Current Savers Blog

President Barack Obama came into office with climate change and the environment on his list of top priorities.

Nearly a year later, one of the top environmental groups in the United States says that Obama has made the grade so far.

In a review of his green record, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) highlighted dozens of moves by Obama at home and abroad. They cited the $50 billion the president put in the stimulus package for cleaner energy and energy efficiency; an executive order for federal agencies to set targets to cut emissions by 2020; and the adoption of strict auto emissions standards, modeled after environmental trendsetter California.

Abroad, the group said that Obama has restored U.S. leadership in the arena of climate change. They pointed to Obama’s efforts to secure an accord at the global climate change summit in Copenhagen — an outcome that the president has said people are justified in being disappointed with — and to partner with China, India and Latin America on clean energy.

Perhaps the brightest spot on Obama’s green record is also his biggest challenge in 2010.

Early on in his first year, the president called on Congress to pass legislation to combat climate change. Getting that legislation passed now sits at the top of the list for his second year at the White House, the group concluded.

(Photo:  U.S. President Barack Obama takes a tour of DeSoto Next Generation Solar Energy Center in Arcadia, Florida in October. Photo credit: Reuters/Jim Young)

The United States became the No. 1 wind power market in the world in 2008. But under the credit crisis in 2009, the building of new wind farms slackened and the United States ceded its top global spot to China.

With the demand for renewable energy still growing, the American Wind Energy Association is eyeing 2010 as a critical year. Here are some of their top trends to watch for:

Second to natural gas: Wind power generates only 2 percent of the U.S. electrical supply. But new wind power generation in the United States has been second only to natural gas generation in terms of new capacity built each year since 2005. Watch for the industry to work to keep that spot.

Wind turbines ratchet up the power: General Electric won a $1.4 billion contract in December to supply 338 turbines for a massive new wind farm in Oregon being built by energy producer Caithness Energy LLC. The size of the turbines — 2.5 megawatts — forecasts a shift to larger turbines, driven by economics, the wind group said. “Taller turbines with larger swept areas produce more power at a lower cost per kilowatt-hour.”

Market for small projects grows: The trade group predicts small wind projects for homeowners and small businesses will see record growth, fueled by an expansion of a 30-percent investment tax credit.

Industry seeks advice on where to put projects: Wind farm developers have to win regulatory approval for their projects, which have sparked conflict with conservationists at times. To ease the process of clearing those hurdles and finding sites for projects, the industry is working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service plus other federal agencies and nonprofits to get more clarity on wildlife surveys and other required studies. Will more guidelines be enough to speed up the development?

States, regions work on transmission: The industry is looking to states and regions to move toward investing in transmission needed to move electricity from often remote wind farms to the cities that use the power. The trade group is eyeing the Midwest in particular and whether its independent system operator that manages the regional power grid for 15 states and one Canadian province follows Texas and the Southwest region in how it invests in new transmission lines.

(Photo: A finished wind turbine complex is shown in southern Wyoming in 2009 where environmentalists feared further development could threaten habitat such as sage brush and species such as the greater sage grouse. Photo credit: Reuters)

It was a cold night with the wind chill reaching -18.4 degrees Celsius. By 5.00 a.m. I’d had enough of being cold and weather beaten by the Katabatic wind smashing the side of my tent and bouncing off my head so I decided to make my way to our base, the Sorensen Hut, for a warm cup of tea and read a couple of pages of my book.

I should have known we were in for bad weather as my neighbours the Adelie penguin colony were no where to be seen or heard this morning.

Before I could walk the five minutes to the hut I had to get dressed for the journey.

The thought flashed across my mind to make a dash across the rocks in my pyjamas, but being dressed inappropriately could be life threatening in Antarctica.

Dressing for polar conditions takes a considerable amount of time as there are so many layers to put on before stepping outside your tent.

New Zealand Merino thermal underwear is considered the base lining as it serves as a neck-to-knee protection. After that comes either fleece top and pants or industrial duty shirt and pants.

A final lining of padded overalls, woollen knee length socks, a pair of polar lined boots, a Canada goose down coat, sun glasses, a pair of gloves, a balaclava and a woollen hat and a splash of sunscreen to protect against the harmful UV rays.

