JR: In this weekend update on Language Intelligence, DeSmogBlog’s Brendan DeMelle explains why he agrees with Van Jones that this book can in fact change your life.

Want to Communicate More Effectively? Buy Joe Romm’s book Language Intelligence

by Brendan DeMelle via DeSmogBlog

If you are a blogger, a commenter, a tweeter, a public speaker or any type of communicator, you will benefit immensely from picking up a copy of Joe Romm’s fantastic new book, “Language Intelligence: Lessons on Persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga.”

DeSmog readers are likely familiar with Joe’s incredible work over at Climate Progress, where he and his team – including my new friend Stephen Lacey, another fantastic writer – expertly cover the politics and science of climate change and energy issues. A big part of the secret to the success of Climate Progress is Joe’s communications expertise.

Language Intelligence has garnered incredible reviews and praise from a who’s who of top communicators, from Van Jones to Bill McKibben, Representative Ed Markey to Michael Mann and John Cook.

DeSmog contributor Chris Mooney, who interviewed Romm about the book on his Point of Inquiry podcast, says of Language Intelligence:

“Everybody who cares about why science doesn’t get through to the public should read it.”

Romm covers everything about effective communication, from the critical importance of metaphors (especially extended metaphors), language simplicity, repetition, using figures of speech, creating anticipation through foreshadowing, and other persuasive rhetorical techniques. As Romm explains so well, the key to effective writing is to engage the reader’s emotions, and work to inspire and activate your audience through honest and powerful communication.

Romm also reveals that he speaks his blogs using dictation software, rather than typing. He uses MacSpeech Dictate, a piece of software that I’ve owned for years but only used extensively during a bout with carpal tunnel when typing was too painful.  I think I’ll dust it off and try it again, although I find that I type much more lucidly than I speak when developing thoughts. But I do actively ‘speak’ the words as I type them, which is the real point.

As blog writers, we need to remember that we’re having a conversation with our readers, we’re not writing academic papers or textbooks.

As the 18th Century novelist, Laurence Stone, said: “Writing is but a different name for conversation.”

This is also demonstrated in the story often conveyed to aspiring journalists about Boston Globe writing coach Don Murray walking into the newsroom and instantly declaring that he could identify the three best writers in the room. “How did you know?” asked the Globe’s editor. “Because their lips move when they write,” Murray responded.

I am thrilled that Joe finally slogged through to the finish line after decades of ruminating over the concepts and language tips found within the pages of Language Intelligence. From now on, this book will be required reading for all of DeSmog’s writing fellows, and it should be on your desk as well.

I sure wish I had a copy of this book when I first started writing professionally about threats to our environment and democracy 15 years ago. As Van Jones says of Language Intelligence, I concur that “this book changed my life.”

So go forth, ye aspiring (and accomplished) communicators, and buy Language Intelligence faster than you can say Jack Robinson.

Don’t feel as if you have to buy it today. Unless of course you’re wondering if it might change your life too?

JR: Now you see why every progressive should read this book. You can buy the Kindle here and the paperback here.

by Michael E. Mann, Gavin Schmidt, and Eric Steig, via RealClimate

It’s been a tough few months for tree-rings, perhaps unfairly. Back in April, we commented on a study [that one of us (Mike) was involved in] that focused on the possibility that there is a threshold on the cooling recorded by tree-ring composites that could limit their ability to capture the short-term cooling signal associated with larger volcanic eruptions. Mostly lost in the discussion, however, was the fact–emphasized in the paper—that the trees appeared to be doing a remarkably good job in capturing the long-term temperature signal—the aspect of greatest relevance in discussions of climate change.

This week [July 8] there have been two additional studies published raising questions about the interpretation of tree-ring based climate reconstructions.

