In a key article in The Guardian called “Methane from landfills is detectable from space – and driving the climate crisis” by Gina McCarthy* a major known concern has become a visible one. Methane is a gas that hangs around much longer and can do more damage to us humans. The methane leaks from natural gas wells is already visible from space, but now landfills’ leakage can be seen. Per the article, here are a few paragraphs with a link below.
“An elusive climate menace is now easier than ever to see. In early March, a rocket launched into the sky with a satellite that spots methane emissions from space. MethaneSAT joined more than a dozen similar satellites now in orbit, scanning the Earth for pollution and feeding that information back to scientists, policymakers, industry and the public.
What story does the data tell? One of methane on the rise, or one of collective efforts that avoid the worst impacts of the climate crisis? Slashing methane is the most efficient way to slow global warming in our lifetimes.
Thanks to huge advances in technology, a new study has brought more clarity to the landfill methane problem than ever before. The non-profit organization Carbon Mapper, with support from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other researchers, observed methane emissions from hundreds of large landfills across the US by aircraft.
They detected significant emissions at more than half of the landfills they flew over. The emissions were often persistent: observed over multiple visits, spanning months, sometimes years. And they were large. About 80% of the emissions detected at landfills – more than 850 unique methane plumes – released at least 100kg of methane an hour.
That emission rate meets the ‘super-emitter’ threshold that the EPA set for the oil and gas sector in its new standards. These large plumes are not fully captured in official inventories. On average, landfill emission rates calculated in the study over multiple visits were 1.4 times higher than the emissions that operators reported to the EPA.
This data is alarming, but the solutions are clear.
Let’s start with prevention. Keeping organic waste out of landfills – through waste prevention, food recovery and composting programs – is the most effective way to avoid future landfill methane generation, while benefiting communities. Each year, the average American family of four loses $1,500 to wasted food. We can all do a better job of buying what we need, eating what we buy, and donating or composting what’s left.
And at landfills, there are simple, low-cost changes to avoid methane leaks. Early and expanded gas collection, better landfill covers, and additional accountability measures – more methane monitoring, more often – can help halt the release of methane to the atmosphere. We can encourage our local landfills to be part of the solution too, implementing best practices that better control methane and co-pollutants.”
I encourage you to review Ms. McCarthy’s credentials and link to the article below. Also, it might be worth checking out the documentary movie “Ice on Fire.”
*Gina McCarthy was the first White House national climate adviser, the 13th administrator of the US Environmental Protection Agency, and is managing co-chair of America Is All In
This post was written almost ten years ago, before the age of Trump. As you go through them, think how these apply to him as well, as he used these approaches often.
The five D’s. As a now 55-year-old man, I have witnessed over time the aggressively managed handling of criticism whether it is in politics or in big business. In my view, the defense could be summed up in the following order – Deny, Discredit, Disinform, Diffuse and Defray – where you keep drawing lines in the sand as you retreat. With each D and line drawn, you want to see if that will stave off the criticism.
The fossil fuel and petro-chemical industries have been deploying these tactics for decades, as what they do for a living is not easy and has a history of impacting the health and welfare of humans and the environment. When you add money on top of these approaches, it takes an Erin Brockovich to make any headway against them. Yet, what people fail to realize is these five D’s are an aggressive risk management strategy.
But, the approach is definitely not limited to big business. Vladimir Putin is probably the best games player around. He knows your weaknesses and hot buttons, so he has and continues to use these approaches. In the US, politicians value and pay dearly for spin doctors like Karl Rove, who in essence are paid liars. Their job is perfume any pig that comes their client’s way. However, most politicians who have won more than one election become increasingly artful in these defense tactics – Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, Obama and the Bushes – all could be considered good at these approaches. With Nixon, the lies caught up with him as he taped himself. He only resigned once the courts ordered him to release the tapes that showed he was not only paranoid, but ran a burglary and disinformation ring out of the White House.