The chance of meeting the man of your dreams in East Antarctica is pretty slim, and just as well, wearing 50 layers of padding for ballast, sporting bed head and the need for a shower.

But thankfully everyone looks the same. There’s no room for the fashion conscious at Cape Denison!!!

Later in the morning as the team began making their way across to Mawson’s Huts it started to snow gently. Within a very short time radio contact began to be exchanged about a blizzard coming in.

Out of our team of 10, four of us were at the base hut and three made it back to base while visibility was still reasonably clear.

The other three members made radio contact to say they were safe inside Mawson’s Hut and would continue their work as planned.

Shortly afterwards visibility was down to a couple of metres, the snow quickly blocked out our windows and mounted up around the door, while high seas battered the coastline.

We remained in constant contact with our team members over at Mawson’s Hut knowing they were in no real danger as they had survival packs, plenty of warm drinks and food.

When a blizzard hits there is nothing to do except stay in doors until it passes, so we passed the day staying warm and drinking lots of tea and eating a hearty vegetable soup and other yummy foods like Thai fish cakes and watching DVDs.

After a couple of hours visibility cleared a little but it took eight hours before our stranded three members walked in the door, safe and sound, to the sound of cheering and clapping.

It’s bed time now and thanks to a blizzard line to guide me and a radio for contact, I will make my way to my tent to hopefully get a better nights sleep in what Sir Douglas Mawson termed “The Home of the Blizzard”.

Penguins’ chatter outside my tent woke me to Christmas Day in Antarctica, but instead of Santa’s sleigh there was just the usual run to ensure our human waste doesn’t permanently become part of this frozen wilderness.

With 24 hours of daylight it was, needless to say, very different from the traditional Christmas most of the ten members of the Mawson’s Huts Foundation living in East Antarctica are familiar with.

It was probably not the ‘White Christmas’. I would have imagined as a child growing up in Ireland and very different to the hot Australian festive season I have become used to, marked  by barbecues and often bushfires.

However, it was a fairly typical day for Antarctica, and for this icy plateau.

Here we are about 3,000 kilometres from the nearest part of the Australian mainland, working with a team who are trying to preserve the relics of the legendary 1911-1914 expedition of Antarctic pioneer Sir Douglas Mawson.

Mawson was lucky to survive that expedition, and basic though our living conditions may seem, they are a far cry from what he and his men endured.

On Christmas Eve we had smoked oysters on crackers washed down with a choice of red or white wine followed by lasagne. Some of us went out to the veranda and danced our way through 80s music to keep warm while watching penguins march in every direction under us and snow petrels glide in the sky above us.

Fortunately, the animal life didn’t seem too bothered by our dance moves.

On Christmas Day I woke early to the sound of penguins chattering right outside my tent. It was – 6 degrees Celsius outside but I could snuggle back into my polar sleeping bag and slept soundly for a few more hours.

Eventually everyone at our base, the Sorensen Hut, slowly emerged from their sleeping quarters and greeted one another while making some breakfast and hugging the kettle for light showers. A kettle of water is enough for a wash here.

I ate freshly baked Stollen — fruit bread — toasted with tea while listening to symphonic music in the background. One of the team sat next to me hand sewing a kite used for aerial photography. It tore the day before on its maiden flight.

Others checked emails, or prepared Christmas lunch in the kitchen, or went out for a morning walk. One member of the team, Peter Morse, admitted he preferred Christmas this way.

“Normally I hate Christmas. It’s a huge relief when it’s over, but this year spending it on ice with penguins and friends will make it a joyous occasion,” he said.

Lunch was vegetable spring rolls followed by roast lamb and a selection of roast carrots, yams, onions and pumpkin with a specially saved selection of wines from New Zealand’s winegrowing region of Marlborough.

After lunch we each selected gifts from under our 40 centimetre plastic Christmas tree.

Christmas Day was rounded off by a Quad bike run to secure a trailer of human waste.

We did it in traditional style, jingling all the way to the sound of Christmas carols. One of our number, Mark Farrell, a heritage carpenter from Tasmania and veteran of the ‘poo run’, drove the bike after we hitched up the trailer.

