This is a rather odd book to review. On the one hand former Speaker Newt Gingrich teams up with the CEO of the Palm Beach Zoo to argue for a “Contract with the Earth” in which all of us, without partisanship, become stewards of the environment. Published in 2007, they note that “as a nation” we must remove our addiction to oil: “By weaning industrial societies from their dependence on fossil fuels, the world would be a far better place.” They implore both parties to take the environment seriously, pleading that “surely our energy problems rise to the level of a presidential crusade.”

Later they quote a coalition of corporate CEOs that together represent an Energy Security Leadership Council:

“America’s oil dependence threatens the prosperity and safety of the nation. Continued policy paralysis is unacceptable precisely because we can take action to improve our energy security. Many challenges lie ahead, but we have no doubt that efforts of the American people will meet with success.”

That was during the Bush administration.

Which gets us to the other hand. While the book argues forcefully for bipartisan (or more accurately, non-partisan) action to deal with climate change, pollution, protection of endangered species, biodiversity, and other environmental values, it is also rife with political innuendo and denialism. Given Gingrich’s recent statements that contradict the profoundly persuasive arguments in this book, it’s unclear whether the self-contradictions are a result of the differing views of the two authors or of the lead author’s political pandering induced by a run for the White House.

Ignoring that aspect for the moment, the book does offer some compelling ideas for how to rid ourselves of our oil addiction and invest in the development of renewable energy. They quote Espy and Winston’s book Green to Gold, in that “smart companies seize competitive advantage through strategic management of environmental challenges.” In other words, smart innovative companies can make a buck and save the planet too! Gingrich and Maple advocate an entrepreneurial approach to dealing with climate change, quoting the Republicans for Environmental Protection:

“America is ready to meet the challenges posed by global warming. America has the best scientists. America’s businesses lead the world in developing and marketing innovative technologies that transform lives. All that remains is leadership that will channel the unrivaled power and creativity of markets toward developing the solutions we need soon to protect our atmosphere, strengthen American economy, and bring clean prosperity to the world’s developing nations.”

As I read those final words it struck me – perhaps Newt Gingrich should go back and read his own book.

Photo Credit: Amazon.com

© David K, 2012

This post can also be found in my two climate-related groups: The Truth About Global Warming, and Exposing Climate Denialism - A Guide to Tactics and Tall Tales.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/10236357-418/global-warming-spurs-updated-planting-map.html

Those evil global warmists are now messing with our gardening!  The Dept. of Agriculture is now changing that climate chart that appears on the back of your Green Bean seed packet, or whatever it is you plant. The change will reflect the fact that temperatures have been rising in recent decades and the seed packet temperature chart is no longer accurate and needs to be changed.

The good news is that you can now probably grow a fig tree in Boston. The bad news is that global warming is real, and your great-grandkids are going to live in a messy world. Time marches on. The denialists don't think so, for them the seed packet thing is a United Nations plot, but yeah it does.

"Rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated" or words to that effect. That was Mark Twain, right?

here ya go:

http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/01/22/408784/wired-clean-energy-experts-debunk-solar-wind/

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120120184233.htm

Researchers posted a study which appears to indicate that increasing carbon acid levels in the world ocean due to global warming are capable of changing fish behaviors in ways that would endanger the survival of some species. The carbonic acid pollution changes behaviors in some fish, making them unable to evade predators. OR- we could talk about ocean mammals, such as the Harp Seal-

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120104174810.htm

you see, the Harp Seal must be able to haul out onto floating ice during the brief period of a couple of weeks in which the females are nursing their newborns. Researchers have determined that in warm years in which ice is scarce, Harp Seal reproduction is close to zero. So- they consider a distinct possibility now that the expected permanent absence of floating summer ice in the arctic a decade or two from now may result in Harp Seal extinction along with Polar Bear extinction.

...TO TEST DRIVE ANY OF THE ELECTRIC VEHICLES CURRENTLY ON THE MARKET

Tesla

Chevrolet Volt

Nissan Leaf

Mitsubishi MiEV

Ford Focus EV

And when you do go test drive an electric vehicle, you should pay particular attention - and ask questions - to the far superior efficiency of the electric motor, relative to the gas engine. I can personally state (I own a Chevy Volt) that I pay roughly 20% to 25% to travel 100 miles that my neighbor pays in his Nissan Morano. And, including maintenance costs that EV owners do not pay, I have heard estimates that EVs cost roughly one-seventh of the operational costs of standard gas cars.

