So Newt Gingrich has promised to build a lunar base by the end of his second term (sic … or is that sick?).  Why?  Jon Stewart believes the answer is global warming:

“Newt Gingrich did that global warming ad with Nancy Pelosi, realized that the Earth is very sick, and now he wants to leave it for a younger planet.”

The Daily Show
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Related Post:

• Sorry, Buzz Aldrin, we’re not sending people to Mars by 2029 to “homestead” or study “climate change”

Our guest blogger is Daniel Souweine, Campaign Director of Forecast The Facts.

The Forecast the Facts campaign is already gaining attention, and as is to be expected, not everyone is applauding our efforts. On the far right, well known climate change deniers Anthony Watts and Michael Lewis accuse us of “laying the ground work for society controlled by corporate-government-military oligarchies,” while leading denier weathermen like John Ghiorse and John Coleman dust off tired canards that the planet is actually cooling and that CO2 does not cause global warming. While those criticisms don’t warrant a response, there is another line of analysis that does. Writing for Washington Post’s Capital Weather Gang, Jason Samenow labels our efforts a “smear campaign” and a “colossal waste of energy,” saying that we should be “establishing common ground with the unconvinced.”

The smear allegation is disturbing and important to dispense with first. Presumably Samenow is referring to the fact that we have included quotations from climate change-denying meteorologists on our site. As yet, not one of those quoted has suggested that we have misrepresented their views. Indeed, many of these TV meteorologists are openly proud to be considered deniers. They say so on air, online, in emails to us, and in their affiliation with prominent denial sites like Icecap. Compiling a careful count of weather reporters who reject the scientific consensus on climate change hardly qualifies as a smear campaign. In fact, there are many weather reporters we have researched that we believe fall in the denial camp, but we have not quoted on our site because we do not have sufficient evidence.

That said, Samenow’s other criticism, that our efforts are unproductive, seems almost reasonable, which is why we think it’s important for us to explain clearly why we take the approach we do.

Samenow backs up his main argument by juxtaposing our campaign with other, more “constructive” approaches that seek to convince climate change denying broadcast meteorologists through dialogue and factual presentations. To be clear, we applaud these efforts and think they should continue and be expanded. But it is totally implausible that these approaches alone will ensure that the American public gets the unvarnished truth about climate change from the nation’s weather reporters.

How can we be so sure? Because these efforts have been going on for years, and they have yet to turn the tide. Early entreaties to broadcast meteorologists date back as far as 1997, when then-Vice President Gore invited hundreds of weather reporters to a discussion at the White House. Since then, there have been numerous other efforts at dialogue, and they continue today. Again, we’re not saying that such education campaigns should cease. We just don’t think that they, on their own, will solve the problem.

Read more

Buffett casts his vote for renewable energy. Will he cast a vote against coal?

Warren Buffett’s utility subsidiary, MidAmerican Energy Holdings, has made a number of large investments in renewable energy over the past few years. But the famed investor doesn’t exactly make environmentalists jump for joy.

Buffett’s take on climate change has been schizophrenic, to put it kindly. In 2009, he penned an op-ed in the New York Times expressing his concern for the problem, mostly for economic reasons. But since then he has made massive bets on coal mining and transportation — calling the industry “fascinating.” MidAmerican also owns 11 coal-fired power plants around the U.S.

Oddly, the same year Buffett wrote that “the world properly worries about greenhouse emissions,” he fought against legislation that would have put a value on global warming pollution. Rolling Stone labeled him one of the top “climate killers” of 2009 due to his sizable investments in oil and coal.

But MidAmerican made a positive move worth mentioning this week. The company announced on Tuesday at it would set up a new business devoted to developing renewable energy generation projects in the unregulated market — focusing on wind, solar, geothermal and hydro. This is in addition to the $6 billion MidAmerican has invested in wind projects in the last three years, and $3 billion it invested in solar last year.

