… have always been, I believe, rooted in capitalism and economic libertarianism. Basically, if anthropogenic global warming proponents are correct (as I believe they are), it basically means that we can’t just “do what we want” regardless of the consequences. One of those right wing definitions of freedom seems to be mind-numbingly simple , i.e. freedom is doing (or buying or destroying, but certainly not having sex with) what you want, regardless of the consequences. It certainly doesn’t take into consideration other people’s freedoms to be free from pollution, dirty water or having the public commons completely corporatized and exploited.
And of course, apologists for this worldview inevitably point to “market based” solutions and the convoluted illogic that regulations are hampering environmental progress, as though if there were no MPG standards, and they could build a car that gets 2 MPG, somehow people will miraculously all start buying hybrids. It’s really as crazy as what the Rapture-Ready™ crowd believes, but it’s more harmful, as it truly affects every single thing on the planet.
This free-market fundamentalism consistently fails to address a rather salient point… how do you fix things, when consumers, given a choice between something environmentally friendly or not, healthy or not, toxic or not, repeatedly choose the detrimental option? Nobody seem to be able to give me a decent answer on that, instead blathering on about “individual choice” and “it’s not my fault if people make bad choices”, or when all else fails, “who are you to decide what’s right?”, as though there are really upsides to lead paint or BPH that are somehow escaping me. If all else fails, some vague reference to the Soviet Union and waiting hours on line for a roll of toilet paper are thrown in for good measure.
If you're not already a regular reader of Vermont Newsguy, which we've had in our blogroll for some time now, you should hop over and read today's post on how Verizon Wireless is cozying up to the climate change deniers.
You may have read about it on Facebook, but VNG has the whole story right here, along with some pointed, and very well-founded, criticism of news bias over at WCAX.
Cross-posted from DailyKos. I wrote this live, but had a long drive before to get more internet access.
I'm at Dartmouth College, Cook Auditorium, where James Hansen and Jason Grumet are speaking tonight on the topic of Climate Challenge: Implications for Energy and Policy and Intergenerational Justice.
I'll be live blogging, updating the diary body every couple of minutes with more text. I won't be able to comment until it's over, assuming my battery lasts.
There's a big disclaimer at the bottom of the presentation screen: "Any statements relating to policy are personal opinion."
Note: I can't type as fast as people can speak, so everything will be paraphrased.
All the news reports say that Hurricane Ike wasn't so bad after all. It headed a bit north and east, so it didn't make a direct hit on Galveston and Houston, as originally feared. So, luckily, nothing bad happened. Please move along now. Did we mention Lipstick?
Below the fold are a few videos from one town. One former town. Chrystal Beach, TX, on the northern end of the Bolivar Peninsula.
There's a 2000ft no-fly zone, killing the news cycle from the air. Luckily, we still have the Coast Guard and small cameras. The next time, I'm sure they'll have their cameras confiscated upon landing.
I don't have a lot to say, because the videos really do say it all. Another community drowned. Another hurricane that may provide a clue as to what global warming has in store for us. Another bungled aftermath by the republicans whose goal seems to be "Government that Does Less and Fails More."
For those in New York, Vermont, and New Hampshire, repeat these words: "Turn Around, Don't Drown."
Make them automatic, because as more roads flood and wash out from the additional 1 - 2" of rain expected to fall today, your life is in danger. A family in NH lost their 7 year old daughter when their car was caught in a flash flood yesterday.
Flash floods are expected in the Adirondacks, Northern Vermont and New Hampshire.
A flash flood is DIFFERENT from ordinary flooding. It's not the same thing as your basement filling with a few inches of water. Instead, rain falling upstream makes its way downstream all at once, causing sudden and dramatic rises in the water level. This is not a slow rise over the course of hours, but a rise of feet in the course of seconds or minutes.
If you see water flowing across the road from a river, brook, or stream, it could be deadly. Turn Around, Don't Drown.
There is also a mud slide warning.
