill and the [Majority] Leader will marry it," she said.
First Solar To Build 2-Gigawatt Solar Power Plant in China Solar-panel maker First Solar is cracking open the Chinese market, which could become one of the world's most promising for solar power. Arizona-based First Solar said today it signed a deal with Chinese officials to build a 2,000 megawatt solar-power plant in Inner Mongolia over the next decade at an estimated cost of $5 billion to $6 billion. UPDATE: That figure is apparently what it would cost to build a similar plant in the U.S. today; building a large plant in China in the future would likely cost less, due to labor costs especially, say First Solar spokesmen. For First Solar, which already has contracts to build smaller, though still utility-size, solar-power plants in the U.S., the Chinese deal could be a game-changer. "If you have two gigawatts, it could change the image of solar power from niche to nuclear-plant-size installations," said First Solar chief executive Mike Ahearn in an interview.
State predicts bright future for jobs in solar energy The number of jobs in the state's solar energy industry nearly doubled from 2007 to 2008 – and the numbers are on pace to grow sharply again this year, according to Massachusetts officials. Ian A. Bowles, secretary of the state's Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, said he would disclose the numbers today at the trade show Cleantech Forum XXIII. The two-day show opened today at the Boston Convention & Exhibition Center. A survey of nearly 100 solar energy employers in Massachusetts showed the number of jobs in the sector grew from 1,086 in 2007 to 2,075 in 2008, Bowles said. The growth is "indicative of the health and welfare'' of the local solar energy industry, he added.
Green Force: U.S. Military's Interest in Algae Fuel Grows Here's a future checklist for a military deployment: rations, boots, camouflage, bullets … algae? Solazyme Inc. said today it had a contract from the Defense Department for 20,000 gallons of algae-derived diesel fuel for testing. What is the Pentagon doing? Dreaming some more about cutting its own supply lines, perhaps. Imagine a mobile army that can take an algae farm that can produce diesel fuel along with it, reducing the need for fuel convoys.
Governor Rendell Announces Federal Funding for Diverse, Renewable Energy Technologies Governor Edward G. Rendell today announced the first in a series of competitive grant programs to help fund large-scale renewable energy projects. Green Energy Works! is now accepting applications for $11 million in federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding for combined heat and power projects, which generate power and thermal energy from a single source. All projects must create jobs, be able to start work within six months, and be completed within 24 months and before April 30, 2012.
EU cuts funding for post-Kyoto climate deal The European Union has scaled back plans to give billions of euros to poor countries to persuade them to help battle climate change, a draft document shows. Funding from rich nations to the developing world has emerged as the main stumbling block to progress in climate negotiations ahead of international talks in Copenhagen in December. Ethiopia warned last week that Africa would veto any deal at Copenhagen that was not generous enough.
Climate cash could create "Copenhagen stimulus" Climate talks could draw on global recovery spending to smooth a deal in Copenhagen in December to replace the Kyoto Protocol, said Nick Robins, head of HSBC's climate change research center.HSBC analysts estimate the green portion of a $3.1 trillion fiscal stimulus at about $512 billion. Those funds to boost renewable energy, efficiency, public transport and water treatment so far exclusively focus on domestic economies and jobs, but could be turned to the aid of faltering U.N. talks meant to agree a new climate treaty. "If we're anywhere near the $500 billion we've identified, then one should hope there is some scope for governments to think about a contribution that would be the Copenhagen stimulus," Robins said at the Reuters Global Climate and Alternative Energy Summit. "The missing element in the stimulus debate is that all the stimulus angles, unsurprisingly, have been very domestically focused, stimulating our economy, our sectors."
Denmark to help Maldives attend climate talks: minister Denmark on Tuesday said it was ready to help the Maldives, whose fight against rising sea levels has become a cause celebre for environmentalists, to attend key climate talks in Copenhagen."In the past two years we have allocated 2.5 million euros to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change so that the poorest states and islands can attend the Copenhagen summit with three delegates each," Cooperation Minister Ulla Toernaes told AFP. It is "clear that the Maldives, which is one of the worst affected nations by climate change, must take part in the Copenhagen summit as their future depends on it," Toernaes said of the December summit. The Indian Ocean atoll nation said Monday it would have to skip UN climate change talks because of lack of funding.
|
