No one can possibly undo all of the damage to climate science and individual scientists done by the diarrhea of disinformation spewing out of the anti-science crowd.   In large part that’s because of the reckless laziness of many in the status quo media, such as CBS, who prefer easy sensationalism to thoughtful journalism.

Few scientists have been more victimized than Michael Mann, Director of Pennsylvania State University’s Earth System Science Center.  Than again, few scientists have been more vindicated than Michael Mann (see “Penn State inquiry finds no evidence for allegations against Michael Mann” and below).

That’s why I feel compelled to keep doing my small part in helping to set the record straight as often as possible — and to publicize the tremendous work of others doing the same, such as the blogger Deep Climate, who has uncovered previously unknown details of just how some of the most fraudulent charges against Mann and the Hockey Stick graph were trumped up by the anti-science crowd in the first place.

Remember the question scientists are trying to answer:  Is the planet now as hot (or hotter) than it has been in a millenium?  Try two millennia (see this 2008 PNAS study, which is the source of the figure above, and this “seminal” 2009 Science study).

In the interests of not spending my time rewriting the terrific work done by others, let me urge you all to read Deep Climate, while I excerpt a very good summary by DeSmogBlog:

Read more

Plus Dr. Jeff Masters on “Heavy snowfall in a warming world”

Memo to anti-science crowd:  Precipitation isn’t temperature!

Another massive mid-Atlantic precipitation event, another piece of nonsense from the anti-science crowd.   Kevin Mooney of the American Spectator actually wrote an article titled, “Snowmageddon” Versus “Overwhelming Scientific Evidence,” which asserts:

Read more

Coming together on climate bill

Defying conventional wisdom that a hardened partisan divide and looming midterm elections will prevent the type of compromises necessary for big reforms, business leaders and environmentalists are redoubling their efforts to advance an energy and climate bill in the Senate.

It’s a seemingly improbable goal, but upending that way of thinking is one of the objectives of a Capitol Hill lobbying blitz launched last week by executives from nearly 200 large and small companies. A dozen CEOs ”” including Shell Oil’s Marvin Odum, Duke Energy’s Jim Rogers and NRG Energy’s David Crane ”” are scheduled to meet with lawmakers and administration officials Tuesday.

“Comprehensive climate change legislation is not part of the liberal agenda,” said Crane, whose company operates a wide range of energy facilities that run from wind to coal to nuclear. “It’s a decidedly centrist thing. We reduce carbon emissions, and we reduce our dependence on Middle Eastern oil. Both parts of the political spectrum should come together on that.”

“Any capitalist with a pulse knows China is moving forward,” said Tad Segal, a spokesman for U.S. Climate Action Partnership, a coalition of business and environmental groups that favor reform. “We can solve a crisis at the same time we grow jobs.”

Another business coalition, called We Can Lead, which includes a mix of pro-reform businesses, is taking the campaign to the public by running television and print ads urging Congress to “move swiftly and boldly” and pass legislation.

Chu takes R&D budget request to House Science panel

Read more

Update: In an interview with the Wonk Room, EPA official Gina McCarthy argues that OMB’s involvement helped strengthen the final standard.

The Obama White House interfered with smog standards at the last minute, preventing the Environmental Protection Agency from properly protecting the health of millions of Americans. The White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and its subsidiary Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), led by Obama pick Cass Sunstein, oversees regulatory decisions by federal agencies. “The EPA issued a new rule recently on nitrogen dioxide (NO2),” Center for Progressive Reform president Rena Steinzor writes, “but not before it was weakened by OMB. The consequences for the public health are real.” On December 18, the EPA had proposed installing new monitoring stations at all cities with a population of 350,000 or more, but by “the time OIRA completed its review on January 22, the minimum threshold for monitoring stations had been increased to one per 500,000 people.” The Center for Progressive Reform discovered an email from a top EPA official that reveals the agency opposed the White House interference:

The EPA had made its position clear, it turns out. In a January 20th email about the “500,000″ proposal, Lisa Heinzerling, the EPA’s Associate Administrator for policy, wrote, “EPA does not support the alternative threshold described in the email below.”

The new standards “will improve air quality, particularly in communities disproportionately impacted by environmental problems.” However, the last-minute interference unnecessarily leaves millions without the same protection. As Matthew Madia relates at OMB Watch, there was no justification offered for the loosening of the standards:

The final rule claims the threshold was raised “after consideration of public comments,” but EPA provides no evidence that the public opposed the lower threshold. The Clean Air Council asked for an even lower threshold, possibly down to 100,000 people, according to a recap of comments in the final rule. Even Dow Chemical Company, which was pushing for a weaker one-hour standard, called the 350,000 person threshold “reasonable.”

When Cass Sunstein was nominated by Obama to run OIRA, environmental watchdogs raised significant concerns that he may share his predecessors’ antiregulatory zeal.

Ironically, Lisa Heinzerling, a law professor, was one of the sharpest critics of Bush White House interference with environmental rules. When the Bush administration wrote a rule to block the Endangered Species Act from addressing the threat of climate change, she said “rule turns the pit bull into a poodle.” Under Ken Salazar, the Obama Department of the Interior has continued to embrace Bush’s “poodle” rule.

Part 4: What went wrong in the Obama White House?

“Historians will puzzle over the fact that Barack Obama, the best communicator of his generation, totally lost control of the narrative in his first year in office and allowed people to view something they had voted for as something they suddenly didn’t want,” says Jim Morone, America’s leading political scientist on healthcare reform. “Communication was the one thing everyone thought Obama would be able to master.”

So writes Financial Times Washington Bureau Chief Edward Luce.

I’m doing a multipart series on progressive messaging, since the failure of that messaging is the second-most important reason we are not going to get a strong enough climate bill this year (assuming the conventional wisdom is wrong and we get one at all).  Of course, the most important reason, by far, remains the self-destructive demagoguing and obstinacy of anti-science, pro-polluter ideologues.

The failure to advance a narrative (frame or extended metaphor) has been a disaster (see Part 1 and Part 2).  It’s worth understanding why that happened.

Read more

AP: “27 of 104 plants leak radioactive tritium, a carcinogen, raising Concerns about nation’s aging plants”

Radioactive tritium, a carcinogen discovered in potentially dangerous levels in groundwater at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, now taints at least 27 of the nation’s 104 nuclear reactors “” raising concerns about how it is escaping from the aging nuclear plants.

Just something to add to all of the “benefits” of going nuke (see “Intro to nuclear power“).  At the very least, this should put up yet another warning flag on the rush to build dozens of new nukes.

The AP story suggests that the original plant designs were inadequate from the perspective of public safety:

Read more

Our favorite climate de-crocker, Peter Sinclair has now started putting together videos on clean energy solutions:

Plug ins are indeed a core climate (and peak oil) solution.  If you want to know more, here’s where to start:

Read more