Month: July 2014

This is an amateur video, made by my friend Aaron Wissner, sitting with a tiny camera in the Garden Theater, in Frankfort Michigan, in mid-July of last year.
I had just gotten back from Greenland, and was giving my first public talk with new footage and my reactions to the experience.
Interesting thing is, despite the obviously-not-a-TEDTalk production values, and with no massive promotion, the piece has gone viral to the tune of 30,000+ views and 900 comments.  Some commenters note that my discussion of Jet-stream weirdness was pretty much a primer for the polar vortex- ridiculously resilient ridge of the past winter.

Not much new for regular readers of the blog, unless you’re curious about the other aspect of my work, public outreach.  I do this a lot.

A lot.

Look for a possible very promising development for DarkSnow 2014, soon.

Fox News:

NASA has launched its first spacecraft devoted to monitoring atmospheric carbon dioxide, the heat-trapping gas thought to be responsible for much of Earth’s recent warming trend.

The space agency’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 satellite (OCO-2) blasted off today (July 2) from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California at 5:56 a.m. EDT (2:56 a.m. local time), carried aloft by a United Launch Alliance Delta 2 rocket. The liftoff was originally scheduled for Tuesday (July 1), but a problem with the launch pad’s water system caused a one-day delay.

The satellite will measure carbon dioxide levels in Earth’s atmosphere 24 times every second, revealing in great detail where the gas is being produced and where it is being pulled out of the air — CO2 sources and sinks, in scientists’ parlance. [NASA’s OCO-2 Mission in Pictures (Gallery)]

“With the launch of this spacecraft, decision-makers and scientists will get a much better idea of the role of carbon dioxide in climate change, as OCO-2 measures this greenhouse gas globally and provides incredibly new insights into where and how carbon dioxide is moving into, and then out of, the atmosphere,” Betsy Edwards, OCO-2 program executive at NASA headquarters in Washington, D.C., told reporters during a pre-launch press briefing Sunday (June 30).

Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have risen from about 280 parts per million (ppm) before the Industrial Revolution to 400 ppm today, the highest concentration in at least 800,000 years.

Humanity is primarily responsible for this increase, researchers say. The species pumps 40 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, chiefly by burning fossil fuels such as coal and gasoline; the planet’s natural sinks remove just 20 billion tons annually, on average.

I’ll be doing another Real News interview later today. This is one of the news items I may touch on.
Beloved-by-deniers notions about German Renewables get another shot below the waterline.

Craig Morris in RenewablesInternational:

German utilities organization BDEW has published its data for Q1 2014, showing that power from hard coal was down by 17.4 percent, while power from lignite was down by 4.8 percent. The biggest loser, however, continues to be natural gas, which was down by 19.7 percent.

The figures confirm Fraunhofer ISE’s data provided based on preliminary figures last month – and forecast in January. In addition to the downturn in power from fossil fuels, nuclear power was down by 4.6 percent – almost exactly the same level as lignite, a clear indication that those two power sources are roughly equally inflexible.

Power from biomass grew by 5.4 percent. Solar power production was up by 82.5 percent, compared to 20.6 percent increase in onshore wind. Power from offshore turbines group from a negligible level by 33.5 percent.

Overall, the share of renewables was up as a share of total power consumption from 23.4 percent last year to 24.7 percent in Q1. As a share of domestic demand (excluding exports), the share of renewables rose from 25 percent to 27 percent.

 

Tropical Storm Arthur now a Hurricane. Here’s what we know.

NPR:

Steve Arthur practically lives out of his truck these days.

He runs one of Fresno’s busiest well-drilling companies, and hustles up and down the highway to check on drilling rigs that run 24 hours a day.

“It’s officially getting crazy,” Arthur says. “We go and we go but it just seems like we can’t go fast enough.”

Drilling in California isn’t just for oil and gas — it’s for water. And during this severe drought, farmers and ranchers are relying heavily on pumping groundwater. Counties in the farm-rich Central Valley are issuing record numbers of permits for new wells. But the drilling frenzy could threaten the state’s shrinking underground aquifers.

Arthur says he’s lucky if he gets three hours of sleep a night.
–

State officials estimate water tables in some parts of the Central Valley have dropped 100 feet below historical lows. Groundwater pumping could also put more stress on the San Andreas Fault, which has moving plates that can cause earthquakes.

And those aren’t the only consequences.

“We’re on a one-way trajectory towards depletion, towards running out of groundwater,” says Jay Famiglietti, a University of California hydrologist and a leading expert on groundwater. He points out California’s the only Western state that doesn’t really monitor or regulate how much groundwater is pumped.

“So it’s not unlike having several straws in a glass, and everyone drinking at the same time, and no one really watching the level,” Famiglietti says.

That could change. A bill making its way through the California legislature could begin requiring local agencies to track, and in some cases, even restrict groundwater pumping. Some farmers oppose it, saying it’s a violation of their private property rights.

CleanTechnica:

One of wind energy’s most overlooked benefits is that it requires virtually no water to produce electricity, while almost all other electricity sources evaporate tremendous amounts of water. In 2008, the nation’s thermal power plants withdrew 22 to 62 trillion gallons of freshwater from rivers, lakes, streams, and aquifers, and consumed 1 to 2 trillion gallons. By displacing generation from these conventional power plants, U.S. wind energy currently saves around 35 billion gallons of water per year, the equivalent of 120 gallons per person or 285 billion bottles of water.

Wind energy’s water-saving benefits have received increased attention in recent weeks, with record wind and solar output helping to keep the lights on amidst the severe drought afflicting California and a new Department of Energy report focused on the energy-water nexus:

California is currently facing a record drought, and unfortunately climatologists view this as a harbinger of coming climate change. As of June 1, California’s precipitation stood at only 61 percent of average, the remaining snowpack was around 2 percent of average, and the state’s main reservoirs held only 50-70 percent of their average water storage.

