"Science of climate change is strong,"
experts at four Texas universities say
March 8, 2010
Scientists at Texas A&M University immediately took issue when top state officials cast doubt on scientific findings about climate change last month in their formal effort to block regulation of atmosphere-warming pollutants.
Now, climate experts from A&M, Texas Tech University, the University of Texas and Rice University have teamed up to write a newspaper column for the Houston Chronicle, declaring that "the science of climate change is strong," even if the state of Texas is challenging that science in administrative and court petitions. The column was published Sunday.
Andrew Dessler, a professor in A&M's Department of Atmospheric Sciences, told Texas Climate News that he and the other scientists were motivated to write the column by the state's legal challenge of a federal finding that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are dangerous to human health and the environment.
The finding by the Environmental Protection Agency is a necessary prerequisite for proposed federal regulation of the gases, which Texas is trying to stop. The state's challenge, filed by Attorney General Greg Abbott with the support of Gov. Rick Perry and other top officials, was largely based on claims that the leading international science body on climate change is not "objective or trustworthy." More►
Transitional turmoil: Gas vs. wind
March 4, 2010
No one ever said a transition to lower-carbon forms of energy would be without turmoil. And sometimes it comes in novel forms, several of which have been in the news lately.
For years, producers of natural gas (with the lowest carbon dioxide emissions of the main fossil fuels) have been promoting it as an environmentally superior alternative to coal (with the highest CO2 emissions) for generating electricity.
Now, the Wall Street Journal relates in an article datelined from the Texas town of Taft near Corpus Christi, natural gas is squaring off against the wind industry, which promotes itself as an essentially zero-CO2 form of electricity production.
Noting that the wind industry has grown from "bit player" status just four years ago to generating "a significant share" of Texas' electricity today, the Journal's Russell Gold reported this week that "the growth of wind power has attracted powerful critics: the owners of natural-gas power plants." More►
A&M scientists back EPA finding
on dangers of greenhouse gases
February 24, 2010
After Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott formally challenged the federal conclusion that greenhouse gases are harmful pollutants, the Houston Chronicle’s Eric Berger asked if he had consulted with any of Texas’ own “eminent climate scientists” before filing petitions that dismiss scientific conclusions about global warming as the product of “colluding and scheming.”
Abbott replied that he had not done so: “Not yet and here’s why. At this stage we’re not focused on, nor need we be focused on, needing to prove anything from a scientific basis ourselves.”
Actually, it seems highly doubtful that the attorney general will want to consult members of Texas A&M University’s Department of Atmospheric Sciences – a respected academic body in the field of climate science – if he’s looking for Texans with the appropriate scientific expertise to help him make his legal case.
After Abbott filed Texas’ petitions against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s “endangerment finding” regarding carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases, key members of the A&M department’s faculty told the Washington-based Wonk Room blog that the department as a whole stands by the EPA’s conclusion about greenhouse gases and by the principal conclusions of the international scientific body on climate change that Gov. Rick Perry’s office, announcing Abbott’s petitions, said had been “discredited.”
Kenneth P. Bowman, who heads the A&M department, sent Wonk Room this statement:
“I believe that (the) EPA finding is based on good science, as do all of my colleagues in the Atmospheric Science Department here at Texas A&M.” More►
Broadening battleground over EPA finding
February 19, 2010
By the time that an official deadline passed this week, only two other states – Alabama and Virginia – had followed Texas in filing petitions challenging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's finding that climate-changing greenhouse gases threaten human health and the environment.
In terms of state petitioners, that meant there were three states against the EPA finding and 16 states (joined by New York City) siding with the EPA over the finding, which laid the legal groundwork for the agency to impose the first-ever federal regulation of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse pollutants.
Even so, other states still have a chance to weigh in on the issue. Houston attorney Richard Faulk, who backs the Texas position, told The Texas Tribune that others have 30 days to intervene on Texas' side in its challenge, and speculated that states with heavily resource-extractive economies may do so.
(Louisiana, for example, is already on the record asking the EPA to reconsider its greenhouse-gas finding, though so far in the form of letters from state department heads, who work for Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal, and not a formal legal petition from Democratic Attorney General James D. "Buddy" Caldwell.)
Meanwhile, the nation's governors are now being asked to support a congressional effort, led by Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, to prevent the EPA from issuing regulations based on the greenhouse-gas finding. This development was revealed today by Frank O'Donnell, director of the Washington-based environmental group Clean Air Watch. More►
Warmer climate, heavier snow?
February 14, 2010
No matter how often scientists repeat that individual weather events and long-range climate trends are not the same thing, global warming skeptics like to cite extreme episodes of winter weather to argue that there isn't really much cause for concern.
Huge snowstorms that blanketed the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast this month have proved no exception, and Texas scientists have joined the ensuing public dialogue.
