Context at Climate Progress.

Update — More context in this Center for American Progress report:

unstable_oil –

Press release via Avaaz.

Barcelona, Spain, November 4, 2009: At the halfway point of the UN climate talks in Barcelona this week, the USA was named as ‘Fossil of the Day’, with Canada coming in second, by a vote of the Climate Action Network International (CAN-I) – a global coalition of over 450 leading non-government organisations. The daily award is given to those nations judged to be the ‘best’ at blocking or stalling progress in the global climate negotiation that day.

The first-place ‘Fossil Award’ was given to the USA for delaying passage of domestic climate change legislation.

The US ratified the UN’s ‘Framework Convention on Climate Change’ in 1992, promising to reduce its greenouse gases emissions to 1990 levels by 2000. But it has failed to meet this promise. The US delegation to the international negotiations now says they will follow the lead of the Congress – so the delay in climate legislation hamstrings the US delegation’s negotiating ability.

Earlier this year, when the House of Representatives pushed forward climate legislation, it seemed likely that domestic legislation would be passed before the crucial Copenhagen climate summit this December. Recent delay tactics in the US Senate – boycotts and commissioning redundant economic analysis – leave the world wondering whether the US will get it done.

“Other countries – developed and developing alike – have moved forward, committing to emission reductions and advancing prospects of a global deal,” said Sara Svensson, a youth climate activist from Sweden.

“It is time for the US Administration and for those on Capitol Hill to get the job done. Their lack of action undermines international trust in the UN negotiations and endangers the prospects of reaching a global solution to climate change.”

After a stunningly non-confrontational chat with Jon Stewart last night, the authors of Superfreakonomics have now taken to the USA Today Opinion blog to continue pushing their nonsense. While they deliberately cited increasing global temperatures — as well as legitimate concerns such as oil wars and ocean acidification — the fact remains: they have gone way too far off the beaten path to successfully walk this one back. As has been the case throughout this episode, they continue to grossly oversimplify and commit numerous logical fallacies in order to make their seemingly-compelling contrarian argument.

I’ve identified 22 flaws in this latest 920 word piece. Let’s look at them individually.

Imagine for a moment that a terrible, unforeseen threat to humankind had suddenly arisen, one so grave that it endangered the very future of the planet. Two teams of respected scientists immediately set to work, trying to find a solution to the impending disaster.

Flaw 1: Catastrophic climate change is not an ‘unforeseen threat’. Scientists began warning about the threat of increasing the level of greenhouse gases in the earth’s atmosphere as early as 1896. 172 countries (including over 100 heads of state) met in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 to work on a collaborative solution. Referring to climate change as an unforeseen threat is not accurate.

Flaw 2: Equating mainstream climate scientists — who overwhelmingly advocate reducing emissions to prevent and minimize the impacts of climate change — with the few who advocate geoengineering as a primary solution is extremely misleading.

The first set of scientists returned with a potential solution, but it had some shortcomings. It was expensive, with a price tag in the trillions of dollars. It also required nearly every human being on the planet to change his or her behavior in fundamental ways. And even if the scientists’ scheme worked, it would take decades for the benefits to be felt.

Flaw 3: The job-creation and other economic benefits associated with developing, manufacturing and deploying clean energy technologies are well documented. Citing the economic costs of a solution without accounting for the economic benefits — despite being good enough for the Congressional Budget Office — is fundamentally dishonest. Further, the economic models such cost estimates are based on tend to undercount low-and-zero carbon alternatives and underestimate innovation.

Flaw 4: Putting the impetus for changing behaviors on individuals rather than policymakers is disingenuous at best. Smart public policy can drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions without having an unpleasant impact on individual behavior. The changes in individual behavior such policies would bring about are undeniably changes that lead people to lead healthier lives. Eliminating subsidies for factory farms, switching out coal-fired power plants with natural gas or renewables and investing in public transportation rather than bailing out automakers are three simple examples. Further, assuming that drastically changing the earth’s atmosphere can be solved without changes in human behavior is a prime example of the nirvana fallacy, in which solutions to problems are said not to be right because they are not perfect.

The second set of scientists returned with a very different answer. Their solution cost less than one-thousandth as much to implement and did not require anyone to change his behavior. The scientists could get their solution up and running in roughly a year, with the benefits to be felt immediately. And if the simple fix turned out to not work as expected, it was quickly and easily reversible.