For those of you, who may scoff at the future of electric vehicles, you should be aware that the automakers aren't scoffing.

So the question is, why pursue more fossil fuels from foreign sources, when there are more profitable, safer, and home grown options already being pursued?

It's interesting to me that China does not pretend that global warming will be good news for China.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2012/01/19/china-issues-grim-warning-on-effects-of-climate-change-115875-23706516/

Water shortages in future decades in China. That means food shortages- because water is what you need to grow food.  The Chinese climate scientists wrote the report, and the Chinese government accepted the report. But beyond that, it gets sticky. The awareness of Chinese policy makers that global warming imperils their ability to feed their citizens is there, but does it mean that China will stop building coal fired power plants? Well, no.  :)

China and the USA have been in a dance of enabling for the past ten years on global warming. We need each other around so we can blame the other guy. China can no longer argue that the USA produces more carbon emissions, because China just went into first place. USA of course is still on top of the emissions per capita list.It changes nothing, we still have the other guy to hang it all on so that each of us can continue to avoid addressing the problem.

If this topic interests you, NPR had a great radio article this morning on the topic of solar power. Apparently some US solar manufacturers want the US government to make a WTO complaint against China for "dumping" solar panels on the USA, which is damaging the US solar panel industry.  But there is good and bad in this. The good is that the dumping has pushed solar panel prices so low that more people are at the point of saying that it makes sense to install an array on their roof. The bad is that US solar panel makers are looking at bankruptcy.

http://www.npr.org/2012/01/19/145403625/cheap-chinese-panels-spark-solar-power-trade-war

The US/China relationship is at the heart of this problem of global warming. But don't look for that relationship to suddenly warm up- and therefore, do not look for either nation to actually bite the bullet on dealing with the consequences of global warming.

This might make people on both sides of the political divide unhappy with me, but sorry if so. The Pipeline is not that important. The President's decision to say no to the pipeline might dismay fossil fuel fans, and it might encourage environmentalists, but it's really not a big deal. Why? Because oil is a global market and Canada will find a way to sell tar sands oil if oil prices stay over $100 a barrel. It will just get shipped west to British Columbia or all the way east to Quebec.

Republicans who argue that this will destroy the US economy are disingenuous. For one thing, those few jobs come at a price- most of the money goes to Canada because they are selling us the oil.  The jobs from building the pipeline would have been temporary jobs- you know, temporary, the thing you did not like about Obama's jobs. Buying oil from other nations is not what saves the US economy- on the contrary, it is a burden to our balance of payments.

If you really want to see this as it really is, it's a tiny but somewhat meaningless victory for american environmentalists who notice how much carbon goes into the sky from the process of mining tar sand oil even before you burn it to send more carbon into the sky. Beyond that, it's a bit of a tempest in a teapot.

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/01/education-advocates-enter-the.html

I would not wish to be a science teacher attempting to explain climate change to a high school class when inevitably some of the parents are denialists.  It invites parent conferences with the Principal, to be followed by a Principal request to "teach the controversy, not the science."

"We are faced with the fact, my friends, that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked and dejected with a lost opportunity. The ‘tide in the affairs of men’ does not remain at the flood; it ebbs. We may cry out desperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is deaf to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residues of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words: ‘Too late.’"

Of course M.L. King Jr. was not actually discussing global warming in that statement- he was discussing race relations. He was not a scientist by trade- he was a minister and a social activist. But his excellent education at Spellman College did not incline him to take issue with acquired knowledge. His statement applies to global warming quite accurately. There is such a thing as being too late, and that thing is what we are experiencing.

The denial crew of course will tell you that there is no such a thing as being too late. Either God is in charge and there is no need to worry, or the scientists are hoaxing us, or whatever other catch-phrase is their flavor of the month.

But M.L. King knew better. Time passes.

http://www.ipy2012montreal.ca/program/overview.php

I just stumbled across this conference while surfing the web. It will take place in Montreal from April 22 to 27, 2012, as part of the International Polar Year. Many polar scientists will be there presenting new findings on the topic of global warming, Greenland and arctic ice melt, polar bear and Walrus survival challenges, etc.

If I did not have a day job, if I were independently wealthy, I would go up there with my wife to see the presentations and discussions, then walk around old town Montreal to sample the nightlife, the cuisine, and the alcoholic beverages! I would also blog report to Gather or other web sources on it.

Ah well, we don't live in that world. We don't have the money, and my mother in law lives with us and requires constant care. But it would be fun to live in that world.