Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Why Biden Is Such an Important Pick for the Climate

By Joseph Romm, Climate Progress. Posted August 26, 2008.


The Dems now have someone who gets global warming and who is one of the most qualified people be a global leader.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Joseph Romm

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Catastrophic climate change is the primary preventable threat to the health and well-being of all Americans -- as readers of this blog already understand and as pretty much everyone else will figure out in the coming years. Keeping total planetary warming as low as possible -- ideally below 2 degrees C, which it turn requires keeping atmospheric concentrations of CO2 below 450 ppm -- will become the central organizing principle for all US energy, environmental, economic, and international policy over the next two decades, and will almost certainly remain so for the next two centuries.

While this is a long-term problem, "What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment," as IPCC head Rajendra Pachauri warned last fall. Beating 450 ppm is certainly not politically possible now, as I have argued in a long ongoing series (see "Is 450 ppm politically possible? Part 2: The Solution" for all the links). Indeed, the recent climate debate in the Senate makes it painfully clear that conservatives are prepared to go down with the climate ship (see "Part 6: What the Boxer-Lieberman-Warner bill debate tells us"). The current oil drilling 'debate' only underscores how hopeless the climate situation is until progressives occupy the White House (see "Will the GOP's cynical lies destroy the chance for serious energy and climate policy?"

That said, the next president is almost certainly going to pass some sort of climate legislation establishing a cap on greenhouse gas emissions that kicks in around 2015. Again, it won't be easy to pass a serious bill -- certainly McCain can't possibly do it (see "No climate for old men: Why John McCain isn't the candidate to stop global warming"). But if we had a president who was capable of truly inspiring people and who actually believes in government-led clean energy policies, then I think it will happen.

But -- and this is where Biden comes in -- even if that legislation is strong enough to put this country on the path towards rapid and deep reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, the entire U.S. effort will certainly fall apart if the next president is not able to negotiate a serious international treaty that encompasses all major emitters. Yet it has become increasingly clear in recent months that achieving a serious, binding international treaty is even more politically implausible a task than passing serious, binding domestic legislation. And that is because Russia has emerged as a country that is likely to be every bit as much an obstacle as China and the United States currently are.

The Chinese Challenge

I have written about China extensively already, and no one should underestimate the difficulty of getting them to embrace the necessary reductions in projected emissions and then in absolute emissions [see "The immorality of China's coal policy is breathtaking (literally)" and "China sells its soul for liquid coal" and "The U.S.-China Suicide Pact on Climate"]

But everyone I know who knows the country tells me that the Chinese leaders understand that global warming will be catastrophic for them -- even if those leaders mistakenly believe they can "go back and solve climate change after they get rich," which has been the standard procedure for how Western countries dealt with traditional environmental problems. Sadly, that approach won't work with climate because the climate system almost certainly has tipping points (see, for instance, "Tundra, Part 2: The point of no return").


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: global warming, election08, climate change, biden

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
HEMP!
Posted by: garry minor on Aug 26, 2008 5:24 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once again another article about global warming, greenhouse gases, and the need for alternative fuel sources without mentioning the #1 source of biomass on the planet, cannabis hemp.
Farming just six to eight percent of our farm land with hemp in the U.S. would satisfy our current demands for oil and gas. Hemp is at the very minimum four times more efficient per acre than corn, kenaf, or sugar cane for ethanol production. It grows without most fertilizers, herbicides, or pesticides to foul the soil and water, in climates and conditions other crops will not grow. In fact anything made from oil, coal, timber, or cotton can be made with cannabis hemp. All paper, plastics, packagings, paints, varnishes, fuels, lubricants, textiles, plywood, structural components, insulations, many medicines, cosmetics, and health foods, over 25,000 known products, can all be made ecologically friendly with hemp!
Henry Ford built and fueled a car primarily with it, the cellulose plastic panels ten times stronger than steel. Synthetic plastics were developed using cellulose technology. Neither Ford or Diesel intended to run their engines with petroleum. Before prohibition gas and alcohol were sold almost equally in the U.S. as fuel. Most farms had a still, not for drinking, but for fuel. Prohibition put an end to that. There is also a process called pyrolysis that would make a sulfer free charcoal of hemp hurds capable of burning in coal furnaces! Hemp seed oil can also be used as fuel, it was the oil in Alladin's lamp and is cleaner burning than any other seed oil. Hemp seed is also the most nutritiously complete food source on the planet, can prevent many illnesses and also help to end world hunger. The ancient Zoroastrians called it "Royal Grain."
Canvas is Dutch for cannabis. For thousands of years all ships sails, ropes, netting, most clothing, and fine paintings were of cannabis fibers which are the longest and strongest in nature. The sails on Columbus' ships were of hemp, as was Betsy Ross' flag. The original draft of the Constitution was on hemp paper. It was illegal not to grow hemp in Colonial America. The War of 1812 was fought over it, the early Pioneers wagons were covered with it! The list goes on and on. Those generations would not believe we have demonized their most useful plant!
The reason hemp became illegal, other than racism, was to protect the DuPont, Hearst, and oil corporations from the competition. Today the alcohol, tobacco, pharmaceutical, chemical, and any other industry threatened by natural hemp have joined the bandwagon and also contribute to the censorship and propaganda at the Earths and our expense.
Currently the United States is the only major nation not growing industrial hemp, to the Canadians delight. The Chinese are growing 40% of the worlds market and they are developing new technology for fuels, plastics, textiles, and more that will keep the United States at an economic and strategic deficit for years, as if we already aren't.
Hemp industrialization in the United States and throughout the world with modern technologies will create millions of Earth friendly jobs from the farm to the laboratory, begin a redistribution of wealth and promote social harmony. It will provide us with fuel for our internal combustion engines until we can make the switch to something better.
Lets not forget that THC is proven to destroy tumors, promote the growth of brain cells, both prevent and cure Alzheimers, and treat hundreds of other ailments with no negative side effects whatsoever. It's True!
It is also the main ingredient(kaneh bosm) in the Holy Oil God instructed Moses to make to anoint all Priests, Kings, and Prophets, for all generations to come, including that of Jesus and today as the title Christ/Messiah means literally covered in oil, Anointed!