Flaw 5: While the hypothetical scientists advocating an emissions reduction strategy had a ‘potential solution’, the scientists advocating geoengineering offered a ’solution’.

Read the rest of this entry »

Oil Change International:

According to a leaked letter, the Obama Administration is set to propose ending fossil fuel subsidies next week at the Pittsburgh G20. The letter, authored by Michael Froman who is an Obama advisor on international economic affairs, calls on the G20 to eliminate all fossil fuel and electricity subsidies, as a “logical step in combating global climate change”.Eliminating fossil fuel subsidies is a great idea, if it’s done right. This is certainly the right time, but the G20 is likely not the right place.

froman-letter-on-pittsburgh-summit-agenda –

Pew:

Pew found that jobs in the clean energy economy grew at a national rate of 9.1 percent, while traditional jobs grew by only 3.7 percent between 1998 and 2007. There was a similar pattern at the state level, where job growth in the clean energy economy outperformed overall job growth in 38 states and the District of Columbia during the same period. The report also found that this promising sector is poised to expand significantly, driven by increasing consumer demand, venture capital infusions, and federal and state policy reforms.

America’s clean energy economy has grown despite a lack of sustained government support in the past decade. By 2007, more than 68,200 businesses across all 50 states and the District of Columbia accounted for about 770,000 jobs.

By comparison, the well-established fossil-fuel sector—including utilities, coal mining and oil and gas extraction, industries that have received significant government investment—comprised about 1.27 million workers in 2007.

Clean_Economy_Report_Web –

This is refreshing to see:

“The conventional energy industry is the biggest corrupter in the world”

“If there is no change by 2030 there will be a bigger economic crash than the recent banking collapse”

“The system must change”

“Renewables are the only solution”

- Hans-Josef Fell, member of German Parliament, Spokesperson for Energy and Technology, Faction Alliance90/The GreensWhile perhaps more strident in tone than some in Germany may be comfortable with, these words from Green party member Hans-Josef Fell express the nation’s determination to lead the world to a new energy economy.

Via DOE:

James J. Markowsky, Nominee for Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy, Department of Energy

James J. Markowsky is currently a consultant in the energy and electric power generation area, a member of the National Research Council’s Committee on America’s Energy Future and a Member and the Chair of the National Academy of Engineering’s Section 6 – Electric Power/Energy Systems Committee. Previously, Markowsky was the President of Research and Development Solution, LLC, from 2004 – 2005 where he was involved in providing technical support services, including R&D technology planning and analysis; R&D project planning and analysis; and R&D operations and process engineering, design and analysis to DOE’s National Energy Technology Laboratories. Before that he was executive vice president of power generation, at American Electric Power Service Corporation(AEP), where his responsibilities included providing overall administrative, operational, and technical direction for the AEP System’s 21,000MWe coal and 800 MWe hydro power generating facilities. Markowsky’s career with AEP extended from 1971 – 2000, and his other positions included; executive vice president of engineering and construction, senior vice president and chief engineer, vice president – mechanical engineering, assistant vice president – mechanical engineering, AEP Sloan Fellow, and section manager.

Markowsky received several awards including the Washington Coal Club’s Lifetime Achievement Award in 2002 and has 26 publications in the area of power generation and fossil energy. He earned degrees from: Massachusetts Institute of Technology – MS in Industrial Management -1981; Cornell University – Ph.D. in 1971 and MS in 1970, both in Mechanical Engineering; and Pratt Institute – Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering -1967.

Polly Trottenberg, Nominee for Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, Department of Transportation

Polly Trottenberg serves as Executive Director of Building America’s Future, a national bipartisan coalition that supports U.S. infrastructure investment and a more accountable, sustainable and performance-driven national transportation policy. Building America’s Future is chaired by Governor Edward G. Rendell, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and has a membership of elected officials from across the U.S. Prior to joining Building America’s Future, Trottenberg served in the U.S. Senate for 12 years, most recently as Deputy Chief of Staff and Legislative Director for Senator Barbara Boxer, and worked extensively on transportation policy.

She also served as Legislative Director for Senator Charles Schumer and as Legislative Assistant for Transportation, Public Works and Environment for the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Trottenberg previously worked at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and the Massachusetts Port Authority on aviation and transportation finance issues, and on the Joint Commerce and Labor Committee of the Massachusetts State Senate. She received her Master’s in Public Policy from Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government and her BA in American History from Columbia University, Barnard College.

Charts galore at this link.