Climate Capitalism

I just read an article put out by the World Watch Institute talking about how “chewing the cud” is potentially responsible for up 51% of greenhouse warming gases.  The New York Times picked up the story this week with Fiona MacKay’s story: “Looking for a Solution to Cows’ Climate Problem.”

While on one had this story gives a big boost to the vegan option, it also suggests the merits of more morally problematic futures that include growing meat in petri dishes.  I hear it goes great with a beaker of a 2016 Cabernet.

For congress, it has been all about health care and the economy in recent months. However, an article in the NYT today suggest there may be some motion on climate change legislation as the major players in the energy industry start taking sides.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/19/business/energy-environment/19fuel.html

This NY Times article, “Arctic Shortcut Beckons Shippers as Ice Thaws” discusses some of the benefits of global warming at least for shipping companies traveling between East Asia and Europe.  According to the article two German ships will make  the first commercial trip from Japan to Rotterdam using a route north of Siberia.

The trip will shave off approximatly 4500 mile from the traditional Suez canal route.  While this trip may reduce some CO2 emmissions in fuel savings, there are others that are deciding to take the long way around the Cape Horn of Africa to avoid the fees of the Suez Canal.  NPR’s Planet Money had a great story about how the economic crisis was changing shipping routes.  http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2009/04/those_ships_and_their_long_det.html

A quick post to two fairly long video clips.

Bill Clinton talks about the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), a non-profit designed to establish base-line data on emissions for countries, cities and companies around the world.  He has some interesting anticdotes on everything from green roofs in New York to sugar cane ethanol in Ethiopia.

Walmart webcast of their Sustainability Milestone Meeting in July of 2009.  Includes a speeches from CEO Mike Duke and other Walmart & Sam’s Club executives.  Walmart recently annouced they will be requiring their suppliers to answer a 15-question survey which includes questions like: “Have you measured your corporate greenhouse gas emissions?”  You can skip the Walmart cheer, but it is interesting to hear how the world’s largest corporation is shifting its thinking and why.

New York times reporter, Elisabeth Rosenthal had an article in the New York Times today which makes me rethink my excitement for Seattle’s shinny new light-rail line.  The article highlights Bogotá Colombia’s bus rapid transit system (BRT.)

The basic idea behind BRT sytems is that building light-rail or subway systems are very capital intensive, not very flexible and don’t take advantage of the millions of miles of pavement we already have.  Use of buses instead of trains makes a lot of sense in terms of basic economics and getting the most out of our car-centric infrastructure — but the negative stereotype of “riding the bus” keep us laying tracks and issuing government bonds in cities all over the first-world.

The concept is not new, but BRT system do seem to be gaining some momentum. I remember reading about them in the State of the World 2007 by the World Watch Institute.  One of the overarching themes in the report: traditionally first-world nations have exported knowledge and expertise to the developing world. Recently the roles are starting to reverse.  As cash-strapped cities in the developing world are forced to come up with creative solutions to the problems of urbanization they are creating the new models of sustainble developent.  One of the chapters focused on a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system in the city of Curitiba, Brazil similar to the one discussed in the NYT article today.  The Curitiba system was origional designed in the mid-1960’s. Like the NYT article, the authors pointed out the importance of building these systems “right.”  These are not your typical city bus.  You need dedicated lanes for speed, platform stations for quick loading and unloading.   Cities like Curibiba and Bogata have figured this out while attempts to uses buses in places like Los Angeles have fallen flat since these key ingredients were left out. It has to feel like riding the subway.

In Seattle, during the 10+ year debate around the new light-rail system, many oppoents argued our bus system was just fine, buy more buses, light-rail was just too expensive. The counter argument was that the roads are the problem.  Buses can’t move in gridlock any faster than cars.  I wonder what would have happened if a true BRT system had be proposed instead?  Perhaps I missed it or perhaps I’m just having buyer’s remorse.