The leaves of the Tree are for the healing of nations. No longer will there be any curse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

extinction
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Aug 26, 2008 10:05 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Environmental policy = energy policy
Energy policy = environmental policy
because Global Warming
can lead to Hydrogen Sulfide gas coming out of the oceans.

Hydrogen Sulfide gas will Kill all people. Homo Sap will go
EXTINCT unless drastic action is taken.

October 2006 Scientific American

"EARTH SCIENCE
Impact from the Deep
Strangling heat and gases emanating from the earth and sea, not
asteroids, most likely caused several ancient mass extinctions.
Could the same killer-greenhouse conditions build once again?
By Peter D. Ward
downloaded from:
http://www.sciam.com/
article.cfm?articleID=
00037A5D-A938-150E-
A93883414B7F0000&
sc=I100322
....................Most of the article omitted......................
But with atmospheric carbon climbing at an annual rate of 2 ppm
and expected to accelerate to 3 ppm, levels could approach 900
ppm by the end of the next century, and conditions that bring
about the beginnings of ocean anoxia may be in place. How soon
after that could there be a new greenhouse extinction? That is
something our society should never find out."

Press Release
Pennsylvania State University
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, Nov. 3, 2003
downloaded from:
http://www.geosociety.org/meetings/2003/prPennStateKump.htm
"In the end-Permian, as the levels of atmospheric oxygen fell and
the levels of hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide rose, the upper
levels of the oceans could have become rich in hydrogen sulfide
catastrophically. This would kill most of the oceanic plants and
animals. The hydrogen sulfide dispersing in the atmosphere would
kill most terrestrial life."

www.astrobio.net is a NASA web zine. See:

http://www.astrobio.net/
news/modules.php?op=
modload&name=News&
file=article&sid=672

http://www.astrobio.net/
news/modules.php?op=
modload&name=News&
file=article&sid=1535

http://www.astrobio.net/
news/article2509.html

http://astrobio.net/news/
modules.php?op=modload
&name=News&file=article
&sid=2429&mode=thread
&order=0&thold=0

These articles agree with the first 2. They all say 6 degrees C or
1000 parts per million CO2 is the extinction point.

The global warming is already 1.3 degree Farenheit. 11 degrees
Farenheit is about 6 degrees Celsius. The book "Six Degrees" by
Mark Lynas agrees. If the global warming is 6 degrees
centigrade, we humans go extinct. See:
http://www.marklynas.org/
2007/4/23/six-steps-to-hell-
summary-of-six-degrees-as-
published-in-the-guardian

"Under a Green Sky" by Peter D. Ward, Ph.D., 2007.
Paleontologist discusses mass extinctions of the past and the one
we are doing to ourselves.

ALL COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS MUST BE
CONVERTED TO NUCLEAR IMMEDIATELY TO AVOID
THE EXTINCTION OF US HUMANS. 32 countries have
nuclear power plants. Only 9 have the bomb. The top 3
producers of CO2 all have nuclear power plants, coal fired power
plants and nuclear bombs. They are the USA, China and India.
Reducing CO2 production by 90% by 2050 requires drastic action
in the USA, China and India. King Coal has to be demoted to a
commoner. Coal must be left in the earth. If you own any coal
stock, NOW is the time to dump it, regardless of loss, because it
will soon be worthless.
I have no financial connection to the nuclear power industry.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: extinction Posted by: LMNOP
» Hydrogen Sulfide is the killer Posted by: AsteroidMiner
» Methane explosions? Posted by: AsteroidMiner
Ok, but the article never says WHY Biden is a good choice in this regard!
Posted by: PaulC on Aug 27, 2008 12:05 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It never really talks about Biden at all!

peace,
Paul

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]