In “The Great Dying” 250 million years ago, the devastation came with runaway greenhouse warming

The geology of Griesbach Creek in the Arctic tells an ancient tale of slow extinction.  Source NSF.

A reposted National Science Foundation press release.

The deadliest mass extinction of all took a long time to kill 90 percent of Earth’s marine life–and it killed in stages–according to a newly published report.

It shows that mass extinctions need not be sudden events.

Thomas Algeo, a geologist at the University of Cincinnati, and 13 colleagues have produced a high-resolution look at the geology of a Permian-Triassic boundary section on Ellesmere Island in the Canadian Arctic.

Their analysis, published today in the Geological Society of America Bulletin [abstract here], provides strong evidence that Earth’s biggest mass extinction phased in over hundreds of thousands of years.

About 252 million years ago, at the end of the Permian period, Earth almost became a lifeless planet.

Around 90 percent of all living species disappeared then, in what scientists have called “The Great Dying.”

Algeo and colleagues have spent much of the past decade investigating the chemical evidence buried in rocks formed during this major extinction.

The world revealed by their research is a devastated landscape, barren of vegetation and scarred by erosion from showers of acid rain, huge “dead zones” in the oceans, and runaway greenhouse warming leading to sizzling temperatures.

Read more

In a speech today on energy policy at the University of Miami, President Barack Obama went off his prepared remarks to note that young people — including his daughters — seem to care more than his generation does about the fate of the planet:

Anybody who tells you that we can drill our way out of this problem doesn’t know what they’re talking about or just isn’t telling you the truth. Young people especially understand this, because, you know, it’s interesting. When I talk to Malia and Sasha — you guys are so much more aware of conserving our resources and thinking about the planet.

Watch it:

The president’s speech forcefully rejected the Republican idea that the solution to all of the world’s ills — including rising gas prices — is to drill, baby, drill. However, not once did Obama directly recognize the reality of climate change. The past burning of hundreds of billions of tons of fossil fuels is already degrading the safety of our planet for human civilization. To keep Obama’s own promise of limiting total warming to no more than 2°C, about 80 percent of proved fossil-fuel reserves will have to remain in the ground.

Republican Presidential Candidate Rick Santorum doesn’t hide his deep disdain for environmental protection.

As Santorum gains media traction after three unofficial primary wins, the outspoken Catholic has been increasingly vocal about his strong dislike of environmentalists. Speaking at a rally this past weekend, Santorum called Obama’s environmental policies a “phony theology” designed to “give more power to the government.”

“When you have a worldview that elevates the Earth above man and says that we can’t take those resources because we’re going to harm the Earth; by things that frankly are just not scientifically proven, for example, the politicization of the whole global warming debate — this is all an attempt to, you know, to centralize power and to give more power to the government.”

Santorum often expresses his strong dislike for environmental protection within a religious context, saying that humans were “put on this earth … for our benefit, not for the earth’s benefit.” However, this belief is completely out of step with mainstream religious leaders — including the Pope — who have called on world leaders to address climate change and other pressing environmental issues in order “protect all creation.”

Santorum’s stance on environmental issues stems from a passage in Genesis 1:28, which reads: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Expressing his interpretation of this passage at a campaign rally recently, Santorum explained that “we were put on this Earth as creatures of God to have dominion over the Earth…. We should not let the vagaries of nature destroy what we have helped create.” He also said that environmentalism is “a worldview that elevates the Earth above man and says that we can’t take those resources because we’re going to harm the Earth.”

However, Santorum confuses this Genesis passage as a command for exploitation, extraction and waste — when in fact the Bible clearly explains that the earth is a gift to be taken care of, not fouled.

Stewardship of the earth is not just a strong theme in Genesis. It’s a very strong theme throughout the entire Old Testament. So what other messages does the Bible deliver on the importance of environmental protection? Here are some of the best:

Read more

In an address on energy policy at the University of Miami, President Barack Obama mocked the GOP drumbeat for a drill-baby-drill response to rising gas prices. Noting that “it’s an election year,” Obama alluded to Newt Gingrich’s promise to deliver $2.50 gas with a return of drill-everywhere platform. Obama described the “three-point plans for $2 gas”: “Step one is drill, step two is drill, and step three is keep drilling.”

“The American people aren’t stupid,” Obama said. Drill, baby, drill is “bumper sticker, not a strategy to solve our energy challenge”:

I mean, the American people aren’t stupid. They know that’s not a plan – especially since we’re already drilling. That’s a bumper sticker. It’s not a strategy to solve our energy challenge. That’s a strategy to get politicians through an election. You know there are no quick fixes to this problem. You know we can’t just drill our way to lower gas prices. If we’re going to take control of our energy future, and can start avoiding these annual gas price spikes that happen every year when the economy starts getting better, world demand starts increasing, turmoil in the Middle East or some other parts of the world, if we’re going to stop being at the mercy of these world events, then we need a sustained, all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy – oil, gas, wind, solar, and nuclear, and biofuels, and more. We need to keep developing the technology that allows us to use less oil in our cars and trucks, less energy for our buildings and our plants and our factories. That’s the strategy we’re pursuing, and that’s the only real solution to this challenge.