Two of us wandered behind to make sure the cargo was well secured, both for the welfare of Antarctica and to ensure we did not get a drenching. It is all a regular event in Antarctica, where in order to preserve the world’s last great frontier, everything brought in must eventually leave, and that means everything.

Sweden complained that the recent Copenhagen climate change summit was a “disaster.” British Prime Minister Gordon Brown described it as “at best flawed and at worst chaotic.” Sudan’s U.N. ambassador, Abdalmahmoud Abdalhaleem, dubbed the outcome confirmation of a “climate apartheid.” For South Africa it was simply “not acceptable.”

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who for over a year had been urging the 192 members of the United Nations to “seal the deal” in Copenhagen, saw things differently. In a statement issued by his press office, Ban said the two-week meeting had a “successful conclusion with substantive outcomes.” Speaking to reporters, the secretary-general expanded on that: “Finally we sealed the deal. And it is a real deal. Bringing world leaders to the table paid off.” However, he tempered his praise for the participating delegations by noting that the outcome “may not be everything that everyone hoped for.”

In fact, the outcome fell far short of what Ban had been calling for over the last year. He had originally hoped the meeting would produce a legally binding agreement with ambitious targets for reducing carbon dioxide emissions and funding to help developing nations cope with global warming. Instead it “noted” an accord struck by the United States, China and other emerging powers that was widely criticized as unambitious and unspecific.

That accord set a target of limiting global warming to a maximum 2 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial times — seen as a threshold for dangerous changes such as more floods, droughts and rising seas. But it did not say how this would be achieved. It also held out the prospect of $100 billion in annual aid from 2020 for developing nations, but did not say where the money would come from. Decisions on fundamental issues such as emissions cuts were pushed into the future.

The South Korean U.N. chief was not the only person to praise the summit. U.S. President Barack Obama said the outcome was an “important breakthrough”, but noted that it was only one step on the road towards the emissions cuts needed. The head of China’s delegation, Xie Zhenhua, said the meeting “had a positive result, everyone should be happy.” (Gordon Brown was clearly placing the blame for the underwhelming outcome in Copenhagen on China and a few other states when he said: “Never again should we let a global deal to move towards a greener future be held to ransom by only a handful of countries.”)

Back in New York, some delegations were shaking their heads over Ban’s bullish remarks about Copenhagen. “He is talking from Mars,” said the Sudanese envoy, who currently chairs the Group of 77 club of developing nations at the U.N. But Ban is not in outer space, several U.N. officials insisted on condition of anonymity. Ban did not see the summit as a failure, but he, too, felt disappointed and would keep on working to “seal the deal” in 2010.

In fact, the U.N. officials said, Ban’s personal intervention had helped prevent the summit from falling apart. “He’s acutely aware of how much worse it could have been,” one official said. He was making phone calls, organizing bilateral meetings and persuading reluctant delegates to join the consensus. “His final intervention at the 11th hour” helped secure that consensus, the official said.

“It’s time to move past the anger and the finger pointing,” he added.

Some diplomats said that instead of calling the summit a success, Ban should admit it was a failure and use the U.N. bully pulpit to accuse China and others of sabotaging it. A name-and-shame policy, they say, might force some capitals to play a more constructive role when talks on a legally binding agreement begin again in 2010.

Another senior Western diplomat said that what Copenhagen showed was that any climate agreement will have to be worked out between the key nations themselves, not the United Nations. That could mean Ban’s role in any future talks would be marginal. “The lesson of Copenhagen is that this is not going to be done through the United Nations,” he said.

- Julian Hunt is visiting professor at Delft University and formerly director general of the UK meteorological office. Charles Kennel is distinguished professor of atmospheric science, emeritus and senior advisor to the sustainability solutions institute, UCSD. The opinions expressed are their own. -

The non-legally binding “deal” agreed at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen among the U.S., China, Brazil, South Africa and India, has brought to a conclusion what has proved an extraordinarily complex set of negotiations.

The outcome has been criticised on numerous grounds and, in U.S. President Barack Obama’s own words, “We have much further to go”.

