Category Archives: environmental news

environmental news

Big storm makes me think: climate change

climate-change

Hurricane Patricia roared ashore on the Pacific Coast of Mexico.

It brought immense wind and an enormous amount of rain. The rain has swept across much of Texas, flooding areas of the southern and eastern parts of the state.

One of my thoughts as I looked from afar at this unfolding misery? Climate change.

I do not know if this storm by itself is a result of the changing climate across Planet Earth. I am quite certain, though, that its ferocity is going to spark more discussion — and yes, even angry debate — about whether the planet’s climate is changing and whether humankind has played a major role in that event.

We’ll let the debate commence.

I just want to weigh in, though, with this thought.

The climate change deniers in public office and even those out here among us unwashed masses keep seeking to debunk the theories put forth by those who believe the planet is warming up and that human activity has played a role.  Their argument? Those who believe such things “aren’t scientists,” they say. They ridicule esteemed individuals, such as Pope Francis, in that category.

Actually, the Holy Father is a scientist, with a background in chemistry. Aww, that’s not a relevant area of expertise, the deniers keep saying. Well, OK. But the pope and others have based their arguments with findings and data compiled by actual scientists who have concluded that human activity is related directly to the changing climate on our planet.

My best response to all of that, though, is that the deniers to whom I refer aren’t scientists, either. Yes, they too present data from scientists who agree with their view that human beings’ abuse of Earth hasn’t contributed to the changing climate.

So, which non-expert do you choose to believe?

I tend to side with those who fear that Earth’s climate is changing and that we human beings have played a significant role in bringing it about.

 

environmental news

Believe it: Texas can benefit from clean-air initiative

Let’s be sure to clear the air — pun intended — on President Obama’s latest call to cut carbon emissions.

One is that Texas politicians are sure to condemn the plan, given that this president is proposing it.

Second, the condemnation will come even as Texas stands to benefit greatly over the long term from what the president has put forth.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/08/03/obama-unveils-climate-rules-texas-wide-implication/

Obama wants to cut carbon emissions by 32 percent by 2030.

As the Texas Tribune reports: “Now final, the unprecedented regulations could significantly affect Texas. As an industrial juggernaut, the Lone Star State generates more electricity and emits far more carbon than any other state. Texas also leads the nation in producing natural gas – a fuel that policymakers could lean on while trying to shift from dirtier coal-fired energy. The state also is already feeling the effects of climate change, including sea level rise, extreme heat and drought, and more frequent flooding, experts say.”

It’s the natural gas element that is going to go largely unnoticed by the chattering class in this state.

We pump a lot of natural gas out here in West Texas. Down yonder, in places such as the Golden Triangle and along the Coastal Bend, we also pump a lot of carbon into the air. The president wants to reduce those emissions — while opening the door for exploration and development of cleaner fuels.

Such as natural gas.

Obama said it plainly and correctly when announcing the new rules. We have “only one planet,” and said “there is no Plan B” for finding a new planet to settle.

So why not do what we can to take care of the planet we have?

Make no mistake, however. The critics out there aren’t going to let an ecological imperative get in the way of blasting a far-sighted initiative designed to help save Planet Earth.

environmental news

Christie on climate change: It’s real

What gives with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie? Doesn’t he want to be the Republican nominee for president in 2016?

He’s traipsing through New Hampshire saying some things that are sure to fire up the GOP base against a potential Christie presidential candidacy.

He’s saying, well, that climate change cannot be denied and, what’s more, that human beings are a contributing factor to the world’s changing climate.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/241495-chris-christie-global-warming-is-real

The planet is heating up, Christie says, and we need to get busy trying to minimize the impact that human activity has on this phenomenon.

Look, his own state was hammered in October 2012 by Superstorm/Hurricane Sandy, which weather experts said was such an anomaly that they blamed climate change on that event when it happened. It wiped out coastal communities in New York and New Jersey.

Christie has changed his tune on climate change. He once opposed regional efforts to cut greenhouse gases. Then he vowed to eliminate coal-fired power plants from his state.

Yes, this climate change issue has sparked vigorous debate. Those who deny it’s happening — including influential U.S. senators, such as Republican Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma — push back by saying that science hasn’t  yet concluded that human beings are a factor in climate change … if it’s actually occurring.

Others, though, say science is on their side, that temperatures are rising, ice caps are melting, weather patterns are changing and that human beings play a significant role — through deforestation and carbon emissions — in creating those changes.

Now we can welcome a potential leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

Thanks, Gov. Christie, for changing your mind.

 

environmental news, local news

Rain, rain, rain … and there's still a drought

Those of us who live on the Texas Tundra are enjoying the rain that’s pelting these parts.

We had more than an inch of it today, according to the National Weather Service office at Rick Husband Amarillo International Airport.

