Archive for the ‘Climate Change’ Category
How can climate change be non-issue in presidential campaigns?
Are you wondering like me how climate change could fail to be a substantive issue in this year’s presidential campaigns?
One explanation may be the unwillingness of debate hosts to raise the issue. Early this year, the League of Conservation voters released an analysis of the debates in 2007 moderated by hosts of the top political programs on television and found that only 24 questions related to climate change or global warming were asked out of a total of 2,275 questions. I haven’t seen an updated analysis of debates since the first of the year. The debates are (or were) a significant source of campaign news; if an issue isn’t raised in a debate, it won’t appear in the next day’s media summaries.
Another explanation is that climate change, while worrisome to Americans, is not among our top concerns. Last year, polls indicated Iraq was top of mind for voters, at least among Democrats. This year it’s the economy, with health care remaining another huge issue. Among Republicans, immigration is a dominant topic. It appears the news media are taking their cue from polling results and covering the issues voters say are their greatest concerns. That relegates climate change to a non-issue in political coverage.
Yet another possible explanation surfaced this week in a post by Joe Romm, editor of Climate Progress (Romm once worked for the Clinton Administration). Citing Elizabeth Kolbert’s book, Field Notes from a Catastrophe, Romm writes: “How can the traditional media cover a story that is almost ‘impossible to imagine’? I don’t think they can.” One reason, he says, is it’s in the nature of the media to lose interest in a story after telling it over and over again. Climate change, because of its complexity and dimensions, is a story that must be repeatedly explored.
While Romm doesn’t refer specifically to political reporters, his analysis suggests the political media simply aren’t up to the task of covering the climate change story; heck, even one of the best climate reporters, Andy Revkin of the New York Times, is singled out for criticism by Romm. If Revkin can’t do justice to the story, certainly no political reporter can.
Revkin responds to Romm here.
Frankly, I think one could write the perfect story on global warming, or create the perfect documentary, and repeat it over and over, and still not see much movement if the goal is to rapidly shift society out of its coal-fired comfort zone as the world heads toward 9 billion people…
As I’ve said, an energy quest — from the bathroom light fixture to the highway to the boardroom to the classroom — does not begin in a newspaper, but must build from deeper within a society (with a big dose of nonpartisn (sic) leadership).
Revkin is right, of course: The news media can only do so much in moving society away from the brink of catastrophe. And leaders of all stripes (and I would add voters, too) must step forward to place climate change at the top of our political agenda and work to keep it there. But I also agree with Romm that the national media is showing no staying power with this story, which I believe to be easily the most important one of our time and will remain so for years to come. The media, like our politicians, must lead, even when the electorate has its mind on other things.
The good news is there’s still time to make global warming a core subject in this year’s presidential campaign — the general election remains eight months away. And the Democratic race is not over. In case you’re interested, here are Clinton’s and Obama’s energy and climate plans.
Tags: Andy Revkin, Climate Change, Climate Progress, Joe Romm, presidential campaign
Posted in Climate Change, Politics | No Comments »
Getting past ideology to action on global warming
A fascinating article in The New Yorker examines the complex interplay of science, politics, market economics and morality in the global efforts to reduce carbon emissions. Definitely worth the time to read.
In one section that speaks to the emotions running through the debate of how best to dramatically lower CO2 emissions, reporter Michael Specter discusses a proposal by environmental group Carbon Conservation to pay tropical forest landowners not to cut down their trees. The proposal would rely on market-based carbon-trading allowances to make the needed payments, a solution rejected by other environmental organizations.
Environmental organizations like Carbon Trade Watch say that reducing our carbon footprint will require restructuring our lives, and that before we in the West start urging the developing world to do that we ought to make some sacrifices; anything else would be the modern equivalent of the medieval practice of buying indulgences as a way of expiating one’s sins. “You have to realize that, in the end, people are trying to buy their way out of bad behavior,” Tony Juniper, the director of Friends of the Earth, told me. “Are we really a society that wants to pay rich people not to fly on private jets or countries not to cut down their trees? Is that what, ultimately, is morally right and equitable?”
Specter refers this argument back to Richard Sandor, chairman and CEO of the Chicago Climate Exchange, whose members buy and sell the right to pollute.
“Frankly, this debate just makes me want to scream,” he told me. “The clock is moving. They are slashing and burning and cutting the forests of the world. It may be a quarter of global warming and we can get the rate to two per cent simply by inventing a preservation credit and making that forest have value in other ways. Who loses when we do that?
