West Virginia Blue
The Best Blogging Community in West Virginia Democratic politics, progressive policies, the good life and free living in Wild, Wonderful West Virginia.
By 2012, mountaintop removal will consume 2,200 square miles of the best land in the Eastern US, an area the size of Delaware. That's 2,200 sq miles of the East Coast rivers' headwaters, and the mine waste will send poisons through the nations water supplies from the Chesapeake Bay to the Gulf of Mexico for centuries to come. It's not sustainable - that land won't give any more energy, food, or water ever again.
Only one small quibble with what bernardpliers said. That flat land left by mountain top removal could produce energy as a small solar farm. ;-) Of course, the original taller mountain probably would have made a better wind energy site, but I digress...
Basically, a solar farm the size of Sicily would provide electricity for the entire EU. An area the size of Ireland would power the entire world.
This seems like a lot of land, but remember, we are already on our way to strip mining an area the size of Delaware and it will just keep getting larger and larger. The amount of area we are strip mining for coal continues to grow, our watersheds are being devastated and the damage is permanent. A similar fate is in store for the Rockies in pursuit of oil shale. These areas are slated for permanent destruction on the scale of a nuclear war.
It's tough to compare the projected costs of different technologies, and the hidden cost of fossil fuels is rarely included. But when you look at the area of land permanently destroyed for a jolt of fossil fuels that only supplies part of our needs, versus the area for solar energy to supply all our energy, it becomes a lot clearer. A picture is worth a thousand words, and if its CSP (concentrated solar power) versus mountaintop removal, solar is going to be the clear winner.
With technology advances in solar collectors -- nanotechnology production techniques, for example -- land requirements for solar may be greatly reduced. Unfortunately, there are no similar technology improvements on the horizon for coal mining.
(Q) How much longer can we wait to take decisive action? The most recent scientific evidence has been "surprises" all in the wrong direction. The latest news, "Carbon output rising faster than forecast, says study".
Corinne Le Quere, a climate expert at the University of East Anglia and British Antarctic Survey, who helped conduct the study, said: "It's bad news because the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide has accelerated since 2000 in a way we did not expect. My biggest worry is people are discouraged by this and do nothing. I hope political leaders will act on this, because we need to do something fast."
The study worsens even the gloomy predictions of this year's report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The IPCC, which shared the Nobel peace prize this month with Al Gore, said there were only eight years left to prevent the worst effects of global warming, by acting to curb emissions.
(A) Less than 8 years left to prevent the worst effects. Meanwhile, we're doing nothing...
In other news about this planet we call home:
* What's the connection between the severity of the horrible fires in California and global warming? Surprisingly direct.
On October 21, three weeks after the official beginning of Fall 2007, today's weather forecast is calling for high temperature above 80. Ten days until Halloween, there's no frost on them pumpkins, kids.
It's not just your imagination. The climate in West Virginia really has changed. It really has changed in just the last 20 years!
As we reported back in January, at the very end of last year the National Arbor Day Foundation took into their own hands what the Bush Administration has been postponing for years--updating the National Hardiness Zone maps.
Watch an animation from this decidedly non-political organization. As they noted in their press release:
The new [2006 arborday.org Hardiness Zone Map] reflects that many areas have become warmer since 1990 when the last USDA hardiness zone map was published. Significant portions of many states have shifted at least one full hardiness zone. Much of Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, for example, have shifted from Zone 5 to a warmer Zone 6. Some areas around the country have even warmed two full zones.
The new 2006 arborday.org Hardiness Zone Map is consistent with the consensus of climate scientists that global warming is underway. Tree planting is among the positive actions that people can take to reverse the trend.
"The Arbor Day Foundation supports tree planting throughout America," says Foundation President John Rosenow. "Providing the hardiness zone for individual zip codes at arborday.org is an important part of that goal, by giving tree planters the most up-to-date and useable data available."
"Of course existing trees should continue to be cared for," said Woody Nelson from the Arbor Day Foundation. "Certain species may be more vulnerable to stress with the current warmer climate, but they will continue to provide environmental and economic benefits as they grow. It's just a good idea to consider more tree species diversity for the future."
As an aside... why is a non-profit organization forced to do the work of a government agency? Could the Bush administration possibly be keeping the USDA from publishing something as basic as a hardiness zone map just because it reflects the reality of a global climate crisis?
What are we going to do about it?
There are some people who seem content to stick their head in the sand. Take my representative in Congress (please!). Here's what Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV-02) had to say in an April 5, 2007 letter to a constituent (emphasis mine):
As you know, there is much debate about the existence, causes, and future extent of climate change, and what steps, if any, society should take in response.
Yes, there is debate among reasonable people about what steps to take. No, there is not debate among reasonable people if we need to take steps. The planet has a fever. Every day we are making the fever worse. The status quo is unsustainable.
Take Action
I'll leave you with three simple action items today.