This means we’re more than 2 inches over normal precipitation for the year to date.

Great news? Absolutely!

Is it a drought-buster? Hardly.

Can we predict what the weather will do for the rest of the year? We cannot predict for the rest of the week.

I stopped by Amarillo City Hall about a week ago and noticed the city’s “Every Drop Counts” water-use monitor over the first-floor elevator. The water use goal for that day was 48 million gallons; the actual use that day was 19 million gallons. Folks who normally water their lawns time of year didn’t turn the sprinklers on to irrigate their grass.

I reckon tomorrow’s water-use meter will register similar figures.

That, too, is great news.

I prefer to stay in water-conservation mode, no matter how much rain we get.

You see, it’s going to take a literal deluge to eradicate the drought threat that continues to draw down the water flowing through the Ogallala Aquifer, which gives our region its life.

The recent rainfall — and the prospect of more of it in the days and weeks ahead — gives City Hall, the water conservation districts, the counties and even the state a chance to remind us of what some of us sometimes forget when we get any significant moisture.

It’s that the drought hasn’t let up. The Texas drought remains a serious threat to our way of life — and even our lives.

 

environmental news

Farmers, ranchers cherish Planet Earth

A quick follow-up to an earlier blog post about Earth Day is in order.

One of my sons shared my post and he got a fascinating reaction from someone, who said farmers and ranchers celebrate Earth Day every day of the year.

That is so true. Indeed, if we all cherished Planet Earth the way farmers and ranchers do — given that they earn their living from the earth — the world would be in much better shape than it is today.

Here, though, is a caveat that needs mentioning.

Farmers and ranchers comprise a tiny and still shrinking percentage of Earth’s population. The rest of on our planet happen to be urban dwellers. In fact, some years back the U.S. Census Bureau stopped counting farmers in a separate demographic category, relegating them and ranchers to “miscellaneous” status. I saw that as a virtual insult to the men and women who harvest food, produce cattle and other edible livestock — otherwise feed the rest of us.

Yes, they care about Earth more than the rest of us.

It is to their great credit that they do.

environmental news

Happy Earth Day, everyone!

So help me, I wish Earth Day was a bigger deal than it has become.

For a whole day — as if that’s enough time to honor the only planet we have — we’re supposed to put Earth on the top of our mind’s awareness.

Homepage

This is the 45th annual Earth Day. Many communities around the world are going to have public events to commemorate the day. That’s fine. I welcome all the attention that will be paid to Earth until the sun comes up tomorrow.

Given that it was created 45 years ago, that means Earth Day began during the Nixon administration. I doubt President Nixon really paid a lot of personal attention to the condition of the planet, but I certainly applaud that it was during his years in the White House that the Environmental Protection Agency was created.

In the decades since Earth Day’s creation, though, it has become something of a political flashpoint.

Some of us believe the planet is in peril. Our climate is changing and yet humankind keeps doing things to the planet that exacerbate the change that’s occurring. Deforestation is one thing. Spewing of carbon-based emissions is another. Some of say we need to do a better job of protecting our planet — or else face the consequences, which are as grim as it gets. Hey, we have nowhere else to live — for the time being, at least.

Others of us say there’s little we can do. Climate change? It’s part of Earth’s ecological cycle. We need to accept the inevitable and not seek to destroy our industrial base to chase after a cause that is far too big for mere human beings to tackle.

I won’t accept the hard-core climate change deniers’ thesis.

For the time being, I am at least grateful that the world sets aside a day to honor the good Planet Earth.

We ought to do it every day of every year.

 

environmental news

Texas city becomes environmental pioneer

Who would have thought that a Texas city would blaze an impressive environmental trail?

Georgetown has announced plans to become the first city in Texas to use renewable energy sources for all its power needs.

Is this the start of something environmentally revolutionary?

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/03/18/georgetown-goes-all-renewable-energy/

Georgetown is in Central Texas. It owns the utility company. Thus, it is able to convert to wind and solar energy exclusively, no longer over time relying on fossil fuels.

Are you paying attention to this, Amarillo, which has abundant sun and even more abundant wind.

OK, the cities are different. Amarillo does not own the utility company that provides electricity to the city’s 200,000 residents. Xcel Energy controls the source of fuel it receives to power its energy plants.

It’s a hopeful sign nevertheless to see a Texas city — which happens to be near the capital city, Austin — engaging in this kind of ecological pioneering.

According to the Texas Tribune: “Because of its size and intense radiation, Texas leads the nation in solar energy potential, but the solar industry has long struggled to get a foothold in the state, as policymakers have provided fewer incentives than other states, and solar energy currently makes up a tiny percentage of the state’s energy portfolio.

“That’s beginning to change.