I’ll be interested to follow this topic as more cities around the world wrestle with the collision of climate change,  traffic congestion.  I’m not sure how many American’s will be trading in their car keys for bus passes just yet, but until we get flying cars, there may be more BRT systems in our future.

A quick follow-up on my June 15th post.  Matthew Wald, of the New York Times reported that Dow Chemical and start-up Algenol Biofuels have teamed up to create ethanol from Algae growing in salt-water.   Dow is interested in finding an alternative to natural gas for plastic production.  The article discusses options for placing algae bio-reactors next to coal power plants which should clean up the coal and help to produce very pure CO2 that can be used for plastic production.

Read the full article:  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/business/energy-environment/29biofuel.html

The Guardian’s, Suzanne Goldenberg discusses the global importance of the U.S. House vote on landmark climate change legislation scheduled for tomorrow morning.  She writes that Obama’s ability to set a global agenda to tackel global warming hinges on the United States passing climate change prior to the United Nations - Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, Denmark in December.

Read Goldenberg’s arcticle at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jun/25/barack-obama-climate-change-bill

Peter Henderson of Reuters reports on Microsoft futurist Craig Mundie.  Mundie promotes conservation but also predicts that nuclear power will play a major role in meeting 21st century “green” energy needs.

Mundie mentions traveling wave reactors which is a sub type of breeder reactors.  Also see Adam Smith’s December, 8th, 2008 post: IFR Technology, the Holy Grail of Clean Energy? about the related Integral Fast Reactors (IFR.)  Breader reactors are still largely theoretical, but do promise to help solve another 21st Century problem… what to do with all that 20th century nuclear waste.

The White House released a key report on climate change this week. The report Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States, (Thomas R. Karl, Jerry M. Melillo, and Thomas C. Peterson, (eds.). Cambridge University Press, 2009.) was the work of multiple U.S. agencies including NOAA and the U.S. Global Change Research Program.

What a difference a new administration makes.  Rather than the Bush administration’s technique of downplaying hard science in lieu of industry interest this report was accompanied by a full White House press release by Obama advisor John Holdren.  The report itself paints a bleak, but honest picture of the challenges climate change poses for the 21 Century world.  It is written in fairly plain language complete with plenty of graphs, diagrams, and examples to make the results of the science that went into the report, accessible to the average reader.

You can view the official press release YouTube clip below.  If you are in a hurry, you can skip the first 5-10 minutes which is largely introductions.  It gets a little more interesting when the authors present some of the key findings of the report.  One comment I found very apt to “Climate Capitalism” was by lead author, Tom Karl,

“… we designed and built our infrastructure for the climate we’ve had, not the climate we will have.”

This statement is exactly the kind of pragmatic thinking this country needs if we are going to lead the world out of the climate crisis.  The status quo of industry and infrastructure will not hold up to the rate of change we are now experiencing.

I was lead the this report and the video clip by Lisa Moore’s post on the Environmental Defense Fund’s blog. Drawing from the report,  Moore’s post includes some nicely summarized highlights of what a warmer world might look like.

I was curious to learn a little more about the state algae as a sustainable source for bio-diesel.   I’d heard it was very efficient source of oil, especially compared to agricultural mainstays like corn and soybeans. I’d also heard claims that it could grow in places less desirable than Iowa such as raw sewage or even space.

A few things I did learn:

Problems

There are some challenges using algae as a economically viable fuel source.  Here is a quick summary of what I found:

From: http://www.oilgae.com/blog/2006/10/three-big-problems-with-algae.html

• Energy intensive to harvest
• Naturally occurring (less-oil rich) species of algae will crowd out preferred species in open-pond systems
• Cost of mitigating potential ground-water contamination

• In a open pond design, since only the top 1/4 in of water in a pond will receive enough light, algea production, like any other land based crop, is limited by surface area.
• Optimum production requires consitent tempatures. Even sun-rich locations like New Mexico had problems due to low night-time temperatures.
• Lab cultures did not always grow in outside ponds.