1. Print out and share the West Virginia Warming graphic. Here's a one pagePDF version for easy printing. Here's a link to the graphic.
2. Join the National Arbor Day Foundation and receive 10 Free Trees to plant. (If you don't have a place to plant the trees yourself you can have them sent to another address as a gift.)
3. Remember that the problem is solvable. What is required is political will, not any new magic bullet technology.
Princeton researchers Robert Socolow and Stephen Pacala have described 15 "stabilization wedges" (far right) to realize that goal using existing technologies.
Study this graphic (one page PDF from this National Geographic article) summarizing the options Socolow and Pacala lay out for stabilizing carbon emissions. It's the single best graphic I've seen showing the way forward.
As my readers know I'm on the mailing list for several pro-coal publications, just to keep abreast of what the other side is saying. Platts reports that Tuesday at the Coal Market Strategies Conference in Tucson,
"Clean energy should really focus on pollution reduction ... and not carbon
dioxide, because carbon dioxide is not a pollutant," said Tom Harris. "Do world climate scientists really agree that our emissions of CO2
are causing a global warming crisis?" Harris contended that they do not.
Harris is executive director of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project.
Nice name. Platts didn't explain who they are. According to Sourcewatch, this Canadian group formed last year and includes leading climate change skeptics.
While the rest of the industrialized world has moved on to addressing the global climate crisis, the United States is still arguing about if we need to do anything about it. Here's an example of an advertisement you might see on U.K. television.
The American people overwhelming feel that this country is headed on the wrong track.
These three issues enjoy strong public opinion for taking on the status quo: ending the United States occupation of Iraq, taking action to address the global climate crisis, and providing universal health care for all Americans.
Where are the political leaders with the moral courage to take on the entrenched interests standing between here and our better future?
An Editorial today in the New York Times warns House Democratic Party leadership that they had better start paying attention to what put them there in the first place... voters who want change not just in Iraq but on environmental policy as well. The first two paragraphs of the editorial sums it up pretty well.
When Americans elected a Democratic Congress last November, they were voting to end politics as usual and special interest legislation. On the vital issues of energy independence and global warming they are not only in danger of getting more of the same but also, unless Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders step forward, winding up in worse shape than they were under the Republicans.
Exhibit A is a regressive bill drafted by John Dingell, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Rick Boucher, a Virginia Democrat. For starters, the bill would override the recent Supreme Court decision giving the Environmental Protection Agency authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles, a decision that even President Bush has reluctantly embraced. It would also effectively block efforts by California and 11 other states to regulate and reduce greenhouse gases from vehicles at a time when the states are far ahead of the federal government in dealing with climate change.
The editorial also says that on some issues these same Democrats are selling out to special interests including the coal industry.
The bill’s fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks are weaker than the president’s proposals and weaker still than standards the National Academy of Sciences says can be met using off-the-shelf technology. And the bill would open the door to a new generation of coal-to-liquid fuel plants favored by the coal lobby that could double the global warming gases of conventional gasoline. (emphasis mine)
This editorial is a word to the wise for our Senators and our Congressional Delegation. Are you listening Congressman Rahall? He as well as all of us can read the editorial by clicking here.
I really get pissed when someone accuses Democrats of being weak on the environment like the NY Times did today.
This week, the leaders of the biggest polluting countries in the world are meeting in Germany at the G8+5 summit. Between them, their countries produce over 70% of global warming emissions. But while climate change is the top issue on their agenda, the Bush administration is trying to prevent any serious commitment to action.
Your voice is needed now to tell world leaders to stand strong on climate change. Sign this petition to send a message that the world is calling for action to avert a climate catastrophe.
We are pleased to introduce WV Blue readers to bantam rooster and noted free market economist Dr. Denton "Denny" Dimwit. Dr. Dimwit is director of the Goat Rope Farm Policy Foundation, a fellow of a number of conservative and libertarian think tanks, and is a senior economic advisor to the Bush administration.
We are convinced that Dr. Dimwit is by far the brightest and most intellectually distinguished representative of this school of thought.
It is our deepest wish that by providing space for (bio) diverse viewpoints, we are reducing the tragic polarization of our time, promoting civil discourse, and creating a climate of profound mutual respect.
As you know, there is much debate about the existence, causes, and future extent of climate change, and what steps, if any, society should take in response.
JONATHAN KARL: But what's your sense, where is the science on this? Is global warming a fact? And is it human activity that is causing global warming?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Those are the two key questions. I think there's an emerging consensus that we do have global warming. You can look at the data on that, and I think clearly we're in a period of warming. Where there does not appear to be a consensus, where it begins to break down, is the extent to which that's part of a normal cycle versus the extent to which it's caused by man, greenhouse gases, et cetera.
Copyright 2011 West Virginia Blue
Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
This site exists thanks to financial support from BlogPAC, dedicated volunteers and participation by members of this community. The views expressed at West Virginia Blue belong solely to their respective authors.