 

Continue reading “In Grim California Drought, Renewables a Bright Spot”

Longer article worth reading in entirety.

Amory Lovins in Forbes:

Before the March 2011 Fukushima disaster, both Germany and Japan were nearly 30% nuclear-pow­ered. In the next four months, Germany restored, and sped up by a year, the nuclear phaseout schedule originally agreed with industry in 2001–02. With the concurrence of all political parties, 41% of Germany’s nuclear power capacity—eight units of 17, including five similar to those at Fukushima and seven from the 1970s—got promptly shut down, with the rest to follow during 2015–22.

In 2010, those eight units produced 22.8% of Germany’s electricity. Yet a comprehensive package of seven other laws passed at the same time coordinated efficiency, renewable, and other initiatives to ensure reliable and low-carbon energy supplies throughout and long after the phaseout. The German nuclear shutdown, though executed decisively, built on a longstanding deliberative policy evolution consistent with the nuclear construction halts or operating phaseouts adopted in seven other nearby countries both before and after Fukushima.

Moreover, the Energiewende term and concept began before 1980, and Germany’s formal shift to renewables—now well over 70 billion watts installed—began in 1991, 20 years before Fukushima, then was reinforced in 2000 by feed-in tariffs. Those aren’t a subsidy but a way for customers to buy, and hence developers to finance and build, the renewables society chose, with a reasonable chance for sellers to earn a fair return on their investments. FITs’ values have plummeted in step with renewable costs, so developers now commonly opt to earn higher market prices instead.

Continue reading “Germany’s Successful Move from Nuclear”

Greg Laden’s Blog:

Patrick Moore is a Hippie for Hire. He makes the claim that he co-founded Greenpeace, and charges a fee to show up at conferences or other venues, or sit on boards, to provide a story that anti-environmentalists, global warming deniers, and others, like to hear. The part where he takes your money to lie, as far as I can tell, is true. The part about how he co-founded Greenpeace is apparently not true.

Here’s what Greenpeace has to say about Patrick Moore:

Patrick Moore, a paid spokesman for the nuclear industry, the logging industry, and genetic engineering industry, frequently cites a long-ago affiliation with Greenpeace to gain legitimacy in the media. Media outlets often either state or imply that Mr. Moore still represents Greenpeace, or fail to mention that he is a paid lobbyist and not an independent source…

For more than 20 years, Mr. Moore has been a paid spokesman for a variety of polluting industries, including the timber, mining, chemical and the aquaculture industries. Most of these industries hired Mr. Moore only after becoming the focus of a Greenpeace campaign to improve their environmental performance. Mr. Moore has now worked for polluters for far longer than he ever worked for Greenpeace.

Most importantly, given Patrick Moore’s insistence that he is a founder of Greenpeace, is this statement by the organization:

Patrick Moore Did Not Found Greenpeace

Patrick Moore frequently portrays himself as a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace, and many news outlets have repeated this characterization. Although Mr. Moore played a significant role in Greenpeace Canada for several years, he did not found Greenpeace. Phil Cotes, Irving Stowe, and Jim Bohlen founded Greenpeace in 1970. Patrick Moore applied for a berth on the Phyllis Cormack in March, 1971 after the organization had already been in existence for a year.

Greenpeace even kept a copy of the letter Patrick Moore sent to them asking for a birth on a boat to engage in a nuclear protest, dated to long after the founding of Greenpeace. Here it is:

 

Continue reading “Who Founded Greenpeace? Not Patrick Moore.”

This month’s new Yale Climate Connections video is getting a good response, indicating a longing for more news on climate solutions.
Several years ago I produced this piece on wind energy, something I’ll be revisiting in some detail in future videos.

If you follow Anthony Leiserowitz’ work tracking public opinion on climate change, you’ll be well served.

These are the numbers that have emboldened the President to keep zinging deniers with ridicule.

Anthony Leiserowitz for the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication:

Today, we are releasing a special report on The Politics of Global Warming, based on our spring 2014 nationally representative survey. We find that registered voters are 2.5 times more likely to vote for a congressional or presidential candidate who supports action to reduce global warming. Further, registered voters are 3 times more likely to vote against a candidate who opposes action to reduce global warming.

Many Americans are also willing to act politically:

• 26% are willing to join or are currently participating in a campaign to convince elected officials to take action to reduce global warming;
• 37% are willing to sign a pledge to vote only for political candidates that share their views on global warming;
• 13% are willing to personally engage in non-violent civil disobedience against corporate or government activities that make global warming worse.

The study also finds that while Democrats are more convinced that human-caused global warming is happening and more supportive of climate and energy policies than Republicans, there are deep divisions within the Republican Party. In many respects, liberal/moderate Republicans – about a third of the Republican party – are relatively similar to moderate/conservative Democrats, while conservative Republicans often express views about global warming that are distinctly different than the rest of the American public.

For example, among registered voters:

• 88% of Democrats, 59% of Independents and 61% of liberal/moderate Republicans think global warming is happening, compared to only 28% of conservative Republicans;
• 81% of Democrats and 51% of liberal/moderate Republicans are worried about global warming, compared to only 19% of conservative Republicans;
• 82% of Democrats and 65% of liberal/moderate Republicans support strict carbon dioxide emission limits on existing coal-fired power plants to reduce global warming and improve public health, compared to only 31% of conservative Republicans.

Continue reading “Poll: Americans Will Vote for Climate Conscious Candidates”