First, when criticism is made against what you do or have done, you deny it aggressively. That is absolutely not true will be words usually spoken. Note, with false claims, denial does not mean the accuser is correct as that is part of the defense strategy under discredit. Putin claims that Ukraine is fascist, but you really cannot call Ukraine fascist if they are trying to have democratic elections. The toxic fracking slickwater is not getting into people’s water supply, is a good example of denial. The NSA is not spying on Americans is another one.
Second, when the denial ceases to work, the discredit strategy begins. Sometimes, the discrediting comes with the denial. The Putin example is a good one. The global warming is a hoax is a prime example, where the fossil fuel industry through its public relations engine wanted to paint Al Gore and all of his imperfections as the reason why global warming was not happening. He lives in large mansion and is using this as a publicity stunt. Name calling or branding people comes part and parcel. Using terms like Hitler, Apartheid or Stalin to paint something you dislike is a common tactic. I have often been called an Environmentalist, which I am, but the term is used to smear me because it is meant to construe that I do not care about jobs. The fact that there are tens of thousands of jobs in solar energy in my own state and they are growing in number, seems to get overlooked as unimportant.
Third, if denials and discrediting don’t work, disinform. This probably frustrates me most, as it is a very common tactic on partisan news shows, to spin the truth, overlook the issues or just lie. I tell people often and write on this blog and emails for people to stop watching Fox news and its counterpart, MSNBC. You are better off watching no news as the spins can be so severe that you are not informed – you have been propagandized. The real truths include: Global warming is not a hoax. Fracking is not perfectly safe. Creationism is not science. Voter fraud is virtually non-existent. Business is not inherently bad, but needs governance. Protecting our environment costs us less in the long run. While there are a few abusers, people on food stamps are not gaming the system.
Fourth, if we are still in trouble, the next line in the sand is to diffuse. This is a measured mea culpa which allows some concessions, but does so on your terms. You have already thought through beforehand what would be an acceptable position to come to, when the avalanche of truth gets too big. You have done some internal investigations and found there is some truth in what we are being accused of, so we will fix it. You are right, climate change is real, so we are going to focus on natural gas, as it burns cleaner than coal. The data breach is bigger than we first imagined, so we are doing the following. We are only getting Metadata and not listening to your phone calls and reading your emails.
Fifth, if this fails, then we need to defray. We need to settle claims as quickly and expeditiously as possible. We must avoid class action suits. We need to divide and conquer. Pay people a pretty penny, but limit the number of pennies and limit the number of hands. No one goes to jail. We just pay out of expenses what we have already accrued when the problem first reared its head. Or, let’s recall every car that has any minor defect now. This will be far cheaper than the potential lawsuit.
The five D’s. Next time criticism is flying toward someone or some entity, watch how the issue is handled. Usually, the higher the revenue stream potential, the more aggressive the defense. The truth is usually further away from the speaker with the most to gain financially. Not always, but often enough.
Let’s keep this simple. Scientist James Hansen first warned us about global warming in 1988. It would turn out his concerns echoed what scientists for both Exxon and Shell Oil were finding, until they decided to follow the PR strategy of denial, shelving their science.
Today, Hansen has provided a more dire warning per The Guardian. “The world is shifting towards a superheated climate not seen in the past 1m years, prior to human existence, because ‘we are damned fools’ for not acting upon warnings over the climate crisis, according to James Hansen, the US scientist who alerted the world to the greenhouse effect in the 1980s.
Hansen, whose testimony to the US Senate in 1988 is cited as the first high-profile revelation of global heating, warned in a statement with two other scientists that the world was moving towards a “new climate frontier” with temperatures higher than at any point over the past million years, bringing impacts such as stronger storms, heatwaves and droughts.”
We must heed the words of people in the know and pay less attention to politicians, especially those whose campaigns are well funded by the fossil fuel industry. We are beyond overdue on significant action to address climate change.
A very informed friend forwarded me this update on the Farmers Insurance Group in reply to my note about the climate change hammered insurance business in Florida. Seven companies have pulled out of the state and homeowners premiums are through the roof, pun intended.