Watch it:

In his speech, Obama also noted the role of Wall Street speculators who now dominate oil markets and called for an end to the “outrageous” billions in tax subsidies the massively profitable oil companies receive from the American people.

A groundbreaking geothermal heating and cooling project shows that these super-efficient heat pumps are gaining traction

Construction of the Ball State University geothermal project is underway

by Christopher Williams

Construction of the largest ground-source geothermal heating and cooling system in the United States is now underway and half complete.

The project, located on the Muncie, Indiana campus of Ball State University, will be large enough to heat and cool 47 buildings, replace four coal-fired boilers, and save the campus roughly $2 million a year over the 30-year life of the system.

The project will also help create 2,300 direct and indirect jobs throughout the construction period.

This is great news for a technology that has been available, efficient and economical since the 1940′s. In 1993, the EPA called it “the most efficient, environmentally clean, and cost effective space conditioning system today.” While the technology has been known for decades, the size of the Ball State project proves that geothermal installers and designers are gaining confidence to implement the technology on a massive scale and are winning the trust of risk-averse property owners.

The role of ground source heat pumps in the U.S.

Geothermal, or ground source heat pumps, can play a critical role in changing the U.S. energy mix by reducing the use of petroleum, coal and gas for on-site heating and cooling applications. The technologies we tend to think of when we use the term “renewable energy” — solar PV, wind, and hydro — usually do nothing to address thermal energy, which makes up roughly one third of our nation’s energy use.

For example, space heating represents 45% of energy use in the average single-family home in the U.S. — by far the single biggest use of energy for consumers. But consumers tend to think mostly about renewable electricity technologies, rather than heating and cooling technologies. Geothermal heat pumps can eliminate the need for on-site fossil fuel use for the heating of a property, particularly in the Northeast, where fuel oil is used to heat a large percentage of buildings.

The state of the geothermal heat pump industry
Read more

TUCSON, Arizona — Newt Gingrich is apparently an oil market whisperer, at least according to Rick Perry. The Texas governor and former presidential candidate, who is now backing Gingrich, told reporters in the spin room after last night’s GOP debate that the former speaker can bring down oil prices by merely talking about wanting more domestic oil drilling:

PERRY: As a matter of fact, perception is everything in this world we live in, and if the perception is Newt Gingrich could be the next president of the United States, that will have a worldwide effect, I will suggest to you, on the price of oil. And people who watch these markets and people who deal with these markets understand, that when you see the type of approach that he’s talking about — opening up federal lands and waters, opening up that pipeline from Canada, clearly giving incentives to drill in America for domestic energy, and then an all of the above policy, whether it’s wind or nuclear or whatever it might be — that will have a dampening effect on the cost of oil in particular and the other energy prices as well.

Watch it:

Oil prices are actually unusually high right now, so either Gingrich’s abilities are less powerful than Perry suggests or not many people perceive that he could be the next president. Of course, domestic oil production is already up under President Obama, and oil prices are set in a global market, meaning increased domestic production has negligible impact, so Perry’s argument is a bit far-fetched, to say the least.

But Gingrich has relied on this kind of voodoo policy making before. He often says in stump speeches that the economy will begin to recover the night he is elected president, months before he has a chance to be inaugurated and implement any new policies.

by Todd Gregory, cross-posted from Media Matters

The Muppets. SpongeBob SquarePants. Dr. Seuss. Beloved icons of childhood entertainment in America, or subtle forms of anti-business indoctrination that brainwash your kids into hating capitalism?

Thank goodness we have Fox to ask these questions.

Lou Dobbs sounded the alarm again tonight on his Fox Business show:

DOBBS: Now, an “Unmentionable” — a story you won’t hear anywhere in the liberal national media, or nearly all of the national liberal media. Hollywood is once again trying to indoctrinate our children. Two new films out this year, plainly with an agenda, plainly demonizing the so-called “1 percent” and espousing the virtue of green-energy policies, come what may.

The first, Dobbs said, is an animated film called The Secret World of Arrietty, and the second is Universal Pictures’ computer-animated version of the 1971 Dr. Seuss classic The Lorax.

