Yet another poll finds Americans do understand the planet is warming and driving more extreme weather. The Washington Post/Stanford University poll conducted in mid-June — before the recent monster heat wave — found 6 in 10 Americans understand that the climate is warming and weather patterns are becoming more unstable. Poll details are here.

A full 77% agree government should “limit the amount of greenhouse gasses that U.S.businesses put out.” This is consistent with other 2012 polls (see “Poll: 75 Percent of Americans Support Regulating CO2 As A Pollutant, 60 Percent Support Revenue-Neutral Carbon Tax“). Some 57% “think global warming is causing there to be more droughts,” — an accurate understanding of climate science and real-world observations.

Only 22% believe the warming we have seen is due to “natural causes” while 30% understand it come from “things people do” and 47% say it is both of the reasons “equally.” It’d  be interesting to ask people directly what percentage of recent warming is due to human activity. For the record, It’s “Extremely Likely That at Least 74% of Observed Warming Since 1950″ Was Manmade; It’s Highly Likely All of It Was.

When asked, “If nothing is done to reduce global warming in the future, how serious of a problem do you think it will be for the United States,” 40% said “very serious” and another 38% said “somewhat serious.”

Significantly, only 12% of  respondents said taking steps to address global warming would decrease the quality of their own lives, while 43%  said it would make their lives better. No doubt that’s why so many support strong action.

Related polling posts:

• Public Understanding Of Climate Science Rebounds, 72% of Independents Say There Is ‘Solid Evidence’ Of Global Warming
• Gallup: 65% of Americans Support ‘Imposing Mandatory Controls On CO2 Emissions’
• Polling Expert: Is Obama’s Reluctance to Mention Climate Change Motivated by a False Assumption About Public Opinion?

• Poll: Large Majority Of Americans Understand Global Warming Made Several Major Extreme Weather Events Worse
• Pew Poll: Clean Energy Is A Political Wedge Among Republicans
• Independents, Other Republicans Split With Tea-Party Extremists on Global Warming

• Democrats Taking “Green” Positions on Climate Change “Won Much More Often” Than Those Remaining Silent: “Our research suggests that it would be wise for the President and for all other elected officials who believe that climate change is a problem and merits government attention to say this publicly and vigorously, because most Americans share these views.  Expressing and pursuing green goals on climate change will gain votes on election day and seem likely to increase the President’s and the Congress’s approval ratings.”

by Elena Craft, via Mom’s Clean Air Force

As we continue seeking relief from rising temperatures this month, it’s also time to be on the watch for ozone alerts. The annual Texas smog season – April 1 through October – already appears to be in full swing this year with numerous counties around the state exceeding health-based ozone concentrations many times since March.

Just last week, the Houston Chronicle highlighted the magnitude of ozone exceedances that the area hasn’t seen since 2003. Additionally, the month of May was the nation’s “smoggiest” in the past five years according to a recent report released by Clean Air Watch. Texas ranked second, surpassed only by California, for the most Code Red and Code Orange days so far in 2012, with 18 days and 27 days respectively.

Ozone-forming pollution is emitted by cars, refineries and various industrial plants. As more Texans begin to see shale gas drilling rigs pop up around them, many are asking the question: Could emissions from natural gas and oil operations significantly contribute to ground-level ozone? The answer is an unequivocal yes.

The Role of Natural Gas and Oil in Rising Ozone Levels

While burning natural gas produces less smog-forming pollution than coal combustion but more than renewable energy generation, much of the equipment used in the drilling, production, processing and transporting of natural gas and oil produces significant amounts of such pollution.  This equipment releases volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), which combine in the presence of sunlight to form ground-level ozone or “smog.” According to the state of Colorado, natural gas and oil operations were the largest source of ozone-forming pollution, VOCs and NOx in 2008.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has reported that storage tanks used in the exploration and production of natural gas and oil are the largest source of VOCs in the Barnett Shale. Recently, there have been additional concerns that San Antonio may not meet federal ozone standards due to Eagle Ford Shale development. Peter Bella, natural resources director at the Alamo Area Council of Governments, told the Houston Chronicle that the city is “right on the edge of nonattainment.”

Ozone concentrations comparable to those recorded in some of the most heavily polluted U.S. cities have been measured in rural parts of Wyoming and Utah, where little other industrial activity occurs:

• In 2010, air quality exceeded national health standards for ozone nearly seventy times in Utah’s Uintah Basin. Concentrated natural gas and oil development in the Uintah Basin has been identified by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) as the primary cause of the ozone pollution.
• Residents of Wyoming’s Upper Green River Basin suffered thirteen unhealthy ozone days in 2011. Air quality in the Basin had declined so much due to emissions from natural gas activities that former governor Dave Freudenthal requested it be designated an ozone nonattainment area, which the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) confirmed.