The announcement itself is notable. But the real story is the way executives at the company are talking about the move. Greentech Media reported on the news this week:

Read more

In his State of the Union address, President Obama announced he would push forward with new offshore drilling — which includes the pristine waters of the Beaufort Sea, Chukchi Sea, and Cook Inlet off Alaska’s coast. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) wrote a report in June 2011 that described dozens of areas that required further scientific research before taking the risks of disrupting the unique ecosystems on behalf of the oil industry. Now, nearly 600 scientists from around the world have signed an open letter urging President Obama and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to base Arctic drilling decisions on science, not politics:

We, the undersigned 573 research scientists, call upon the Administration to follow through on its commitment to science by acting on the USGS recommendations. Doing so prior to authorizing new oil and gas activity in the Arctic Ocean will respect the national significance of the environment and cultures of U.S. Arctic waters and demonstrate the value that your Administration places on having a sound scientific basis for managing industrial development of the Outer Continental Shelf.

“Already stressed by rapidly melting summer ice, the whales, walrus, ice seals, polar bears, and other wildlife in these waters are especially vulnerable to oil spills and industrial activity,” the Pew Environment Group and the Ocean Conservancy explain in a full-page ad they will run in the New York Times and Politico highlighting the letter.

Drilling for fossil fuels in a melting Arctic would accelerate the potentially catastrophic destabilization of the planet’s thermostat. As National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration chief Jane Lubchenco told ThinkProgress Green, “We don’t fully understand what the consequences of that are going to be.”

An upcoming report from the Center for American progress, due to be released later this month, will examine in greater detail America’s deficiencies in regard to Arctic infrastructure and oil spill response preparedness, and suggest steps to be taken before activities, such as drilling, commence in the world’s last unspoiled frontier.

In 1880, when modern global temperature records began, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels were at 285 parts per million. In 2011, they are were over 390 parts per million. That has trapped a lot of extra energy on earth — see “The Radiative Forcing of the CO2 Humans Have Put in the Air Equals 1 Million Hiroshima Bombs a Day.”

As we’ve spewed greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere at at a faster pace, global temperatures have accelerated upward, particularly since the 1970′s. To illustrate this rise, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies released this fascinating video of 131 years of temperature records edited into a 30-second video.

“We know the planet is absorbing more energy than it is emitting,” said GISS Director James E. Hansen. “So we are continuing to see a trend toward higher temperatures. Even with the cooling effects of a strong La Niña influence and low solar activity for the past several years, 2011 was one of the 10 warmest years on record.”

Hansen said he expects record-breaking global average temperature in the next two to three years….  “It’s always dangerous to make predictions about El Niño, but it’s safe to say we’ll see one in the next three years,” Hansen said. “It won’t take a very strong El Niño to push temperatures above 2010.”

by Rebecca Leber

Chevron Corp. announced fourth-quarter earnings today of $5.1 billion, falling from $5.3 billion a year earlier. However, the second-largest U.S. energy company had a record year-end profit of $26.9 billion, a 23.3 percent jump since 2010. Here are a few other useful facts about Chevron:

• Chevron has spent more than $9 million lobbying Congress in 2011.
• Chevron contributed $467,996 to federal campaigns in 2011, with 91% to Republican candidates.
• Chevron is the third-largest campaign contributor in the oil and gas industry.
• Chevron had $13 billion in cash on hand last year. The five oil companies collectively have cash resources of $59 billion.
• The company spent $1.25 billion on stock repurchases for Q4. They spent 16 percent — $4.35 billion — of annual profit to reinvest in their own stock. That enriches their shareholders, but it doesn’t add to oil supplies or investments in alternative fuels or other new technologies.

Earlier this week, ConocoPhillips reported record fourth-quarter profits of $3.4 billion — a 66 percent gain, with a 2011 profit totaling $12.4 billion. Exxon releases its fourth-quarter results this coming Tuesday.

Chevron Corp. announced fourth-quarter earnings today of $5.1 billion, falling from $5.3 billion a year earlier. However, the second-largest U.S. energy company had a record year-end profit of $26.9 billion, a 23.3 percent jump since 2010. Here are a few other useful facts about Chevron:

– Chevron’s $26.9 billion profit translates to $3 million every hour or $51,000 every minute of 2011.