“Farmers Insurance Group has announced that it will not renew home, auto, and other policies for people in Florida. The company cited increasing risks of severe weather in deciding to leave nearly 100,000 policyholders stranded.
Farmers had already limited policies in California, as have other major insurers like Allstate and State Farm….Here’s the thing:
Farmers has invested massively in fossil fuels. And its affiliated company, Zurich Insurance Group in Switzerland, is a major insurer of the oil and gas industries — the very industries that have brought us to the brink of climate catastrophe in the first place!
Zurich, by the way, has a market value of $71 billion. That’s more than the combined gross domestic products of the world’s 42 poorest countries — the citizens of which will suffer far more from climate chaos than will corporate executives lounging about in lodges in the Swiss Alps.
A message for Farmers Insurance executives:
Farmers Insurance says it can no longer afford to insure Americans’ homes and automobiles because of increasing risks of hurricanes, wildfires, and other climate-related events. But Farmers and Zurich are still financing and insuring the fossil fuel industry that is the reason humanity is facing a climate crisis in the first place. Your myopic pursuit of short-term profits by propping up dirty energy is actually undermining your own market — not to mention putting all of humanity and our entire planet in peril.
Thanks for taking action.
For progress,
Robert Weissman, President of Public Citizen
Public Citizen | 1600 20th Street NW | Washington DC 20009 |”
Note, investing in companies that will hasten your own demise, seems unwise. At best, it is very short-sighted.
In an article in The Guardian called “‘Game changing’: spate of US lawsuits calls big oil to account for climate crisis” by Dharna Noor, it notes the litigation regarding climate change litigation is increasing globally and in the US. Here are a few salient paragraphs:
“Climate litigation in the US could be entering a ‘game changing’ new phase, experts believe, with a spate of lawsuits around the country set to advance after a recent supreme court decision, and with legal teams preparing for a trailblazing trial in a youth-led court case beginning next week.
The number of cases focused on the climate crisis around the world has doubled since 2015, bringing the total number to over 2,000, according to a report last year led by European researchers.
The US has not always led the way, but experts say that could be changing as:
The first constitutional climate lawsuit in the US goes to trial on Monday next week (12 June) in Helena, Montana, based on a legal challenge by 16 young plaintiffs, ranging in age from five to 22, against the state’s pro-fossil fuel policies.
A federal judge ruled last week that a federal constitutional climate lawsuit, also brought by youth, can go to trial.
More than two dozen US cities and states are suing big oil alleging the fossil fuel industry knew for decades about the dangers of burning coal, oil and gas, and actively hid that information from consumers and investors.
The supreme court cleared the way for these cases to advance with rulings in April and May that denied oil companies’ bids to move the venue of such lawsuits from state courts to federal courts.
Hoboken, New Jersey, last month added racketeering charges against oil majors to its 2020 climate lawsuit, becoming the first case to employ the approach in a state court and following a federal lawsuit filed by Puerto Rico last November.
‘I don’t know of another time in history where so many courts in so many different levels all over the globe [have been] tasked with dealing with a similar overarching issue,’ said Karen Sokol, law professor at Loyola University New Orleans College of Law.
Research also continues to unearth more about the fossil fuel industry’s knowledge of climate change. A January study revealed that Exxon had made “breathtakingly” accurate climate predictions in the 1970s.“
2,000 and counting court cases is quite telling. What has long troubled me is the scientists for the fossil fuel industry used used to speak at conferences over their concerns of climate change, then called global warming. Shell Oil scientists even made an educational video back in the mid-1990s.
But, that was all before the industry adopted a “naysaying campaign” armed by adverting consultants who helped the tobacco industry deceive the public about nicotine. Like that industry, the fossil fuel companies know what they do is harmful.
Now, kids and young adults are part of a movement in these lawsuits saying stop hurtin the planet we live on. And, stop the lying which continues to this day. I hope their efforts bear fruit. We need it to.