“Improving technology has driven down the price of solar power, making it more competitive with other resources­ — even without extra incentives, developers say. That trend has sparked what some industry experts describe as a small “land rush” in West Texas, and it’s increasingly convincing utilities that solar power is workable.”

Texas already has joined California among the nation’s leading producers of wind energy. That’s a hopeful sign as well of a commitment to renewables in a state that has relied for more than a century on fossil fuel — oil and natural gas — to fill its energy needs.

Here’s hoping this decision by a single Texas city is a harbinger of a cleaner energy future.

 

environmental news

Snowball stirs climate change debate

1 Comment

U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe’s snowball stunt has done something quite useful.

It has sparked another round of debate over whether Earth’s climate is changing.

The Oklahoma Republican sought to debunk the climate change theorists when he brought the snowball to the Senate floor this week. It’s really cold in Washington, D.C., the chairman said. So the snowball is a symbol of what he believes, which is that climate change is a load of crap.

http://time.com/3725994/inhofe-snowball-climate/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+time%2Fscienceandhealth+%28TIME%3A+Top+Science+Stories%29&utm_content=Google+UK

Actually, it’s not.

As the brief essay attached to this post notes, although the D.C. temperature was quite cold, that very day it was swelteringly hot in Opa Loca, Fla. — 87 degrees hot, as a matter of fact.

Does the temperature in Opa Loca on one day mean that Earth’s climate is changing? Not any more than the snowball in D.C. disproves it.

But the debate is a good one.

Science has produced mountains of evidence to suggest that the planet is getting warmer. Yet we keep hearing deniers suggest that the planet is getting colder. The polar ice caps are melting. No, wait! They’re getting larger.

The climate is changing because of human activity, scientists have concluded. Others say the climate change is part of an epochal cycle.

Here’s a notion worth considering. What if we actually did reduce carbon emissions significantly by requiring industrial plant managers to do a better job of controlling what they’re spewing into the atmosphere? How about if Third World governments cracked down on those who are obliterating forests and reducing the level of oxygen being pumped into the atmosphere to counteract the carbon dioxide that contributes to the carbon levels? What if we did all we could do to make the air cleaner with less carbon?

Wouldn’t that sustain the planet longer? Wouldn’t all that work slow the deterioration of our resources, if not reverse it?

Chairman Inhofe can deny the existence of climate change. But a cold day in D.C. doesn’t prove his point.

I am not going to buy into the notion that doing nothing about any of this is good for the only planet we have.

 

environmental news, International news, national news

Keystone veto will stick, for now

President Obama has vetoed the Keystone XL pipeline.

However, his reason seems a bit nit-picky.

The White House said Obama doesn’t necessarily oppose the pipeline, but he opposes the process that delivered the bill to his desk.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/obama-vetoes-republican-attempt-to-force-keystone-approval/ar-BBhVCrd

The pipeline is supposed to ship oil produced from Canadian tar sands through the middle of the United States, ending up in ports along the Texas Gulf Coast. It then will be shipped overseas. Proponents of the bill say it will create jobs and will help ensure that the world’s supply of oil remains high, thus helping ensue cheaper prices for the oil around the world.

Although I do support the pipeline, the president’s veto makes a modicum of sense.

He thinks an environmental study process should have been allowed to run its course. Congress short-circuited that process — which includes a complete review by the State Department.

“Through this bill, the United States Congress attempts to circumvent longstanding and proven processes for determining whether or not building and operating a cross-border pipeline serves the national interest,” the veto message said.

As Bloomberg News reported: “White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Obama’s rejection was strictly about the legislation and not the project. It’s ‘certainly possible’ that Obama would eventually approve the pipeline once a State Department review is completed, he said, without giving a timetable.

“’The president will keep an open mind,’ Earnest said, repeating past administration language.”

The White House said the review is part of an intricate longstanding process that’s been honored over many years. Congress’s decision to fast-track the pipeline didn’t allow a thorough review of the total impact of the project.

Perhaps the State Department can complete its review in relatively short order, deliver its findings to Capitol Hill and the White House — and then we can go through this legislative process all over again.

Let’s do it the right way.

environmental news

Correction noted on climate change blog

This post will be brief. It’s something I don’t normally do, but I thought I’d make an exception.

I’ve made a correction to the previous blog I posted this morning about climate change. I made an error in stating the increase in Earth’s temperature in 2014. I erroneously typed that it increased .7 degrees; the actual temp increase, according to the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, was .07 degrees. Quite a difference. Earth didn’t heat up quite so dramatically, but it did continue its warming trend.

It was brought to my attention by a former colleague with whom I’ve had disagreements over a number of issues. Climate change happens to one of them, I reckon. He reminded me: “Best to be right when you’re being smug.”

Correction noted.