In effect, the agreement may ultimately amount to no more than a long-term climate change dialogue between Washington and Beijing.  While global action to tackle emissions of carbon dioxide must remain a priority, the fact remains that we may be heading towards a future in which no long-term, comprehensive successor to the Kyoto regime is politically possible.

One of the chief flaws in the Copenhagen negotiations was the fact that the overly-ambitious political deals being discussed were not realistic, nor framed to inspire people to act and collaborate with each other across the world on both a local and regional level.  Going forwards, national governments will need to be more honest about future likely emissions and also of future temperature changes.  In this crucial debate, scientists must be free to state their estimates without political bias.

In the absence of a new global deal, it is now crucial that the centre of gravity of decision-making on how we respond to climate change moves towards the sub-national level.  This may also have the effect of re-energising future global climate change talks as environment diplomacy could certainly be furthered by policies decided at the local and regional level.

The need for such a paradigm shift from a “top-down” to a “bottom-up” approach is becoming clearer by the day.

Over the last decade, records of weather and climate trends have revealed larger and more unusual regional and local variations — some unprecedented since the end of the last ice age 10,000 years ago.  Among such warning signs are the disappearing ice fields around the poles and on all mountain ranges, more frequent droughts in Africa and now in wet regions (such as the 2006 drought in Assam India, previously one of the wettest places in the world), floods in dry regions (as recently, the worst floods in 50 years in northwest India), and ice storms in sub-tropical China in 2008 (for the first time in 150 years).

Such extreme events threaten sustainable development around the world, natural environments are destroyed irreversibly, and economic growth is slowed.

One of the most compelling advocates this month at Copenhagen for sub-national solutions for tackling climate change was California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.  As the state of California, and legislators in Globe and city governments are putting into practice, adaptation needs to build on existing knowledge and infrastructures in local settings.

Forming loose collaborative networks will enable regional facilitation centres, their experts and decision makers to learn from one another and also draw upon the resources of existing national and international databases and programmes, such as those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) and the growing number of consortia linking major cities, local governments, and the private sector.

Experience shows that this ‘bottom-up’ approach works very effectively as it is only generally when sub-national areas learn how they will be specifically affected by climate change that widespread, grassroots political action can be aroused.

Although regional variations in climate change are approximately predicted by IPCC global climate models, more local measurements and studies are needed for sub-national governments, industry and agriculture to better understand their local climatic situation and develop reliable and effective strategies to deal with all the ways that climate change affects their activities and well being.

Hence, the increasing numbers of regional monitoring centres which, by communicating and interpreting these predictions and uncertainties, are contributing towards local adaptation plans:

•    In China, where provinces require targets for power station construction, regional environmental and climate change centres are now well developed.
•    In the United States, a recent report has highlighted the value of non-official centres, such as a severe storm centre in Oklahoma, which gives independent advice to communities and businesses, while relying on government programmes for much of the data.
•    In Brazil, a regional data centre is providing data and predictions about agriculture and deforestation and informs legislation about policy options.

What this activity points to is the need for a global network of such centres to support national climate initiatives, and to facilitate international funding and technical cooperation in delivering the right information to the right place, at the right time.

Local actions can only be effective if measurements of climate and environment are made regularly and are publicised as well as information about targets, and projections of emissions.  Experience shows that full exposure is needed about what is happening, what is planned, and how every individual can be involved (as the Danes show by their community investment in wind power).

Historically, it is cities that have helped lead the vanguard towards tackling major environmental challenges.

It is therefore unsurprising that it is individual cities that are seeking to adopt some of the most innovative ways of adapting to worsening climate hazards, including showing how to integrate these measures with considerable savings in costs — such as putting windmills on dykes as in Rotterdam.

For instance, a recent “civic exchange” meeting in Hong Kong considered solutions for how major cities in China will strive to reach targets for reductions in emissions as stringent as those in developed countries.  This is a very ambitious objective, since in China the carbon emission per person per year is 6 tons, compared with 10 tons in the EU, and 25 tons in the United States.