Texas leads the way in wind energy, but for some reason this is not common knowledge, nor is broadcast. First, a few statistics from the US Energy Information Administration.
“Texas produces more electricity than any other state, generating nearly twice as much as second-place Florida. In 2021, Texas accounted for about 12% of the nation’s total electricity net generation.
The share of electricity generated from wind in Texas has shot up from zero to 24 percent between 2001 and 2023.
In 2021, Texas produced about 26% of all U.S. wind-powered electricity generation, leading the nation for the 16th year in a row. Wind power surpassed the state’s nuclear generation for the first time in 2014 and exceeded coal-fired generation for the first time in 2019.”
Just picking the numbers 24% and 26%, the oil rich state of Texas gets about 1/4 of its electricity from wind energy and it provides about 1/4 of the wind powered electricity in the country.
Why? Four main reasons.
1)Texas provided powerlines to rural areas starting back at the turn of the century to harness electricity from such sources to meet a renewable energy goal of 15%.
2)Texas wind energy developers pay an annual rent to ranchers and farmers to put wind mills on their property. The number I recall is $5,000 per annum per windmill. One ranchers said he gets $55,000 per year for his eleven windmills which is huge supplement to his income.
3)Per now-deceased oil tycoon T. Boone Pickens, he said on “60 Minutes” about ten years ago that wind is the future of energy in the middle of America; natural gas is just buying us time. Iowa gets about 43% of its electricity from wind energy with several other states getting over 1/3 of theirs.
4)The production of wind energy has dropped in cost to be as cost-effective, if not moreso, than coal energy. Natural gas put the first nail in coal’s coffin, with wind and solar energy adding two more nails.
The reason I love this story is it surprises people. But, it also shows how an oil rich Texas planned ahead and now is seeing the dividends. It should be noted because of these four reasons, other utilities not based in Texas have wind farms in that state. Not only is wind renewable, it is not a zero-sum provider of electricity. My wind energy does not affect yours.
The following post was written over ten years ago, but remains a beacon. I cite the findings of Dr. Sandra Steingraber, who is one the most grounded scientists on the subject of what the environment does to us, especially our children. Her voice has been heard any several halls of governance and is worth heeding.
Earlier this week, I had the distinct pleasure to hear Dr. Sandra Steingraber speak on the significant environmental crisis that has been with us for some time and the impact past, current and future events will have on the environment and us in the future. I say pleasure, but in fact, she scared the crap out of me and everyone in attendance which was her purpose. Dr. Steingraber is an ecologist, author, cancer survivor* and mother of two. Her most recent book about her son is called “Raising Elijah – Protecting our Children in an Age of Environmental Crisis” and it follows her earlier book called “Living Downstream: An Ecologist’s Personal Investigation of Cancer.” She is a frequent public speaker and has testified in front of Congress, the United Nations and the European Parliament to name a few. Her first book has been made into a film by The People’s Picture Company of Toronto.
She tells her stories from each of her lenses, but her most impactful lens is the one told as a mother of two. I am currently reading “Raising Elijah” and would encourage each of you to read it and tell others about it. I will move onto her first book after this one. She attests that when you speak of these issues as a mother (or parent), it resonates with everyone as we all wish for our children to live healthy lives. She notes she has been able to bring pro-life and pro-choice believers together on these issues.
In her mind, there are two types of crises with the environment – the toxic crisis and the climate change crisis. The toxic crisis has been with us for some time and decisions and exposures from many years ago are still affecting people now. The climate change crisis is very real and, in addition, to the other issues it creates, it heightens the impact of the toxic crisis even more. Elevated temperatures and the impact on the ozone will only make current matters worse. From a mother’s perspective, the impact on our children is worse than it is on adults. She notes the obvious, but children are closer to the ground where many of the toxins reside, they have a much higher degree of mouth breathing meaning they will take in more air per pound, they put their hands in their mouth about ten times an hour plus they will be exposed for longer periods due to their age than adults to toxins. A few facts that will heighten the issue
– 1 out of 8 US children are born prematurely which is traceable to the environment; early births mean the lungs are not fully created, so life long breathing issues will result;
– 1 out of 11 US children have asthma (1 out of 4 in Harlem);
– 1 in 10 US children will have a learning disability;
– 1 in 110 US children will have some form of Autism; and
– 1 in 10 US white girls and 1 in 5 US black girls will have breast development before the age of 8, which translates into menopausal and other issues.
