Okay, so Planet Gore doesn’t believe in the things eco-savvy progressives do, like “climate change, alternative energy, environmental activism,” and, of course, Al Gore. That is why they spread entertaining disinformation on those subjects, and why I launched the PG Disinfotainment Watch.

So why are there nearly two dozen posts (as of today) attacking corn ethanol — using terms like the “reprehensible ethanol boondoggle” or “ethanol hoax” or repeating the oil industry claim that “ethanol is wreaking havoc on the nation’s refineries.” I have met few if any eco-savvy progressives who think corn ethanol has much value as a climate solution, except possibly as a transition fuel to cellulosic ethanol.

Indeed, anyone else but PG would be hard-pressed to find a clear political label for corn ethanol supporters — heck, President Bush seems to be the biggest cheerleader: In the 2007 State of the Union address, he called for “setting a mandatory fuels standard to require 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels in 2017 — and that is nearly five times the current target.” And most of that would be corn ethanol.

For PG, though, the culprit is clear:

Read more

Time to gear up for battle on CAFE with the Senate considering serious legislation. The U.S. Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) has “launched radio advertisements in 10 states that contain false claims and factually inaccurate information,” as the National Environmental Trust notes on their website.

NET is a great source of hard facts for those who want to take on the auto industry’s disinformation. For instance, did you know that polling reveals, “pickup owners overwhelmingly support requiring the auto industry to increase fuel efficiency standards.”

I actually joined a conference call with NET for reporters in Arkansas on fuel economy — audio is available here.

NET’s debunking of the industry ads is reprinted below:

Read more

Like his boss, EPA administrator Stephen Johnson is “all hat and no cattle” on climate — he talks tough but ultimately does nothing.

Johnson told the House special committee on global warming “he would not decide whether to issue regulations controlling greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles until late next year.” He also refused to say “when he would decide whether to grant California the permission to enforce its own, more stringent tailpipe emissions standards.”

Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) had the quote of the day:

This is like saying we’re going to have a meeting next year about getting Osama bin Laden

Can a major magazine publish a special issue on China with multiple articles that NEVER mention global warming? As it turns out, yes.

Worse, the cover story of the Atlantic Monthly‘s July/August issue (subs. req’d for some articles) is actually titled, “Why China’s Rise is Good for us.”

Whatever else you can say about China’s rise, their decision to copy our style of coal- and oil-intensive development is bad for everyone, including them. For the past few years, the country has been building one major dirty coal plant almost every week. That’s a key reason I have a chapter in my book titled, “The U.S.-China Suicide Pact on Climate.”

The cover article’s only passing reference to the climate issue is stunning in its insouciance:

Read more

Lloyd Alter at treehugger.com attacks my review of George Monbiot’s book Heat, which was reposted at Grist’s blog. He first questions my motives, saying that because I have a book on the subject, I am “author of a competitor for shelf space and hardly a dispassionate observer.”

That’s hilarious. A typical book store might have, at most, fives copies of my book. I compete with nobody for shelf space, and it certainly doesn’t bias my judgment. In fact, I like most of the books that have been written on global warming — the best one, I think, is Tim Flannery’s The Weather Makers. But there are way too many climate books for the casual reader — some culling is needed.

I don’t like Monbiot’s book. It is supposedly a book on solutions, but it is riddled with mistakes in almost every chapter.

Cutler says “Romm doesn’t actually read the book, he reviews the index.” No, I just use the index to find out if Monbiot knows what he’s talking about. He doesn’t.

Interestingly, Cutler writes “He doesn’t like Monbiot’s ideas about electricity generation; Neither do I.” Well, gee, electricity is about half of the global warming problem — and Monbiot gets it wrong.

Read more

Oregon Enacts Tough Renewable Power Requirement – Reuters. Oregon, the 24th US state to establish a renewable portfolio standard (RPS), will now require that “25% of power delivered by the state’s biggest utilities be made from renewable sources by 2025.”

Amendments ready to roll in Senate following cloture vote – E&E Daily (subs. req’d). Debate on the Senate energy bill begins today. Likely topics for amendments include CAFE standards, greenhouse gas emissions reporting, and oil company taxes.

World Bank Targets Forest Preservation-Climate Link – Wall Street Journal (subs. req’d — full article below). “The World Bank got G-8 support for a $250 million investment fund to reward countries for not cutting down their rain forests. Deforestation accounts for some 20% of global carbon emissions.”

Read more

Carnegie Mellon researchers state the obvious in a new report:

A major program to subsidize coal-to-liquids [CTL] makes no sense, since the goals of energy independence and reducing greenhouse gas emissions can be achieved at lower cost through plug-in hybrid vehicles charged with electricity from reduced carbon sources.

The plug-in hybrid vehicle, which Climate Progress has long been a fan of, is a terrific climate solution. CTL is an irredeemably terrible idea masquerading as a redeemably so-so idea.

The report’s main, if obvious, conclusions are:

Read more