It’s important to note, however, that ozone monitoring does not exist in many oil and gas development areas, so we don’t know the full extent of the potential problem. For instance, though the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has committed to start monitoring in the Eagle Ford, there is not currently sufficient monitoring to characterize ozone problems in the area.

Read more

After Pfizer Contribution, Heartland Continues Attacks On Climate Science And Tobacco Risks

By Brad Johnson, campaign manager of Forecast the Facts

Despite rising pressure from scientists and doctors, top Pfizer executives defended their affiliation with the Heartland Institute, brushing aside concerns that the group mocks the risks of tobacco smoking and vilifies climate scientists.

In a call with activists on Wednesday, Pfizer Corporate Secretary Matthew Lepore explained that Pfizer gave Heartland Institute $45,000 for 2012 and is considering future donations for 2013 and beyond. In recent months, Heartland’s president Joe Bast has compared believers in climate science to the Unabomber and claimed that the public health community has a campaign to “demonize smokers” based on “junk science.”

Lepore also stated that Pfizer isn’t concerned by the decisions of its competitors, such as Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, and Bayer, to disassociate themselves with Heartland:

“We do things at Pfizer that are best for shareholders of Pfizer. What’s going to make us make our decision is where we make a determination that the benefits we receive from Heartland are no longer justified.”

The call with Pfizer executives was organized by Forecast the Facts on behalf of over 2000 members in the medical community, who have signed an open letter to Pfizer CEO Ian Read demanding that his company stop supporting Heartland.

Lepore defended the “benefits we receive from Heartland” after being reminded by representatives from the National Wildlife Federation and Americans for Nonsmokers Rights that climate change and tobacco addiction are global health threats. The executives were told that Heartland’s claim that the risks of climate change and tobacco disease are junk science is ethically and morally unacceptable. Pfizer’s funding lends credibility to an organization that remains a front group for tobacco companies such as Altria and Reynolds American and polluters such as Murray Energy and Koch Industries.

The executives on the call minimized the severity of the climate and tobacco threats, which cost millions of lives around the world every year. Pfizer’s funding is “specifically designated for health care issues,” Lepore said, including vaccine regulation, academic detailing, and personalized medicine. “We can’t be very knee jerk on every issue that is brought to our attention,” said Marc Scarduffa, Vice President, Government Relations & Public Affairs. Pfizer produces Chantix, a nicotine replacement therapy for tobacco addiction, and Spiriva, which treats tobacco-related pulmonary disease.

The Union of Concerned Scientists is asking people to contact the two medical doctors on Pfizer’s board of directors with the message that “they can help protect Americans’ health by cutting off funding for climate denial groups.”

The climate advocacy organization Forecast the Facts announced Thursday they will be handing out flyers at Pfizer’s headquarters in New York City to Pfizer employees asking them to sever ties with the Heartland Institute.

Newt Gingrich tests virtual reality goggles.

With drought baking one third of counties across the country, an historic wildfire that torched the arid landscape of Colorado, and record heat and violent storms that recently left millions without power on the East Coast, scientists and government officials in the U.S. are issuing stronger warnings about the influence of climate change on intensifying extreme weather.

But former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has a different worry: Electromagnetic pulses.

In a Washington Post op-ed published yesterday, Gingrich — who recently ran for the GOP presidential nomination — used the violent storms, blackout and heat wave to discuss his long-time concern for EMPs.

The introduction makes it seem like he might actually talk about climate change:

Callista and I live in the Virginia suburbs of Washington, and, like many in the region, we lost power in the recent storms. The blackout, combined with a record heat wave, made homes nearly uninhabitable. The storm and heat were this region’s greater leveler: Rich or poor, urban or suburban, six-figure income or just barely getting by, we were all cast on the same strange shores.

But no. Gingrich instead pivots to an issue that experts at the Missile Defense Agency call “pretty theoretical.”

I write this now because of my concern for national security and our power grid, which are susceptible to doomsday-level damage if hit by an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) strike or a major solar storm.

It is almost unthinkable, yet possible, that an enemy could detonate a nuclear weapon over the atmosphere over the continental United States, triggering an electromagnetic pulse. This would short-circuit our power grid, taking power off­line for months, perhaps even years.

One scientist looking at the data on the recent heat wave says it’s “highly unlikely that the extremity of the heat during the past 13 months could have occurred without a warming climate.” That seems like something worth mentioning.

Instead, Gingrich attempts to focus our national attention to a problem that defense experts say they’re only mildly concerned about:

The Missile Defense Agency, an arm of the Pentagon that maintains an arsenal of ground-based interceptors ready to fly into space and smash enemy warheads, says that defeating such an attack would be as straightforward as any other defense of the continental United States.

“It doesn’t matter if the target is Chicago or 100 miles over Nebraska,” said Richard Lehner, an agency spokesman. “For the interceptor, it’s the same thing.” He called the potential damage from a nuclear electromagnetic pulse attack “pretty theoretical.”