I wish to tell you these numbers are made up, but they are well-grounded. And, the higher propensity can be traced to toxins that have been allowed to exist in the air, water and even playgrounds. The latter will make you furious, but the pressurized wood we have in many of our playgrounds is loaded with arsenic, copper and chromium, so our children and adults with our pressurized decks, are exposed to these chemicals. Adding to that, it is measured that 60% of Americans live in areas where the air is unhealthful. So, from her perspective, “an investment in green energy is also an investment in cancer prevention.”
I went to hear her speak as she is one of the biggest opponents of hydro-fracturing or fracking to release and harvest natural gas. What I expected to hear is the impact fracking has on the nearby water where the chemicals used to fracture the shale gets in the water table. I also expected to hear about the significant increase in earthquakes in areas where fracking is done. These are a problem. Yet her major concern is what is released into the air and its impact on many today and in the future. Air pollution is what is causing the conditions in children and adults.
She notes the US is now doing and promoting Four Extreme Measure of Fossil Fuel Extraction – (1) mountain top removal, (2) tar sands, (3) deep-sea oil drilling and (4) fracking. All of these impact our environment greatly, but fracking gives her the most alarm. She advocates we must have a strategy to cease all new fossil fuel extraction now and invest in renewable forms of energy. Her point is any change will not impact the climate change for about 15 years, so we must divorce ourselves now from new fossil fuels.
What can we do? Reading from “Climate Change and Your Health – Rising Temperatures, Worsening Ozone Pollution,” by the Union of Concerned Scientists, we should be doing the following:
– investing in more fuel-efficient cars and reducing the miles driven;
– developing fuels that are less carbon-intensive;
– providing good public transit and other commuting/ travel alternatives;
– increasing energy efficiency at industrial and commercial facilities;
– developing and retrofitting homes and buildings to be more efficient;
– using more renewable energy resources – such as wind, solar and geothermal – to generate electricity;
– ensuring that ozone and carbon-reduction standards are strong enough to be truly protective of public health; and
– working collaboratively with global partners to reduce carbon emissions from other countries.
The issues and solutions require concerted effort and input from all parties. This issue more than any scares me most if the GOP takes the White House. I feel we will not only lose momentum, but many of the policies of the GOP are the exact opposite of what we need to do. When Newt Gingrich has to disavow that he changed his mind on global warming when he appeared with Nancy Pelosi (I guess we are to shake up our Etch-a-Sketch to erase it from our memories) that is a telling point for me. The President is on the right track, but he needs to do more and he needs the Republicans to join him at the table and stop being ostriches with their head in the sand. And, once you read Dr. Steingraber’s book I hope you have a better grasp that we need a concerted effort now to save our children – our Elijahs. Forget the debt, forget the economy, forget social values – none of that will matter if we don’t fix this problem. The human and economic cost will dwarf any of these issues.
*Note: Steingraber is a survivor of bladder cancer, which is called a bell weather cancer as it is often associated with environmental causes. She grew up between four different factories. Other relatives also got various cancers, including bladder cancer. Yet, here is the gist – Steingraber was adopted, so it was not a hereditary cause. Eventually, the cancer was linked to environmental toxins from the factories.
The following was written ten years ago. Since then, the US helped push and sign the Paris Climate Change Accord, decided to leave it under the last president, then decided to stay with the current president. As an independent and former Republican and Democrat voter, this difference in doing something about climate change is the primary reason (among several) to avoid voting for Republicans. Full stop. We have no more time to waste and need to fund and do bigger things to stave off what is already happening. Just look at some of the predictions referenced from 2013 below looking forward until today.