For those who don't live in these states, join me after the fold for a discussion of what I now call "Weather 2.0," some of its implications, and something I want to try to do about it.
A state study of the watersheds of the West, Williams and Saxtons rivers in the southeastern corner of the state shows the biggest environmental problem appears to be increased temperatures, a planner with the Agency of Natural Resources said.
Marie Levesque Caduto, a watershed coordinator with the agency, said Friday the study is one of 17 being conducted on the different watersheds in the state.
The article doesn't go into real detail, but refers to the importance of cool temperatures to the creatures living inside the rivers, not just the fish, but the creatures the fish eat as well.
The article itself doesn't necessarily attribute this to global warming, but it's obvious that this is a contributing factor, along with other factors, noting that:
it was not just the large ponds or lakes behind the flood control dams, which act as giant heat sinks, but that all along the rivers people are cutting trees and shrubs along riverbanks, eliminating its shade which is important not just to fish, but the tiny invertebrates they eat.
As climate change continues to gather more steam as an issue both in Vermont and abroad, I'm continually and increasingly perplexed as to what neurons are misfiring in Whinin' Jim Douglas' brain cavity.
First, a bold and comprehensive energy bill gets shot down by Douglas so he can keep his VT Yankee buddies from paying their fair share of taxes. In Douglas' perpetual taxpayer funded campaign stops "Set The Agenda Tour", Jimbo says that he's not really hearing much about global warming. It's all about that that nasty, overtaxed, harsh business climate that Douglas seems intent on promoting Vermont with (the only "climate" he seems to be interested in). Then, the guv's Commission on Climate Change issued a report detailing the severity of the problem, seemingly contradicting the short shrift the guv' seems to be giving it.
As you probably know, Vermont is examining its energy future. as you follow this discussion you might want to hop on over to Welcome Campground and take a look at this post about what role coal should play in the picture:
In the California wildfire coverage, I came across a federal site with satellite images of fires throughout the world. I created a time-lapse movie of the images beginning january 1, 2007 and ending with the most recent image, from October 17. Images are created once every 10 days, and are a compilation of the daily images from that 10-day period. The current CA fires won't show up until the 28th.
By all accounts (except for the crude one in the Rutland Herald, written in such a way as to make one wonder if the reporter was even present), the recent McKibben-McLaughry debate on global warming was a one-sided bloodbath, with reports that McKibben not only casually countered every phony, long-obsolete canard offered by McLaughry, he actually had McLaughry beginning to accept reality and discussing solutions.
Well, apparently it didn't take, as the "Ethan Allen Institute" (such as it is) is now sponsoring a Vermont appearence by Dr. Marlo Lewis, Jr. Hardly news, but it's interesting that the Vermont GOP is actively promoting this lecture on their website, lashing themselves haphazardly to the Exxon-Mobil funded Lewis, whose scientific credentials seem to consist of degrees in Government and Political Science, and a career in partisan hackery. Here are some choice comments from Mr Lewis:
26 April, 2006 The main incontrovertible effect of global warming to date is that it has made those severely cold regions slightly less lethal to people and other living things. Source: www.cei.org/pdf/5288.pdf
1 February, 2007 "The asserted consensus that global warming is a planetary emergency and that all right-thinking people believe we need to limit our energy use has been exposed, once again, as unsubstantiated myth." Source: Heartland Institute website 2007
It's continually outrageous that anyone continues to spout this nonsense, and Lewis wavers between outright denial and passing off climate change as a really swell thing for everybody. What's interesting at the local level is that the state GOP is gleefully associating themselves with this sort of rhetoric, when many of their elected politicians are wising up enough to realize what kind of poison such views are to their electability.
Global Warming denial is steadily moving into the realm of evolution-denial. It's flat-Earthism. The new issue for the casually engaged swing voter that defines a candidate as that political nowhere creature (at least in the purple-to-blue states); the Neo-Trogladyte. The Neo-Trog label sticks, and becomes a shorthand measure of a candidate's character to the marginally engaged, who so often turn close elections.