– Chevron has spent more than $9 million lobbying Congress in 2011.

– Chevron contributed $467,996 to federal campaigns in 2011, with 91 percent to Republican candidates. This does not include their undisclosed contributions to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Petroleum Institute, or other organizations.

– Chevron is the third-largest campaign contributor in the oil and gas industry.

– Chevron had $13 billion in cash on hand last year. The five oil companies collectively have cash resources of $59 billion.

– The company spent $1.25 billion on stock repurchases for Q4. They spent 16 percent — $4.35 billion — of annual profit to reinvest in their own stock. That enriches their shareholders, but it doesn’t add to oil supplies or investments in alternative fuels or other new technologies.

Earlier this week, ConocoPhillips reported record fourth-quarter profits of $3.4 billion — a 66 percent gain, with a 2011 profit totaling $12.4 billion. Exxon releases its fourth-quarter results this coming Tuesday.

by Zach Rybarczyk

As the third-largest coal producer, Kentucky generates about 94% of its electricity from the resource. As a result, the state has some of the lowest electricity prices in the country. But that’s not the true cost of energy.

According to a health impact assessment by the Kentucky Environmental Foundation that examines research on the impact of coal in Kentucky, the health costs came in at more than $62 million in 2007 — and that’s just for asthma, which inflicts 1 in 10 Kentuckians and kills about 50 people in the state per year. Asthma rates for African Americans of high school age in Kentucky are at 22%.

More than 3.3 million residents in the state live within 30 miles of a coal fired power plant.

The report examines costs along the coal value chain, including mining, transportation and electricity generation. KEF cites a study from Public Health Reports that finds 2,347 – 2,889 yearly excess deaths from coal mining in Appalachia, costing the region an estimated $10 billion each year.

Data reviewed for this health impact assessment clearly indicates that coal poses significant health risks to people working at or living near coal facilities at each phase of its cycle – mining, processing, transportation, combustion, and waste disposal. Accidents in underground mines, and at or near surface coal mines can injure or kill workers or people living nearby. Pollution including soot, smog-forming chemicals, greenhouse gases and heavy metals travels through the air or water and can impact the health of people living close to coal-related activities, and the general public living hundreds of miles from the pollution source.

In fact, a recent report from some of the leading economists in the country found that accounting for these and other environmental harms would add “close to 17.8¢/kWh of electricity generated” from coal.

The health impact assessment was put together by KEF, a Kentucky-based environmental group, in order to raise awareness for policies supporting clean energy in the state. Kentucky currently has no requirement for efficiency or renewable energy generation. However, there is currently a bill in the legislature that would increase renewable energy targets to 12.5% of generation by 2022, increase efficiency by 10.25% by 2022, and create a feed-in tariff program as a support mechanism.

The Institute for Energy Research — an anti-clean energy free-market think tank — has praised Kentucky’s failure to embrace clean energy, saying it “has thus far avoided many of the costly energy policies.”

Or rather, it has pushed the costs elsewhere in society.

• Economics Stunner: “Oil and Coal-Fired Power Plants Have Air Pollution Damages Larger Than Their Value Added.”

Other stories below: Singapore raises sea defenses against tide of climate; FirstEnergy to shut down six coal sites

Waxman: GOP ‘so stupid’ to include Keystone pipeline in payroll tax package

A senior Democrat on the payroll tax conference panel had some strong words Thursday for Republicans hoping to attach Keystone pipeline language to the package.

“That is so stupid, already, for them to be pushing the Keystone pipeline issue in this bill, in this conference,” Rep. Henry Waxman told reporters gathered near the Chesapeake Bay for the Democrats’ annual caucus retreat. “The pipeline issue is one that the Republicans are obsessing over.”

The California Democrat suggested that a provision forcing approval of the pipeline would alienate the Democrats on the panel and kill any shot at a bipartisan deal.

“Many of us believe that that pipeline will lock us into a 50 to 100 years of dependence on the dirtiest source of oil,” said Waxman, the senior Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. He characterized the GOP’s Keystone provision as a “special interest earmark” with no business on the tax bill.

Read more