Today is a good day to reflect on what more we can do to protect our planet and make it a life-sustaining environment for eons to come. I would encourage you to spend a few minutes perusing my friend Z’s blog at www.playamart.wordpress.com and check out her Earth Day post of yesterday. She has captured in her photos and quotes a very meaningful journey on this Earth Day, as she often does with other topics of import. Below are a few odds and ends for your review as well.
It is all about water and air
These are our dearest resources. We must be vigilant on how we use and impact these resources. I have written recently about “water is the new oil.” We can not only avoid polluting our precious resource, we have to be very thoughtful about its overall supply. Do not let anyone tell you this is not a major issue.
On the air side, we must guard against the emissions that come from the mining, collection, use and disposal of fossils fuels and petro-chemicals. For those who want to protect our kids from future debt problems, this will impact their health and the debt in far greater way, with the high cost of fixing problems and tending to those impacted mentally and physically.
Some skeptics will see the word “mentally” and say that is overblown. Yet, one of the key tenets of Dr. Sandra Steingraber’s books “Living Downstream” and “Raising Elijah” is most environmental models look at the impact of pollution on a 50-year-old man. The models need to look at the impact on children who are of lesser weight, closer to the ground, mouth breathe more, put hand to mouth more, and have developing brains. The data are showing the impact of various chemical pollutants heightens the propensity to certain mental and physical challenges such as autism and its various manifestations, asthma and other breathing disorders and more premature births which creates a vicious cycle for future health issues. Her data is very compelling and her voice needs to be heard.
Global warming will accelerate many bad things
In her books, Dr. Steingraber, who is an ecologist, biologist, and bladder cancer survivor, also notes that a problem we do not talk enough about in the discussion of global warming is its impact on the toxins that are in our air, water and environment. She says it is like a chemical crockpot. As the earth warms, so will these toxins and our ability to reduce them will be challenged. She highlights her bladder cancer as a bellweather cancer, as it is typically caused by environmental issues. She had other relatives nearby who also had bladder cancer – the key is she was adopted, so it was environmental not hereditary.
We are already seeing worse things in the global warming models than forecasted, so as one of the US’s political parties is fiddling, Rome is burning. Last year at this time, I read a report that showed hurricanes will more significantly impact the coastal regions with the higher sea levels. The analogy used is it is easier to dunk a basketball when the court is raised. This was before Hurricane Sandy which many scientists note was heightened by the raised sea levels. In addition to lives, livelihoods, and homes, the cost to fix is at least the $50 billion the federal government provided in January.
The other predictions in the model are heightened forest fire prevalence and intensity, worsened droughts in the drier areas along with more stalled weather systems. So some areas get way too much precipitation, while others get way too little. The human and economic cost of these worsening conditions is huge says Mercer Investment Consulting and major pension trust sponsors around the globe. This study done in 2011 talked of these increasing forest fires, worsening droughts, and intensifying hurricanes, which had already been occurring and are now more prevalent around the globe.
Already too much carbon in the air
People like to talk about global warming as a future event, yet as noted above, it is already impacting our lives. We have too much carbon in the air today and it will only get worse. China is firing up more coal plants and Beijing is coming closer to being an inhabitable city. If you do not believe this, then ask why it is getting harder for companies to get their ex pats to move and stay there.
There are solutions in addition to moving more quickly away from fossil fuels. We need to adopt older ways of grazing cattle that will let the grasslands flourish. We need to plant even more trees than we are doing now and stop taking them down at such an accelerated rate. And, we need to move more food growth and distribution closer to the sale and consumption of food. The greener areas will absorb more carbon at of the atmosphere and coupled with more renewable energy sources, will move us down the right path.