If Roper wants to continue to hang this sort of nonsense around his Party's neck in this state, more power to him.
According to an online article at Der Speigel, a team of researchers led by Nobel-prize winning chemist Paul Crutzen has found that growing and using biofuels emits up to 70 percent more greenhouse gases than fossil fuels. They are warning that the cure could end up being worse than the disease.
I'm not agreeing with it one way or the other but I thought this article might generate some interesting discussion, especially since we're trying to figure out an alternative energy future.
(NOTE: If you've noticed diaries appearing and disappearing, it's because I'm seriously bungling the "draft" vs. "live" diary feature today... woops...)
Governor Douglas's administration has stated that they believe most of the now-defeated (by his hand) H.520 (the "global warming" bill) can be implemented through the executive branch - even the efficiency utility piece that was so controversial. Well lo and behold, the Public Service Board has reported back that, no, they have no such authority and would require legislative action (duh) to proceed. What's absolutely jaw-dropping is the statement from Commissioner of Public Service David O'Brien:
The administration was never against evaluating in broad terms how best to improve the efficient use of heating fuels by Vermonters, O'Brien said. Instead, his and Douglas' concern about the energy bill was the speed with which an entirely new program was being implemented, he said.
"We were hesitant and cautious … most of our real concern was how fast this was moving along," O'Brien said.
Oh - THAT was the problem? That's the story now? Puh-leeze!
If you haven't seen the emails and postings, Sierra Club is targeting Fox "News" for their campaign of crude, scorched-earth style global warming denial (heh... pardon the expression... honestly, it didn't even occur to me until I read the diary preview..heh heh). To do so, they've identified a major Fox advertiser - Home Depot - for action. Here is the associated YouTube video:
It's not just a rumor any more. Home Depot has set it sights on central Vermont.
The company that bills itself as "the world's largest home improvement specialty retailer" is targeting a partially abandoned strip mall on the Barre-Montpelier.
It's possible they may be more receptive than usual to Vermonters, under the circumstances.
Despite the gloomy predictions, Democratic Legislative leaders are going into this veto override session swinging. Tomorrow at 9:30 at the statehouse, leadership will be hosting Ned Raynolds, Northeast Climate Policy Coordinator for the Union of Concerned Scientists who, according to Senator Shumlin's office, will "share new scientific findings from the Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment Report (which is being released regionally on the 11th). Mr. Raynolds remarks will focus on the consequences for different sectors of the Vermont economy under two global warming emissions scenarios." The presentation will take place in the Cedar Creek Room, if you're interested.
Think the neocons are on their way out? Not if Rudy Guiliani has anything to say about it. Neoconservative patriarch Norman Podhoretz has been tapped as a foreign policy advisor by Rudy's campaign. To get a flavor of the guy, here's his recent op-ed entitled The Case for Bombing Iran: I hope and pray that President Bush will do it. Swell.
Let's look ahead to just how the H.520 fight could play out in the coming weeks. As I've said, the big mistake of the announcement was twofold; one, that it let many of the supporters feel left out in the cold scratching their heads (and greenvtster is mistaken, only in that leadership had up to that moment, very much been in coordination with the base on this), and two; that the timing was premature and gave the appearence of capitulation, and therefore - weakness (and you never want to show weakness at a time like this).
Still, it was a strategic move, and if you still doubt that - consider how this could now play out.
Leadership holds the veto vote and comes up short. They then do what they've suggested; vote to suspend the rules and modify the bill, putting off the funding schema until January. This bill - a new bill - passes with a simple majority.
Then we go through it again - the new bill goes back to the Governor's desk where he can sign it, veto it, or allow it to become law without his signature. WIthout the funding scheme, the pressure will be a lot greater than it was before -especially since his "unfunded mandate" and "bureaucracy" excuses are so thin, they're falling completely flat.