The graphic that aired during a clip of the movie declared, ” ‘Lorax’ Movie Pushes Anti-Industry Message”:

Dobbs found the message of these two movies reminiscent of President Obama’s recent speeches on taxes. For support, he played clips of Obama, complete with an “Indoctrinating Our Children” graphic:

Read more

President Obama should use the strategic petroleum reserve to lower gasoline prices

by Daniel J. Weiss

Americans are rightly concerned about rising oil and gasoline prices. On February 21 oil closed at $106 per barrel, while the average gallon of gas in the United States cost $3.59. Bloomberg reports that prices could continue to rise:

While gas prices tend to rise through the first half of the year, this is the earliest the average price per gallon has breached the $3.50 mark. If this pace continues, the national average should hit $4 a gallon by May, if not sooner.

This is not good news for consumers or for the economy. High oil and gasoline prices slow economic growth and take a real toll on families’ already-strained budgets. They are difficult to lower in the short run because it is very hard to promptly increase oil supplies. Meanwhile, demand for gasoline does not decrease even as prices increase because most people cannot quickly and significantly reduce the amount they drive.

There is one proven tool for temporary reductions in oil and gasoline prices that can forestall reduced economic growth and help middle-class families: selling oil reserves from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

President Barack Obama plans to speak about high oil and gasoline prices today in Florida. He will remind Americans that oil production is up and consumption is down, which means that families are saving money on fewer gasoline purchases even though prices are rising. The payroll tax cut extension will provide an average of $40 more per paycheck and will also help ease some of the strain of higher gasoline prices. It is unlikely the president will announce the sale of reserve oil during the speech, but it remains an option if prices continue to climb.

Why are oil and gasoline prices so high?

Oil and gasoline prices are rising now for a myriad of reasons. Growing demand from China and India has boosted consumption, and Libyan production has yet to return to its prewar level of 1.6 million barrels per day. Pat Garofalo of ThinkProgress reports that the price is going up “despite lowest [U.S.] demand [for oil] since 1997.” He cites Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst for the Oil Price Information Service, who says that speculators are helping to drive up oil prices:

Read more

The EPA can’t be used as a scapegoat for plant closures that have been informed by many different economic drivers.

by Dan Bakal, reposted from Ceres

When the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its Mercury and Air Toxics Rule (MATS) in December, a handful of utility companies that rely heavily on coal-fired power plants claimed the rule would lead to power plant retirements.  Yesterday’s publication of the final rule in the Federal Register has set off a new round of criticism as the clock starts ticking on any last-minute legal or legislative actions to undermine the rule.

Take, for instance, FirstEnergy’s recent announcements that it will retire nine of its older coal-fired power plants by September 1, 2012.  In its statements, FirstEnergy blamed the EPA’s Mercury rule for forcing the retirements. Not only is the company blaming the EPA for the retirements, it is also placing potential layoffs and grid reliability issues at the EPA’s door. This decision poses an important question:  if these retirements are because of the EPA rule, why is FirstEnergy retiring the nine plants which are located in Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Maryland in 2012, rather than waiting until 2014, when these older plants would actually have to come into compliance?

In their news release, FirstEnergy states:

“We recently completed a comprehensive review of our coal-fired generating plants and determined that additional investments to implement MATS and other environmental rules would make these older plants even less likely to be dispatched under market rules. As a result, it was necessary to retire the plants rather than continue operations.”

Upon closer inspection, however, it’s fairly easy to see that this decision wasn’t based primarily on EPA rules; it was based on current economics, including the following:

• These Eisenhower-era plants are on average 58 years old and have rarely been used since 2010. (They have an average capacity factor of 36.5%.)
• A slower economy, energy-efficiency programs and mild weather have reduced demand for power.
• Today’s historically low natural gas prices, which are not expected to increase much any time soon, mean it is more expensive to produce power using coal-fired plants than natural gas plants. (The process of converting a coal plant to natural gas is complex, but is also a project that is fully achievable within the EPA’s timelines.)

So when a plant is already over half a century old, underutilized and inefficient during those occasions when it is used – it probably makes better business sense to retire it rather than making the investments to convert it to natural gas or retrofit it with pollution controls to comply with EPA clean air rules.  Sure, the MATS rule may have played some role in the decision-making process, but these plants were on a clear path toward retirement in the near future.

Read more

Marking the one-year anniversary of the Solyndra investigation, the Republican National Committee released an infographic on President Obama’s supposed “insider deals.”

But after 187,000 documents, 10 hearings, and multiple independent media investigations concluding there was no evidence of political “pressure” to approve the loan guarantee, Republicans show no signs of ending the political games around Solyndra. In response to the RNC, Climate Progress created its own infographic that puts the politics-infused investigation into perspective:

And if you hadn’t seen it, here’s the RNC’s version:

Read more

Other stories below: Global warming means tough choices for West Virginia; Judge’s Ruling Complicates Hydrofracking Issue in New York

Chinese Tier-2 Modules Offered Below $1/W

Prices for crystalline-silicon (c-Si) solar photovoltaic (PV) modules fell below the $1/W mark in January 2012, and in some cases well below even that, marking the first time that global average prices have fallen below this milestone, according to IMS Research.

Read more