And it is not just humans
Finally, our ability to survive on this planet is not just in human hands. We are seeing the impact of global warming and environmental toxins on animals, fish and insects that matter to us. The honey bee population continues to fall and the culprit is most likely the pesticides sprayed on adjacent crops. These bees cross-pollinate a non-inconsequential percentage of our food and farmers and beekeepers are worried.
Our coral reefs are dying off in greater numbers. The Great Barrier Reef outside of Australia is shrinking for example. This is of vital importance due to the numbers of fish and other species that swim and grow there. And, species we do not eat are eaten by species we do. So, it is a major concern. And, closer to home the populations of cod are much smaller in Cape Cod, so the fishermen have to go further out to sea. The US Fisheries Department has been tracking the impact of global warming on fish populations for over ten years, while the fiddlers still fiddle.
And, in the animal species, it is not just polar bears who are being impacted. The huge amount of fracking going on in our national parklands is impacting animals there. In Pennsylvania, small animals and birds are impacted by drinking the chemically laden water that cannot be kept out of the water supply. There is a domino effect that will impact us humans at some point, either directly, or through the animals, fish and insects we come in contact with.
Conserve and advocate
Now that I have scared the crap out of you, what can we do? Continue to conserve, compost and reuse. Do small things and big things. I wrote a post on last year’s Earth Day about conservation. But, also advocate. Change the conversation with others and leaders. Write them and be matter of fact. If someone starts a conversation about their doubts over global warming, say “that train has left the station, we need to talk about what to do about it.” If they insist, say “97% of scientists believe it to be so and only 26% of Republican Congresspeople. I choose to believe the 97% of scientists.” My advice is to not to debate the obvious, but discuss what to do about it. It will change the tenor of the conversation to be action-oriented.
And, that is precisely what is needed – action. We really do not have any time or resources to waste. Happy Earth Day.
*Note: Our friend Jill posted an old Earth Day post as well. Here is a link.
Note, the following post was written four years ago and reposted two years ago, but still serves as a reminder of the progress we have made and need to make to address our climate change problem.Since I mentioned this documentary in a comment on my last post, I thought I would repeat it here.
I encourage people to watch the excellent HBO documentary called “Ice on Fire” on concerns over climate change and remedial actions underway that should and can be leveraged. The documentary is produced and narrated by Leonardo DiCaprio, but the most impactful voices are the scientists, inventors and trendsetters who are seeing dividends from their actions and investments.
To sum up, we have two major problems facing us – too much carbon in the air along with a growing concern over methane as it is released from beneath melting ice caps and frozen tundra, on top of the venting from natural gas sites. The title comes from researchers lighting methane leaks on fire as it is released from melting ice covered waters. The scientists note with data that it is quite clear man is causing the hastened uptick in temperatures as we leave our carbon fingerprints in the atmosphere.
These are major concerns, but we are not sitting still. Significant efforts are underway. They can be categorized as putting less carbon in the air and capturing more carbon from the air. To avoid a novel, I will touch on some of the ideas, but please do deeper dives and watch the documentary airing now.
Stop putting carbon in the air
We must hasten the move to renewable energy. The costs are more on par and less, in some cases, than fossil fuel energy production. Wind and solar energy are growing at accelerated rates. One CEO noted, the technology is here to make this happen even more than it already is. Here in the US, California gets 25% of its electricity from solar and Texas gets 16% of its electricity from wind energy.
Yet, a very promising start-up off Scotland is tapping tidal energy. There is a company producing electricity today with an offshore platform with two turbines turned by the tides to generate electricity. I have written before about this group as they use existing technologies to harness the sea. Their success is gaining notoriety around the world, as it appears to be replicable.
Two other ideas also help with both recapture and restricting release. The first is reusing depleting biowaste (such as dying trees, plants and compost) in the soils to grow crops and future trees and foliage. The biowaste holds water better, maintains top soil and is straight out of nature’s guidebook.
The other is growing more kelp offshore as it captures carbon like sequoia trees and can also be used as a food source for livestock. Feeding cattle kelp is not a new approach. Feeding cattle is important as it greatly reduces the gases released by animals and preserves more carbon capturing grassland.