But let's say the Governor vetoes it again. The Dem leadership then has the option - even the responsibility - of calling another override session. When? Check your calendar, folks, we're talking September again, when we can have all hands on deck - and with a bill that, in theory, many of the opponents have indicated they'll support. With all its policy provisions intact. And the whole thing keeps the issue alive and active in the public debate leading up closer to the election season.
The problem is we've become conditioned to see every move of the leadership as a failure (and the anti-Dem crowd gleefully exploits that), and in this case - at least in the big picture - it's just too early to tell.
(Okay, I've acccepted this is more than a one diary issue). A long time ago there were two bills; a renewable energy bill and a building efficiency bill. Over a wild and wacky session, these bills joined together into what came to be known as the global warming bill. Advocates in each chamber joined together on the new hybrid bill, whose efficiency element was going to cost a little money. To fill this gap, there was first the fuels surcharge - which got (thankfully) dumped as being too regressive. After fits and starts, and in the 11th hour, came the new funding source; the legendary tax that primarily targeted Vermont Yankee.
So advocates moved forward, re-energized. What they didn't realize was that the old bill was gone, and what was in its place was more complicated. By appending the Yankee tax, they tapped into a surprisingly deep and wide resevoir of frustration and energy from the many on the left who have felt that VY has been given a sweetheart deal at the expense of Vermoners' environment and safety. As such, what had been a global warming bill to some was now a Vermont Yankee bill to others (and to some it was equally both).
Fast forward to the mistake in timing that was this week's decision to put the funding source back on the table (instead of holding that card until the veto session) in order to call Douglas's thin bluff at taking the issue seriously. The truth is that no matter when they would've pulled this card, the reaction on the left would have been similarly angry/frustrated/confused.
As a proponent of the global warming bill from early on, I've always looked at it AS a "global warming" bill, and have only just come to understand that many saw it otherwise. To those that saw it as a VY bill, this move is utter capitulation (and I'm not talking about the predatory Greens with their own anti-Dem agenda, such as Colby-boy), leaving those of us more firmly in the global warming camp wondering why people are talking as though the bill has been compromised. But with the narrative on the Dem leadership that's in full circulation; that they run away from controversy and cave upon meeting conflict, it's the capitulation argument that rings true for people.
A lot of lessons here. The big one is that Legislative Leadership should get out more and listen more (as should I, frankly). If they (we) had, they might have realized what they were really doing in plugging into the simmering, untended political lesion that is Vermont Yankee. It's clear that the VY tax couldn't be added as casually and modularly as one might add a sales tax increase, and that reality is just now dawning on those in leadership, as well as folks like me.
The other lesson is that Dem leadership better not give an inch on the global warming elements of the bill in the upcoming veto override session. I'm told both the House and Senate intend to hold firm this time. If they know what's good for them, they'll stick to that.
The AP is reporting that Governor Douglas, Senator Shumlin, and House Natural Resources Chair Representative Robert Dostis are scheduled to meet tomorrow to discuss the global warming bill and the upcoming July veto-override session. Right on the heels of that announcement comes this from the Senate Prez-Pro-Tem's office:
The leadership of the Vermont House and Senate today announced that in light of Governor Douglas's veto of H.520 and his objection to the source of funding for the bill, Senator Shumlin and Speaker Symington will propose a suspension of the rules during the veto override session on July 11 to consider the same bill with the funding for an all fuels efficiency utility removed. Since the legislation vetoed by the governor stipulates that funding for the all fuels efficiency utility will be needed starting in 2009, this proposal would allow the legislature to consider how to fund the utility when it reconvenes in January. In the meantime, the planning process for the utility, as well as other key provisions in H. 520, will be enacted
This announcement is one of two things; either another example of our legislative leadership running to move the goalposts and compromise before negotiations have even begun... OR... a(n attempt at a) savvy move to put the Governor on the defensive, and put the media focus of tomorrow's meeting squarely on the content of the bill and not the "dreaded" funding scheme vis-a-vis Vermont Yankee.
