Mark Mellman, a leading pollster for progressives since 1982, has written a must-read op-ed slamming the latest dubious messaging advice:

Some progressives seem unwilling to take yes for an answer.

Just as the long battle for public opinion on global warming is being won, along comes a well-meaning Bob Perkowitz and his ecoAmerica with a politically na¯ve, methodologically flawed and factually inaccurate study, which he apparently interprets as telling us that voters do not care about global warming.

He could hardly be more wrong.

In fact, most Americans believe global warming is real, is happening now and constitutes a serious threat, particularly to future generations.

Last week, I was very critical of ecoAmerica’s advice on climate messaging after sitting through the full two-hour presentation (see “Messaging 101b: EcoAmerica’s phrase ‘our deteriorating atmosphere’ isn’t going to replace ‘global warming’ “” and that’s a good thing“).

Perkowitz, in the comments, questioned “What background do you have in the cognitive sciences or marketing?“  Although it is my full-time job — and has been my part-time job for nearly two decades — and although I have followed all the polling and messaging reports closely, I’m just a lowly messaging amateur.

On the other hand, Robert J. Brulle, Professor of Sociology and Environmental Science, Department of Culture and Communications, Drexel University — and a widely published expert on environmental messaging — emailed me about my analysis:

I liked your blog post today.   I think we agree at about the 95% level across the board.

And now we have Mark Mellman, president of The Mellman Group, whose “current clients include the majority leaders of both the House and Senate.”  Mellman is one of the most respected pollsters and messaging gurus in the progressive world.  Here’s his take on the public view of global warming based on all the recent polling, including his own:

Read more

It’s the ice thickness, stupid.

The Arctic ice cover, which has endured for at least 100,000 years, will be all but gone within a decade according to a volume-based projection by a leading British scientist, the BBC reports.  At the same time, “a gruelling 73-day” survey of sea-ice thickness found “the average thickness of the sea ice was 1.774 m” [5.8 feet].

One surveyor said the data “seems to suggest it was almost all first-year ice.”  And that confirms what the National Snow and Ice Data Center reported in April:

The view of the Arctic from above tells you only ice area, not volume.  So even as the climate science deniers (temporarily) crow about the latest two-dimensional data, those who think three-dimensionally know that the Arctic is a cracking eggshell (see NSIDC: Arctic melt passes the point of no return, “We hate to say we told you so, but we did.”).

Peter Wadhams, head of the polar ocean physics group at the University of Cambridge, “believes the ice, which has been a permanent feature for at least 100,000 years, is now so thin that almost all of it will disappear in about a decade“:

Read more

President Obama praised House Democrats today for “extraordinary progress” in their negotiations on global warming and energy legislation at the center of his domestic agenda.

So reports Greenwire (subs. req’d) today:

“I want to take a moment, before I start talking about health care, just to congratulate Chairman [Henry] Waxman and the Energy and Commerce Committee Democrats, who’ve made such extraordinary progress in reaching a deal on comprehensive energy reform and climate legislation,” Obama told reporters at the White House.

“This is a major step forward in building the kind of clean energy economy that will reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil,” the president added.

Obama repeated his clarion call for action:

Read more

Solar Hot Water for Toronto Homeowners

Solar Thermal comes to Canada (!), and guess who’s selling them the solar panels: not us.

In an innovative joint venture, Canadian natural gas giant Enbridge Gas Distribution has teamed up with green electricity marketer Bullfrog Power and the City of Toronto to promote solar thermal systems that promise to slash residential hot water heating costs by as much as 60 percent, or about $260 per year.

Under the program, announced Tuesday, London-based EnerWorks will supply the panels, which are certified for year-round use.

Homeowners can qualify for federal and provincial rebates to offset half of the $7,000-$10,000 capital outlay. Enbridge has anted up a $400,000 grant to further reduce costs for some residents.

Read more

Concentrated solar thermal aka solar baseload has definitely come of age in the United States.

Just a few weeks ago, I posted “World’s largest solar power plants with thermal storage to be built in Arizona” about a 200-MW plant and a 280-MW plant planned for AZ.  But “The technology that will save humanity” is on the fast track thank to the stimulus:  “Mohave Sun Power, LLC has announced plans to build a 340-megawatt concentrating solar project.”

CSP plants are cropping up all over.  Earth2tech reports, “11 Solar Thermal Companies Powering Up“:

There are 2.5GW of solar thermal projects with announced power purchase agreements in California and Arizona slated for construction in the next few years.

UPDATE:  In its new study Global Concentrated Solar Power Markets and Strategies 2009-2020, Emerging Energy Research finds that “the CSP industry is scaling rapidly with 1.2 GW under construction as of April 2009 and another 13.9 GW announced globally through 2014 … with 8.5 GW in the pipeline and scheduled for installation by 2014.”  Here is their remarkable figure showing the “global take-off” of CSP:

Global CSP pipeline by country, 1985-2014.

Read more

The first quote is the Washington Post headline today.  Can’t argue with the overall message — although I would like to know what those “house emissions” are.  Roll Call‘s spin is more political, and thus more positive, “Waxman, Markey Announce Breakthrough on Climate Change Bill.”  Or you can take Congress Daily AM’s spin, “Energy And Commerce Dems Reach Partial Deal On Climate And Energy.”  Or Bloomberg’s, which cuts to the chase, “Democratic Climate Plan Would Trim CO2 Emissions 17%” by 2020.

The original Waxman-Markey has indeed been weakened.  I’ll post the details as they become available, although most of the basics have already been reported.  Certainly the bill is no longer a B+.  I won’t be able to give it a final grade until we see all the details — I just learned something that wasn’t in any of the news stories, that the 5 to 4 “exchange” rate for offsets is gone. Dumb!

UPDATE:  I’m informed that my original source was wrong and the 5 to 4 ratio is still in the bill!  ["For every tonne of an entity's compliance obligation that is covered by an offset, an entity must turn in 1.25 offsets"].

That said, I see nothing to change Al Gore’s overall judgment:  “One of the most important pieces of legislation ever introduced in the Congress “¦ has the moral significance” of 1960s civil rights legislation and Marshall Plan

The “good” news is that one of the most elements of the bill — the 2020 target — has been weakened less than earlier reports had suggested:

Read more