Republican politicians and conservative commentators have been using recent snow-dumps to bolster their attack on the science behind human-caused warming and proposals to mitigate its climate-changing impacts.
For instance, Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, who has claimed that manmade warming is a "hoax," seized the moment to publicize an igloo bearing the sign "Al Gore's New Home," which members of Inhofe's family had built in Washington.
Fox News, not surprisingly, had some fun with that one – a correspondent introduced an interview with Inhofe on Thursday by declaring that the heavy snow in Washington and other locations had made it "a rough week for Al Gore and global warming alarmists everywhere."
An editorial in the conservative Washington Times on Thursday echoed Inhofe's "hoax" accusation: "Record snowfall illustrates the obvious: The global warming fraud is without equal in modern science."
Scientists have taken the opportunity provided by such rhetoric to explain that mammoth snowstorms are actually consistent with the effects that experts anticipate warming-instigated climate change will include.More►
Proud to be first with greenhouse-gas limits
February 5, 2010
Texas has no shortage of high-level complaints about possible regulations to fight manmade climate change, but you won’t hear them in the executive offices at Houston-based Calpine Corp.
The electricity producer proudly announced Thursday that it had just gotten approval from air quality regulators in California “to build the nation’s first power plant with a federal limit on greenhouse gas emissions – putting both the plant and the company at the forefront of the fight against global warming.”
The limit is in a federal permit, issued by a regional agency in the San Francisco Bay area, for a new, 600-megawatt plant that will burn natural gas. The plant, to be located on the southeast side of the bay at Hayward, Calif., will supply electricity to area, the company said.
Calpine said the permit places limits on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. It is “the most stringent” ever issued by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, that agency said [pdf] in a separate release.
Environmentalists were quick to praise the action as a possible precedent for the broader regulation of pollutants that scientists blame for causing global warming and climate change.
Whether the Calpine plant’s permit will be such a model is a question, however, that is clouded by gathering uncertainties about whether such regulations are coming – and if they are, what form they could take. More►
National poll confirms opinion shift
January 27, 2010
Yet another national poll shows recent slippage in public agreement that global warming is happening and manmade, as a huge majority of scientists believe.
This survey, conducted by the Yale Project on Climate Change and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication, was released Wednesday.
A few key findings, reflecting changes in public opinion in the U.S. from 2008 to 2010:
- The percentage who "think that global warming is happening" has dropped from 71 to 57 percent.
- Of respondents who do think it is happening, the percentage who were "extremely" or "very" sure declined from a combined 72 to 61 percent, while the percentage saying "somewhat sure" increased from 24 to 37 percent.
- The percentage saying global warming, if happening, is "caused mostly by human activities" fell from 57 to 47 percent.
- There were also major changes in public perception of scientists' views. The percentage thinking that "most scientists think global warming is happening" went from 47 percent to 34 percent, while the percentage thinking there is "a lot of disagreement" among scientists on the subject rose from 33 to 40 percent. (A separate poll of scientists, released last summer by the Pew Research Center and American Academy for the Advancement of Science, found that 84 percent said "the earth is getting warmer because of human activity.") More►
Whole Foods chief: Climate change skeptic
January 6, 2010
Just because a company takes actions to reduce greenhouse gases – and talks about them explicitly in the context of manmade climate change – it doesn't necessarily follow that the company's top official thinks manmade climate change is a problem. Or that it even exists.
Consider Austin-based Whole Foods Market, the grocery chain specializing in "natural" and organic products, and its libertarian-minded co-founder and chief executive, John Mackey.
Whole Foods does a lot to reduce its carbon footprint – it ranked fourth in the U.S, Environmental Protection Agency's latest list of the 50 corporations and government entities that buy the most "green power."
Even so, Mackey was recently quoted expressing strong skepticism about the science underlying the conclusion that human activities are altering the earth's climate. His views on the subject were reported in a lengthy profile in the Jan. 4 issue of The New Yorker. More►
Copenhagen Accord: Now what?
December 23, 2009
Parsing of last week's outcome of the international climate conference in Denmark began within moments of the announcement of a non-binding agreement, dubbed the Copenhagen Accord.
Was it a tragic failure to tackle the looming threat of climate change or a valuable if insufficient step toward doing just that? Proponents of both viewpoints have spoken out.
Who was responsible for the fact that a more dramatic and definitive agreement was not reached? President Barack Obama? The U.S. Congress? China? All came in for blame from different quarters.
If one thing is certain in the aftermath of the much-anticipated, closely-watched summit, it seems to be that the path ahead for multilateral action against manmade global warming is uncertain.
Will Copenhagen hurt or help the chances of climate-energy legislation in Congress, which might help lead to a binding accord to reduce greenhouse emissions? Does the conference outcome suggest that the U.N.-sponsored diplomatic process on climate change, which also produced the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, is not an adequate vehicle for dealing with the climate issue?