Capture more carbon from the air
The documentary spells out several natural ways to capture carbon and a few technological ways. On the former, here are a few ideas:
Maintain forests, especially those with large sequoias, which are huge carbon eaters. There are several places that are nurturing huge forests, but they note we need more of these efforts. We need to be mindful to replace what we cut, but keep some protected forests off limits to cutting.
Another example is to replenish mangroves that offer buffers to oceans. In addition to offering protection against storms, they also are natural born carbon eaters.
Another effort is to grow more urban farms. These farms are usually more organic, but in addition to absorbing carbon in urban areas, they perpetuate a farm to table concept that reduces transportation fumes. Reducing auto fumes is a huge concern of cities around the globe.
The next idea is more compex, but it requires the growing of more shells in the ocean. The dusts off the shells creates “ocean snow” that settles to the bottom and absorbs carbon. The idea is to spread a very small amount of iron in the ocean to cause more shells to grow.
The more technological solutions are designed to pull carbon out of the air. There are two approaches – one is to extract carbon and store it safely underground. The other is to pull it out and reuse it through artificial photosynthesis. Both of these options need more description than I am giving them. I prefer the more natural ways, but all of the above, is a necessary strategy at this late hour.
The scientists have concerns, but they do offer hope. The uncertainty of the ice-covered methane release gives them pause. They did note the methane release from accidental leaks from fossil fuel is visible from space and reduceable with some effort.
Another concern is the well-funded activity behind climate change deniers. A Wyoming rancher scientist standing in front of a visible, leaky methane cap said it plainly – they know this stuffs hurts kids more than adults. If someone came into my home to hurt my kids, it would be over my dead body. So, why is it OK to allow this?
Another scientist was less colorful, but equally plainspoken. He said fossil fuel executives perpetuating climate change denial should be tried in The Hague for crimes against humanity. Yet, as the costs have declined, the profit of creating carbon is becoming less palatable than the profit of reducing carbon in the air. People need to know these market forces exist today and not stand for future unhealthy energy creation.
Finally, if you cannot convince a climate change denier that we have a problem, ask them a simple question – if costs were not an issue, would you rather your children and grandchildren breathe methane from vented natural gas or drink coal ash polluted water or have carbon and methane neutral solar, wind or tidal energy? Guess what – costs are not much of an issue anymore and, in an increasing number of cases, less for renewables.
Amid all the contrived and exaggerated banter by one of the US ‘ political parties about fairly pedestrian topics, I am sure a story out of Australia was missed about the Antarctic ice melting at an even faster pace. This is not good for our planet, especially the billions that live in our coastal cities.
Citing the lead character Johnny from Stephen King’s book “The Dead Zone” might help get people’s attention. After an accident, Johnny could see a hazy future when he touched someone which could be altered if people acted differently when told of his prediction. An arrogant father chose to ignore Johnny as he told the father his son and other kids would drown at a hockey practice on a frozen lake that afternoon. Johnny hit the table with his cane and said you know who I am, don’t you? You investigated me before letting me tutor your son. The ICE is going to break!The son chose not to practice and survived, but four kids died when the father went on with the practice in spite of the warning.
So, let me channel my inner Stephen King and loudly say to people who would rather talk about wokeness, how evil LGBTQ+ are and book banning instead of real problems and dangers, “the ice is going to break!” It is ironic that four of the leaders of this movement to focus on contrived issues live in Florida, which is surrounded on three sides by ocean. In fact, two climate scientists on different continents have said Miami is the most at risk city in the world given its population, sea level proximity, and porous limestone protecting its aquifer. Yet, that apparently is unimportant.
And, just to emphasize the point, the number of sunny day floodings from ocean water coming up through the street drains have increased in the city of Miami Beach. Maybe people should ask Messers. DeSantis, Rubio, Scott and Trump what they plan to do about that. We may need to “wake them up” first.
musingsofanoldfart 