Update 7/12/12: Media Matters comments on the latest misrepresentations of the Esper et al study discussed in our article: ‘Surprise: Fox News Fails Paleoclimatology’
Update 7/13/12: Further comment from Bob Ward of the Grantham Institute in Huffington Post UK “The World’s Most Visited Newspaper Website Continues to Regurgitate Nonsense from Climate Change ‘Sceptics’”
Update 7/14/12: Some additional context provided by this LiveScience article

The first of these by Steinman et al (Mike is again a co-author) appeared in PNAS, and compared evidence of winter precipitation changes in the Pacific Northwest over the past 1500 years using a physical model-based analysis of lake sediment oxygen isotope data to statistical reconstructions of drought based on tree ring data. Steinman et al note that the tree-ring and lake estimates track each other well on multidecadal timescales, but show some divergence in their lower frequency (i.e. centennial and longer timescale) trends. They conclude that this divergence may simply reflect the differing and, in fact, complementary seasonal information reflected by the two proxy records, noting in the abstract:

differences in seasonal sensitivity between the two proxies allow a more compete understanding of the climate system and likely explain disparities in inferred climate trends over centennial timescales.

The authors amplified this point in their press release (emphasis added):

Tree ring and oxygen isotope data from the U.S. Pacific Northwest do not provide the same information on past precipitation, but rather than causing a problem, the differing results are a good thing, according to a team of geologists.

Nonetheless, some of the coverage (e.g. “Scientists see ancient climate patterns in lake-bottom ‘muck” by Lauren Morello, E&E/Climatewire, July 3, 2012) emphasized conflict between scientists over the discrepancies, rather than the more positive message about making use of complementary strengths of diverse sources of information about past climate change. In other words the ‘signal’ (moving forward with the science) became buried in the ‘noise’ (scientists on record arguing with each other).

The principle that different types of proxy data are complementary in the information they provide is in fact the motivation for the development of “multiple proxy” (multiproxy) reconstructions of climate (see e.g. this commentary by Mike from a decade ago). A new paper today is worth discussing for just this reason.

Jan Esper and colleagues have an article in Nature Climate Change that introduces a new reconstruction (N-Scan) of high-latitude (Fennoscandian) summer temperature changes over the past two millennia based on Maximum Latewood Density (‘MXD’). The most exciting–and in our view important–development is that they seem to have greatly ameliorated the “divergence problem” that has plagued some surface temperature reconstructions based on these types of data; given that the the revised MXD data appear to be able to track the most recent warming provides increased confidence in the estimates they provide of past temperature changes.

Read more

by Mary Anne Hitt, via the Sierra Club

In the tranquil, misty mountains of southwest Virginia, the coal industry is trying to build its very own road to nowhere. King Coal’s latest scheme is to try and take $2 billion of federal funds — our tax dollars — to build the Coalfields Expressway through rural Southwest Virginia. Coal companies plan to use mountaintop removal mining to flatten the area to make way for the road, while they keep the profits from the coal they extract. While the coal companies call it a road, local residents are calling it a taxpayer financed strip mine.

Virginians aren’t taking this news lying down, though. Last Friday, when an official comment period closed, more than 4,400 Virginians and 81,000 people beyond VA’s borders had submitted comments to the Federal Highway Administration in opposition to this project — over 85,000 comments opposing this boondoggle.

These tens of thousands of Americans know that the construction of this “Coalfields Expressway” won’t serve the public. The route was designed to help a coal company, Alpha Natural Resources, access coal reserves. To make matters worse, the road will not only cause pollution and destruction, but it also bypasses local communities and threatens to remove the through-traffic that local businesses depend on. 

The controversial highway project would cut through southwestern Virginia, using eminent domain to relocate dozens of property owners while bypassing local business areas and burying at least 12 miles of streams.

Local residents assert that while the project is being billed as a highway project, in reality it’s a taxpayer financed strip mine that is likely to be exempt from all of the permitting requirements and other protections provided for communities and the environment by the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Action.

In addition to collecting comments, local residents organizing against the project recently testified at public hearings held in the Virginia towns of Wise and Vansant. Dozens of local residents turned out to oppose the project and the negative effects it would have on their community, water supply, and local economy.

