Saturday, June 22, 2013

We'll be waiting for you on Tuesday

Obama will lay out his climate initiative Tuesday afternoon at my Hoya alma mater (the secret passage rumors there are true, btw, I found one myself in the main auditorium that he might use). Lots of speculation on what will be in it. You've got mine from February and May:  no shutdown of Keystone, but something else substantial, with fingers crossed it's the NRDC proposal to regulate existing coal power plants. The speculation suggests a bunch of other climate-related actions will also get thrown in, both on adaptation (which makes sense practically and politically) and carbon sequestration (which makes sense politically, I'm less sure practically except that it needs to be fully researched).

It would be interesting if the numbercrunchers with the chops to do it, go and figure out which is better for the climate - shut down Keystone, or do everything else he'll propose instead. Yes, better still would be doing both, but I'd like to know if the enviro emphasis on Keystone over coal-plant regulation is right. I'm sure it all depends on how generously one's assumptions favor the result one wants to reach (e.g., do you assume current tar sands production shuts down instantly, or that it continues in some form).

In other news, the new senator from Hawaii has adopted the Eli Rabett approach on climate communication with deniers, ridiculing the know-nothings. Will be interesting to see if he does it prominently.


carrot eater said...

Keystone is a silly distraction. People never should have made it the emotional symbol that they made of it.

It's a carbon price you want. and if you can't get a carbon price, you do things like increasing vehicle fuel economy standards (done), coal plant regulation, etc.

carrot eater said...

Also, probably some more carrots/sticks for better building efficiency - insulation and all that.


I hope he can keep the motorcade under 5,000 horsepower.

Anonymous said...

Whatever Obama says odds are it is talk with no action, based on past performance.


a_ray_in_dilbert_space said...

Whatever Obama DOES will be more than any previous president--and more than you are capable of understanding.

Anonymous said...

I do have to thank a_ray, he is a lot of the reasonI continue to post here. Just to get him to post one of his name calling attacks helps reveal thelevel of discourse on Rabett Run.

I am sure you all appreciate his comments on your "serious" blogs.

Thanks a_ray. I look forward to future exchanges and your assistance in exposing the two sets of rules for commenters.


a_ray_in_dilbert_space said...

Poor Pisshead,
He thinks that the truth can only come from patricians drinking tea with their little pinky extended. It is beyond his comprehension that one could be sufficiently passionate about truth to lash out at a lying SOB.

Hank Roberts said...

> I continue to post here. Just to
> get him to post one of his name
> calling attacks

And we know why you provoke such:
"... too many of the progressive movement's most vocal “advocates” apparently believe that what Limbaugh, Hannity and Fox News do actually works to make the right more popular, so they try to mimic that, to make the left more popular. They're not entirely wrong. The right's negativity does work, but only with the right. What the right wing echo chamber does makes right wingers love them, but it turns off everyone else. Given that this is a democracy, certainly you can see the problem, right? If 20% of the population likes you, but everyone else hates you, you're not winning anything.

Well... that's only true if they vote for someone else. If they stay home, it actually plays to the Republican strategy.

Progressives must always keep in mind that the number one Republican strategy in every election is to depress turnout at the polls...."

Confusing voters works — because when people get confused, can’t trust sources to be working really hard to get the information right, can’t tell who’s telling the truth and has the facts right, voter turnout goes down.

Stated clearly by a GOP strategist:

“PAUL WEYRICH: They want everybody to vote. I don’t want everybody to vote. […] As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.”


"ofundsi practice"
-- Captcha

EliRabett said...

a-ray, keep it clever. See Russell.

The next one goes in the hole. And yes, #1, we don't watch the blog 24/7 so don't blame Brian for not defending you.

If you try and anger folks and it works, take the reply like a Bunny not a Pielke.

opit said...

Keystone is ridiculous. Tar sands extraction is a poisonous and inefficient mess from the get-go which requires energy inputs to work properly. Anybody looking at the idea of shipping from the B.C. coast should note both missing obstacles and lack of sense about natural hazards associated with storms in a long tidal neck. Then there is the question of corrosion and use of proper pipelines to transport extra hazardous brew. The sands are a scar on the planet best viewed from space. Downstream natives are suffering ridiculous numbers of deaths from cancer.
Anyone worried about pollution should add this project to the list of worst ideas implemented.