Such are the questions being asked as attention turned in the climate arena to what may lie ahead, especially at major diplomatic meetings scheduled in 2010. More►
Texas Comment
EPA, coal, Copenhagen
December 15, 2009
Editorial writers and columnists have had a good deal to say in Texas newspapers lately about recent developments related to global warming and the attendant policy debates.
In this entry of TCN Journal, we present the first in an occasional series of posts that will summarize and provide links to some of what is being said by opinion journalists, op-ed writers and bloggers.
News events that provided a basis for recent commentary in Texas newspapers included the continuing international climate conference in Copenhagen, the Environmental Protection Agency's designation of carbon dioxide as a hazard to public health and the environment, and the U.S. Energy Department's big grant for carbon-capture technology at a plant where coal will be turned into gas at Penwell, near Odessa.
A staff editorial in the Dallas Morning News took positive note of the Energy Department announcement in the context of the EPA's CO2 decision, getting in a dig at Gov. Rick Perry in the process:
Last week's announcement that Summit Power has won a $350 million federal grant to build a coal gasification plant in West Texas positions our state as a leader in developing the next generation of power facilities. In Penwell, Summit plans to build a cleaner coal plant that captures carbon dioxide emissions. The CO2 then could be sold to oil companies to enhance petroleum recover. ...
What's more, the EPA's announcement Monday that it would pursue limits on carbon dioxide emissions only underscores the urgent need to pursue clean energy options.
Gov. Rick Perry continues to characterize attempts to regulate carbon as senseless. But his 38-page rebuttal, submitted to the EPA, is probably a futile exercise. Federal officials have made clear that soon, Texas will not be permitted to pollute with impunity. Texas' future, Gov. Perry, is in Penwell. This is one change we can embrace without getting dirty. More►
Houston, DFW top EPA's Energy Star list
November 11, 2009
Now there's more evidence indicating that Texas – contrary to some statistics and some perceptions – is a leader in energy efficiency.
According to some criteria, at least.
Last week, TCN Journal highlighted the findings of a national report from an efficiency-promoting group, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, that ranked Texas only in 23rd place for state policies boosting efficiency but second-best in improving household efficiency per person.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reported data that added more luster to the state's leadership credentials in the home-efficiency category.
The occasion was the EPA's announcement that its Energy Star program had logged the construction of the millionth home that qualified for the Energy Star label for meeting strict efficiency guidelines. The home-labeling effort started in 1995.
The EPA said that the two cities where the most such homes have been built since that time were Houston, with 144,000, and Dallas-Fort Worth, with 103,000. Houston had the sixth-largest metropolitan population in 2008 and Dallas-Fort Worth the fourth largest. More►
Texans say no to cap-and-trade bill,
yes to state efficiency rules in new poll
November 5, 2009
A new poll has found that a plurality of Texans oppose a federal cap-and-trade bill to reduce greenhouse emissions, while a sizable majority favor state rules requiring efficiency measures to accomplish the same goal.
The survey results [pdf] were published Wednesday by The Texas Tribune, a non-profit news venture that was launched this week. They were part of what the new online publication described as "the inaugural University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll."
Respondents were asked their opinion of "the proposed 'cap and trade' legislation that would impose limits on the amount of greenhouse gases that a company can emit and cause them to buy permits when they need to exceed their limit." (A bill featuring that kind of regulatory system won narrow passage in the House in June. The Senate is now considering a similar measure.)
Forty-four percent said they oppose such a law (36 percent "strongly" and 8 percent "somewhat"). Thirty-seven percent said they support it (15 percent "strongly" and 22 percent "somewhat"). Nineteen percent answered "don't know."
Pollsters also asked this question: "In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, what is your opinion on the Texas state government requiring new homes, commercial buildings, and industrial plants to be more energy efficient?" More►
Texas a leader on energy efficiency?
November 2, 2009
Is Texas a national leader on energy efficiency or is it lagging somewhere in the middle of the pack?
The answer is yes to both questions, according to a new report by a prominent efficiency-promoting group. It depends on what criteria are used to do the measuring.
In its third annual 50-state scorecard on "policies, programs, and practices," the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) recently put Texas in 23rd place (tied with Florida and Utah).
That was a drop for Texas from its 19th-place slot in the group's 2008 scorecard, which "examines six energy efficiency policy areas: (1) utility-sector and public benefits programs and policies; (2) transportation policies; (3) building energy codes; (4) combined heat and power; (5) state government initiatives; and (6) appliance efficiency standards."
Regarding the states that improved their rankings the most from 2008 to 2009, the lead author of the report, ACEEE's Maggie Eldridge, said in an announcement:
"The most improved states are stepping up their efforts in several ways, such as adopting new building energy codes and setting aggressive new energy savings targets. By highlighting these most improved states, we hope to encourage others to step up their efforts to implement energy efficiency as their first-priority resource." More►