ThinkProgress Logo

Climate Progress

Dopey Survey by New Scientist

New Scientist is usually sharp, but not with the poll that led them to conclude, “the US public has a clear preference for action in the electricity sector rather than vehicle fuel.” The methodology was flawed:

new-scientist.jpgWe split the sample into three groups. One was told that the vehicle fuel policies would result in the price of a gallon rising to $4. The second group was told that a gallon would rise to $7 and the third $15. We did the same for electricity, telling the groups that a typical monthly bill would rise from $85 to either $87, $95 or $155. Then we presented all the respondents with the six policies and for each asked: “If an election were being held today, would you vote in favour of this policy or would you vote against it?”

Gosh, people would rather their electricity bill rise a little than their gasoline bill rise a lot. Duh.

And this polling completely misses the point that you can cut emissions in both sectors without raising energy bills — if you focus on energy efficiency.

Jeers to New Scientist for trying to pass off this silliness as serious analysis.

Climate News Roundup

Freak autumn & winter is Europe’s warmest for 700 yearsNew Scientist. “The last time Europeans saw similar temperatures to the autumn and winter of 2006-07, they were eating strawberries at Christmas in 1289.”

Why ‘Green’ Investing Has Gained FocusWall Street Journal. “For Holly Isdale, managing director and head of wealth advisory at Lehman Brothers, global warming isn’t a scientific theory — it’s an investment opportunity.”

Climate change and the fight for resources ‘will set world aflame’The Independent. “A report to be published by UNEP tomorrow will make a direct link between climate change and the Darfur conflict” (a point ClimateProgress has made before).

Senate Near Deal on Fuel Economy

Breaking News:

Senate lawmakers neared a compromise on Thursday to sharply increase automobile fuel efficiency….

The emerging compromise would preserve much of the lead Senate proposal that would require all vehicles to average 35 miles per gallon by 2020….

However, negotiators agreed to strip other mandates out of the bill, including one that would require specific efficiency gains after 2020.

Much better than nothing — and does not preclude revisiting post-2020 fuel efficiency as concern about peak oil and climate change grows in the coming years. Now the House must step up to the plate.

House Dems Should NOT punt on CAFE

dingell_headshot_2004.jpgE&E News (subs. req’d) has reported on an “apparent deal” between Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and House Energy and Commerce Chair John Dingell (D-MI):

Dingell has effectively decided to punt until later in the year the entire fuels title, which contained an alternative fuels mandate, a low-carbon fuel standard, a boost in corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards and coal-to-liquids provisions.

My sources — how many years I have waited to write that — say differently. They say no firm deal to punt on CAFE exists.

Punting on CAFE makes no sense now that political momentum has swung in favor of genuine action on fuel economy, and the Senate is poised to put CAFE into its energy bill.

Let’s hope my sources are right and the news reports are wrong. In any case, even if CAFE isn’t in the Bill, surely amendments will be offered. The time to act is now!

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up