“People tell me, well, these are bad guys, and corporate guys who just want to buy the right to pollute are bad, too, and we should not be giving them incentives to stop. But we need to address the problems that exist, not drown in fear or lose ourselves in morality. Behavior changes when you offer incentives. If you want to punish people for being bad corporate citizens, you should go to your local church or synagogue and tell God to punish them. Because that is not our problem. Our problem is global warming, and my job is to reduce greenhouse gases at the lowest possible cost. I say solve the problem and deal with the bad guys somewhere else.”
Remember, all of these people agree that we need to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions as much as we possibly can. I suppose it’s a sign of progress that the raging debate now is how — not whether — to do that. Unfortunately, the window of time for debate is rapidly closing and decisions need to be made by government, business and activist leaders on how to proceed. Mistakes are likely to be made, but the greatest mistake of all is allowing our ideological differences — such as social justice vs. capital market efficiencies — to stand in the way of action.
Tags: Carbon Conservation, carbon emissions, Michael Specter, Richard Sandor, The New Yorker
Posted in Climate Change | No Comments »
The price of our Google addiction
Head out east from Portland about 80 miles on I-84 along the Columbia River and you’ll come to The Dalles. Otherwise known as the secretive home of two Google computing centers, each the size of a football field. Google is on my mind today because of a feature piece in the local newspaper yesterday on Google’s green energy initiatives. It is said Google is investing tens of millions of dollars to promote renewable energy development and other earth-saving programs. Why is that, the article asks:
Along with being a big investor in energy research, Google is a very big user of energy. Its massive data centers, which in the United States alone stretch from Atlanta to The Dalles in Oregon, suck up enough power each year to keep the lights on in a small country. “It’s in our best interest to find cheap electricity to use,” said Robyn Beavers, Google’s director of green business operations.
And cheaper energy is what’s generally available near the Columbia River, courtesy of its hydroelectric dams. One Google watcher speculates that the firm’s founders are motivated in part by guilt. Whatever works, I guess. Companies like Google need to do all they can to stem the non-renewable energy demands of their data centers. A study released last year said “energy consumed by data center servers and related infrastructure equipment in the United States and worldwide doubled between 2000 and 2005.”
What’s driving this consumption? From users, it’s their hunger for everything Web, from video on demand and music downloads to Internet telephony and more…The spike in power consumption was also caused by a number of other trends, especially the proliferation of “lower-end servers” costing less than $25,000 in the United States and worldwide…A jump in the volume of servers in data centers is accountable for 90% of the growth in power consumption.
According to a new article in Harper’s Magazine, no one outside of Google knows how many servers are housed in The Dalles and fed by cheap hydroelectric power. Worldwide, Google may own as many one million servers. Harper’s says by 2011 The Dalles plant (known in the tech industry as server farms) “can be expected to demand about 103 megawatts of electricity—enough to power 82,000 homes, or a city the size of Tacoma.”
That’s just Google’s server farm in The Dalles. It has at least 25 data centers around the world, according to the New York Times. On top of that you have Microsoft and Yahoo trying to play catch-up to Google with giant data centers of their own, including near The Dalles. And mega-corporations, governments and higher ed the world over with ever-growing data centers that store and process enormous amounts of information. I saw this digital transformation up close and personal in my 20 years in high tech.
The energy source for most computing continues to be fossil fuels; Google’s hydropower in The Dalles is an exception to the rule. Of course, fueling the demand for more computing power and energy consumption are people like me. Here I sit with my laptop connected to the Internet. All my sources for this post courtesy of Google searches. Millions like me everywhere are virtually addicted to the convenience of information at our fingertips. And as I type this sentence, I’m thinking of the price in greenhouse gas emissions this convenience is costing Earth and those who live here. Like Google, we computer users also have an obligation to do our part.
Tags: cheaper energy, data center energy consumption, Google, green energy, Harper's, The Dalles
Posted in Climate Change | No Comments »
Playing with green Air Jordans in a dead-end game
Say what you will about Nike, they know how to market and sell products. And they seem to take seriously the challenge of becoming a more sustainable manufacturer. Witness the 23rd version of its most high-profile product, the Air Jordan basketball shoe. It’s said to be Nike’s “first premium product designed according to the company’s sustainable standards.”
My question for Nike, and virtually any other manufacturer, is how do you square your boundless desire for growth and its associated requirement to make and sell more products with your stated objective of reducing your environmental impact.
Isn’t it a bit like exercising madly while eating ever-increasing amounts of low-calorie foods, and still expecting to lose weight? You can only exercise so much. Meanwhile, your caloric consumption steadily increases and eventually so does your weight. At some point, you have to start eating fewer calories.