Compare that to what Defense Department says about climate change. In May, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta declared that “climate change has a dramatic impact on national security.”

“Rising sea levels, severe droughts, the melting of the polar caps, the more frequent and devastating natural disasters all raise demand for humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.”

Ironically, Gingrich calls for a national war-like effort to create “fortified bunkers for the national power grid.” But when asked about dealing with climate change — a direct, oncoming threat that the military establishment is planning extensively around — Gingrich said he thinks “there is no evidence that justifies a large government centralized response of any kind right now.”

Here’s a chart that voters in the Midwest probably aren’t going to like:

This graphic, put together by the wind industry, illustrates how an expiration of the production tax credit may impact employment in the U.S. Notice the spike in activity before the drop-off. That’s due to the rush of development we’re seeing currently in the lead up to the lapse of the credit. But even if the credit is extended at the end of the year, it looks like 2013 will be a poor year for installations. Developers need a lead-time of about 18 months, so many of them have put projects on hold without any clarity on if the credit will be extended. That’s why we’re already seeing manufacturers lay people off.

by Michael Kodas, via OnEarth

Praying for rain is common when your state is beset by record-setting blazes, but as always, be careful what you wish for. Heavy downpours create their own hazards. The irony was highlighted for me two weeks ago when the city of Colorado Springs found itself simultaneously under a “red flag” fire warning and a flash flood warning.

The good news is that monsoon rains in Colorado over the last week helped firefighters bring an end to the High Park Fire in the foothills above Fort Collins, as well as Colorado Springs’s Waldo Canyon fire, which was declared 100 percent contained Tuesday night. Between them, the two most destructive wildfires in Colorado history burned nearly 600 homes, so no one was sad to see them quenched.

But before the firefighters had even finished scratching their firelines around the blazes, residents were facing new threats — including floods fed by runoff from the burnt land, along with mudslides, debris flows, and contaminated water supplies, all a result of the heavy downpours that fell over the weekend.

Like wildfires, powerful afternoon thunderstorms are a regular part of Colorado’s summer. (The National Weather Service reported that one area between Denver and Colorado Springs received 2.5 inches of rain in an hour last Friday afternoon.) But when fires and floods mix, bad things happen: a mudslide from the High Park burn zone covered the highway with ash, branches, and black mud up to a foot deep; volunteers filled thousands of sandbags to protect their neighbors’ homes and used snowplows to clear ash and mud; and the Cache la Poudre River turned as black and turbid as India ink when inundated with the ash and cinders from fire runoff.

Post-wildfire debris flows can destroy houses, bury or wash out roads, contaminate reservoirs, block drainages and water pipes, and threaten lives. Some flows are strong enough to carry boulders, automobiles, and parts of houses. Debris flows that followed Southern California wildfires in 2003 killed 16 people on Christmas Day that year. In 1994, after the South Canyon fire killed 14 firefighters near Glenwood Springs, Colorado, debris flows crossed Interstate 70, overrunning Jersey barriers, burying 30 cars, and pushing some of them into the Colorado River. Miraculously, there were no fatalities.

But the threat from the combination of fire and water can last for years, or decades. Initially the grasses, shrubs, and small trees that would hold soil in place are burned away. Larger trees that are killed by fire leave their roots in the ground, and as those decay or give way during the coming years, they perpetuate the risk of debris flows. Flows from 2002’s Hayman fire, Colorado’s largest on record, destroyed homes and washed out a highway four years after the fire.

But the longest-term threat in Colorado is to the water itself.

Read more

A round-up of the top climate and energy stories.

In the U.S. – land of the gas-guzzler SUV and 24/7 air conditioning – energy efficiency isn’t known as a strong suit. The country’s power management efforts are so poor that a new report ranks it near the bottom of the pack of major economies. [Los Angeles Times]

Rising temperatures caused by climate change may lead to reduced milk production among cows in the southern United States, a new study suggests. [U.S. News]

America declared a natural disaster in more than 1,000 drought-stricken counties in 26 states on Thursday. [Guardian]

It’s high season in the nation’s national parks as millions of visitors come to see nature. Yet many visitors are likely to find their view of the natural landscapes softened, if not significantly obscured, by haze or smog from civilization. [New York Times]

According to a new survey, the most eco-conscientious consumers were in the developing world, in places like China and India. And these countries tend to have the most green guilt. [Wonk Blog]

Senegal is one of 11 countries in the Sahel region of Africa looking towards the same solution to the desertification problem: The Great Green Wall. [Guardian]

Global oil demand is expected to rise by one million barrels a day next year, faster than growth this year, but “well below” the levels seen before the financial crisis as economic recovery remains muted, the International Energy Agency said Thursday. [Wall Street Journal]