“We’re worried that this project is going to cost taxpayers an enormous amount of money while leaving Virginians with a toxic mess and miles of bare stripped land instead of a useful road,” said Marley Green, a Sierra Club Organizer in Appalachia, Va. “We need both the Virginia Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration to take action to protect the health and safety of our communities.”

Already, $38 million in taxpayer funds were wasted on a cancelled portion of the highway. The total taxpayer price tag for the entire project is still unknown. The Sierra Club and Southern Environmental Law Center submitted comments opposing the project, together with our allies Southern Appalachian Mountain Stewards, Appalachian Voices, Wise Energy for Virginia, and CREDO Action.

We can’t let King Coal destroy our streams and our mountains. Appalachians have suffered enough at the hands of the coal industry. The Coalfields Expressway will only lead to more polluted water and destruction.

This project is poorly planned, a threat to local streams and rivers, and a waste of tax payer dollars.

We urge the Federal Highway Administration to stand up for Appalachia, and complete a full study of the threats this road would have on local communities. There are smarter, more efficient ways to improve transportation options in southwest Virginia, and it’s crucial that we not rush into a giant gift to the coal industry without considering all of the impacts and alternatives.

Mary Anne Hitt is Director of the Beyond Coal Campaign. This piece was originally published at the Sierra Club’s Compass blog and was reprinted with permission.

by Peter Lehner, via NRDC’s Switchboard

New York City, like hundreds of older cities around the country, can’t stand the rain. With so much paved area, and so little ground to soak up the water, the city’s sewer system can get overwhelmed by a mere tenth of an inch of rainfall, triggering the discharge of polluted runoff from streets mixed with untreated sewage into the nearest water body. Anyone who’s walked along the Hudson River the morning after a storm knows what this looks like.

For New York, excess stormwater is one of the biggest sources of water pollution in the city. It’s a 30-billion-gallon-a-year problem.

The traditional approach to stormwater management is to treat it like garbage, as waste that needs to be disposed of. But a growing number of cities have recently embraced an innovative new approach to stormwater that transforms this “waste” into a resource that will improve neighborhoods. By building out a suite of solutions known as green infrastructure–including features like porous pavement, street plantings, and green roofs—city landscapes can absorb rainwater where it falls.  Instead of washing straight into the sewer system and triggering sewage discharges, this water can be used as nature intended, to nurture trees and plants, keeping neighborhoods cooler, greener, and the air cleaner.

This street planting outside a Brooklyn playground is one of the city’s pilot projects. By expanding the planted area around a streetside tree, using native plants and specially engineered, absorbent soil, city engineers have created a system that can absorb nearly 1,000 gallons of stormwater runoff, which would have previously been mixed with sewage and ejected directly into Jamaica Bay. The tree box also has extra storage chambers underground, which can hang on to extra water and slowly release it for the trees to drink.

The city plans to eliminate 1.5 billion gallons of water waste each year through green infrastructure, and aims to save billions of dollars as compared to the cost of building conventional “gray” infrastructure, such as pipes and large storage tanks.

“It’s particularly important for the State and City to leverage innovative, cost-effective solutions like these when there are competing social needs and taxpayer dollars must deliver more services for less, said city councilman James F. Gennaro, who supported the plan. Business leaders are on board with the effort as well, praising its cost-effectiveness and the use of public and private properties for stormwater management.

Philadelphia has an even more ambitious green infrastructure plan, and other cities are exploring the idea as well. Using green infrastructure to stop water waste is a radical departure from the norm, and it’s incredibly encouraging to see the idea take root. Stopping waste, even though it makes perfect sense, sometimes requires a change in thinking–and when it happens, the ripple effects can spread far and wide.

Peter Lehner is Executive Director of the Natural Resources Defense Council. This piece was originally published at NRDC’s Switchboard and was reprinted with permission.