Nike, and consumer products companies like them the world over, must at some point realize that selling ever-increasing amounts of products, no matter how low-cal (green), is an environmentally dead-end game. The earth’s natural resources are finite. Using them in smaller quantities per unit ultimately changes nothing when unit volume is always increasing. And that’s to say nothing about the carbon footprint of companies like Nike that continue to expand office space, send growing numbers of employees on countless airline trips around the globe and ship their products thousands of miles from where they are manufactured to where they are consumed.
Whether Nike or anyone else wants to admit it or not, there’s nothing sustainable about an economy dependent upon growing material consumption. Something has to give. And right now, Earth is doing all the giving. You won’t hear that in the new Air Jordan commercials.
Tags: Air Jordan, consumer products, material consumption, Nike, sustainable manufacturer
Posted in Business & Economics, Climate Change, Marketing, Oregon, Sports, Sustainability | No Comments »
While business waits for incentives, Earth heats up
A new report by energy consultants at McKinsey & Company says the US could fairly painlessly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by 28 percent, although the consultants were not optimistic this would happen anytime soon.
One example they cite is making changes in the lighting, heating and cooling of buildings that would save emissions and money. The problem is landlords and builders are able to pass energy costs on to tenants or home buyers. They have no incentive to spend more upfront for energy efficient equipment.
Another example is the potentially large energy and emission reductions made possible by choosing more energy efficient computing equipment. The problem here, the consultants say, is few consumers consider energy consumption when choosing which computer or electronic gadget to buy. That means consumer electronics manufacturers have little incentive to make their products more energy efficient.
This study underscores the challenge in achieving goals of dramatically lower carbon emissions. Too many business decision makers require financial incentives before taking steps to slash carbon emissions. Too few are investing in reducing CO2 emissions because it is simply the right thing to do. Period.
Fortunately, there are growing numbers of enlightened entrepreneurs and businesses that recognize something must be done to stave off the worst effects of climate change. And they are determined to make money while they do good. I learned of one such outfit yesterday, when speaking with a local general contractor. In addition to his contracting business, he is an independent representative of Citizenre Corporation. From what this contractor told me, Citizenre is launching a completely new business model for supplying residential solar panel equipment. According to the company Web site:
The Citizenre REnU program is the first to give residential customers the chance to use green energy in their home without the usual dilemma. A photovoltaic (“PV”) array, inverters, and an exchange point (“XP”) are prepackaged to deliver energy to the customer or the utility from power generated at the home. Our new program takes care of all the usual headaches: it provides hassle free installation, operation, and maintenance – and does so with the most attractive terms in the industry. Customers have the option to rent the system for either 1, 5 or 25 years. This arrangement eliminates the traditional up-front investment and associated investment risk.
But before you get too excited by those grand claims, it sounds like the company is quite a few months away from getting its panel manufacturing worked out. So the most you can do right now is sign up early and lock in your rates. Then wait until their product is ready for installation.
The point here is many, if not most, businesses want to be assured of profits before doing the right thing. But a few are willing to risk doing the right thing with no guarantees of making money. I know which group I want the market to reward.
Posted in Business & Economics, Climate Change, Sustainability | No Comments »
Buy Nothing Day, Buy Local Week
Friday after Thanksgiving. A perfect day to stay home, or at the very least do no shopping. Instead, join with folks around the US and the globe who are observing the 15th annual “Buy Nothing Day.” The Adbusters Media Foundation originated the event in Vancouver, BC. According to Kalle Lasn, the organization’s co-founder, the day’s focus has shifted over the years from simply an escape from modern life’s obsession with consumption. Increasingly it’s about making a statement that we cannot continue our consuming ways in the face of climate change.
“So much emphasis has been placed on buying carbon offsets and compact fluorescent light bulbs and hybrid cars that we are losing sight of the core cause of our environmental problems: we consume far too much. Buy Nothing Day isn’t just about changing your routine for one day. It’s about starting a lasting lifestyle commitment. With over six billion people on the planet, it is the responsibility of the most affluent, the upper 20% that consumes 80% of the world’s resources, to set out on a new path.”
I couldn’t agree more. There’s another way to make a statement this holiday season: buy local. Keep your gift dollars circulating in the local economy by shopping at locally owned, independent businesses. Avoid the chain and big box stores this year. Not only will more of your money stay in the community, you’ll be reminding others of how important local merchants are to the unique character of our communities.
Here in Portland, the Sustainable Business Network of Portland is sponsoring Buy Local Week, December 1-9. (Full disclosure: I am a board member of SBNP.) Vote with your dollars by visiting your favorite neighborhood businesses, restaurants and service providers the first week of next month (and throughout the year). Also, start looking for a special Buy Local Coupon Book at a variety of SBNP member businesses across the city.
Buy less. Buy local. Sounds like a great New Year’s resolution.
Posted in Business & Economics, Climate Change, Oregon, Sustainability | No Comments »