My money's on the latter, but its risky. Still, the papers and internet are replete with conservatives claiming that they'd be all for this bill with a different funding scheme. This calls their bluff, and leaves them nowhere to hide if they really are global warming deniers. It also puts the BS to the GOP nonsense line that the bill is all about "getting" Vermont Yankee.
Unfortunately, it also leaves the Dems nowhere to go in a July compromise, but to take actual policy content out of the bill. It's a good ploy, but the risk seems perhaps disproportionate and the timing dangerously off. We'll see. The content of the full press release is below the fold, along with a poll as to whether or not you think this is a wise strategic move...
Jim Douglas hardly tries to conceal his snarky streak anymore.Freyne has a quote where Douglas lets his contempt for concerns about climate change shine through:
"I’ve said many times that Vermont has such a small imprint on the surface of the planet that we can do as much as possible and still not save a single polar bear or make any significant impact on global warming,"said Vermont's Republican CEO.
"But China can have an impact because of the environmental challenges the environmental officials we’ve met with recognize and need to deal with. I would hope that Vermonters who have a serious interest in climate change would devote their time and energy to places like China
Looking for the perfect gift for Dan DeWalt this summer? Click here.
Shad 2, Vermont Yankee 1. A judge has again ruled that Vermont Yankee can't dump its water discharge into the Connecticut River (potentially harming fish) after receiving permission from the Douglas Administration to do so.
Speaking of haters, are authorities getting involved with the threats received by Rep. Bill Lippert (D-Hinesburg) thanks to Bill O'Reilly? This site and other Vermont sites have received hits from law enforcement via a Google search for "bill lippert fag". It's not the norm for people in law enforcement to use department computers for personal use, so this is likely a sign of some sort of official inquiry or investigation. Book 'em Dano, I sez.
Climate Change has sure been the topic of the week.
Internationally, of course, Bush predictably rejected German Chancellor Merkel's proposals for greenhouse gas reduction benchmarks, but allowed her to attempt to save face by agreeing to some other meaningless promise to look into the matter, once again. Wonder how many backrubs that measly accomodation cost her.
Locally of course, Governor Douglas followed through on his promise to veto the Vermont Legislature's Climate Change bill, and on news that Al Gore's aid had been enlisted by the Legislative leadership, Douglas quickly cobbled together his own proposal in a failed attempt to steal Gore's thunder (instead, I think he may have added to it, based on the prodigious news coverage).
Douglas's plan at a glance seems odd. A thrown together jumble of half-considered ideas to provide loans to Vermonters for energy efficiency. As if low-income Vermonters will fall in line to heap more debt on themselves (of course, the banks must love it, as these loans would be guaranteed by the state). No idea where the funding for those guarantees will come from (well, we know it won't be Entergy). As for incentives for renewables, I haven't heard anything, and exactly what's supposed to be done with this proposal now that the biennium is done is anyone's guess. Wait til next year I s'pose. All in all, Douglas couldn't have piked a clearer way of showing how little regard or concern he has for the issue.
As for the Gore videoconference over Vermont Interactive Television, his remarks can be heard on VNRC's website. Freyne has a lot of quotes from Shumlin in the brief presser that followed, and he is absolutely right when he says that Shumlin was in top form. Seriously, this was the best he's sounded in many weeks, as he demonstrated a real command of the room. Symington as well seemed more focused and passionate than usual. I suppose the break has already done both of them some good.
And for a hastily thrown together event, it was surprisingly well-attended at the remote VIT sites around the state. It's a shame the tech didn't go off as well, as Gore's link to the VIT network was routed through the internet, rather than via ISDN or satellite (and we all know how the internet can be). After many fits and starts, Gore's audio was a mess and out of sync (you'll hear it if you go to the mp3 link above) - but it was nevertheless audible.
A veto override is still clearly a longshot, but there's an awful lot of focus and energy around the issue that seems to be snowballing, so contact your legislators if you haven't already (and maybe you should do it again if you have).