Taken overall, the cumulative effect of such sub-national actions may well determine the speed and effectiveness of global responses to climate change.  The message is clear.  ‘Localisation of action and data’ must be the post-Copenhagen priority if we are to tackle the global warming menace.

By John W. Edwards, Jr.

President Barack Obama certainly is walking the walk when it comes to weatherizing America’s homes.

Five billion dollars was included in the economic stimulus legislation for the Weatherization Assistance Program, the federal program started in 1976 to help low-income families.

And more recently the president has proposed a “cash for caulkers” incentive program for homeowners modeled on the successful “cash for clunkers” autos program earlier this year.

He has called weatherization a “smart thing to do.” I couldn’t agree more.

Community action agencies have been operating the Weatherization Assistance Program locally since its inception, and we are geared up for a busy 2010 when the president expects half a million homes to be retrofitted with proper insulation, new windows, modernized heating and the like to make them more energy efficient.

Since it was started, the Weatherization Assistance Program has provided services to 6.2 million low-income families who cannot afford the cost of the repairs.

What I like most about the program is that it is diagnostically driven, using a blower door that demonstrates how much air is infiltrating the home. With this information, we can determine how best to make the fixes necessary to reduce a family’s energy use – and utility bills.

The government estimates low-income families save an average of $350 or more each year after their homes are weatherized.

The program also tests for carbon monoxide levels in homes with gas appliances, so that when the house is tightened it does not create a health issue for residents.

But the benefits of the program extend beyond those that go directly to the homeowner.

It creates employment – 52 direct jobs and 23 indirect ones for every million dollars invested, according to federal estimates. That gives people the opportunity to work for a decent wage and, in some cases, the ability to move to higher-paying jobs within the building trades.

With the national employment rate at 10 percent, that is no small thing.

The program also reduces national energy demand by the equivalent of 18 million barrels of oil per year, and it helps the environment by reducing harmful emissions.

Overall, the Department of Energy estimates that for every dollar invested, weatherization returns $1.65 in energy-related benefits and $1.07 in other benefits like reducing pollution and unemployment.

Statistics like these are important, but what’s more important to me is what President Obama’s $5 billion belief in the Weatherization Assistance Program will mean on the ground.

With weatherized homes, families no longer are too cold in the winter, and they can spend their energy savings on food, medicine and other necessities of life.

Contractors can avoid layoffs and actually add to their workforce. Once-jobless workers will be trained and employed retrofitting homes to make them more energy efficient. Thanks to the greatly increased funds for weatherization in the stimulus bill, there will be more stories like these.

Community action agencies have been involved in this work for a long time, and 2010 promises to be our busiest year ever. But our experience tells us with certainty that more weatherized homes are good for the country both economically and environmentally. It’s time to get to work.

John W. Edwards, Jr. is board chair of Community Action Partnership, which represents more than 1,000 community action agencies that work to fight poverty at the local level. He is also executive director of the Northeast Florida Community Action Agency.

(Photo shows U.S. President Barack Obama visits a Northern Virginia Home Depot to discuss home improvements and energy savings in Alexandria, Virginia December 15, 2009. REUTERS/Larry Downing)

Sitting at the base of the memorial cross at Azimuth Hill two nights ago watching the baby chicks that had hatched over a 24-hour period we noticed a black dot on the horizon.

In less than an hour the dot grew larger and larger, as it steaming towards us, until finally a large dark ship, with razor sharp spikes impaled around its exterior, dropped anchor in Commonwealth Bay.

It was the Steve Irwin, an anti-whaling protest ship owned by the environmental activist group Sea Shepherd and skippered by Captain Paul Watson.

Watson sails the Steve Irwin, with its Jolly Rodger flag, into Antarctic waters at this time each year to try and stop the Japanese whaling fleet from killing minke whales.

Watson said he had decided to sail into Commonwealth Bay to avoid being detected, in the cat and mouse game, with the Japanese whaling fleet.

We were not expecting guests until January so there was great excitement when we invited our unexpected visitors ashore and in return were invited aboard the Steve Irwin for dinner.

There are 40 people on the Steve Irwin — a mixture of Sea Shepherd volunteer crew and a television camera crew making a documentary on the anti-whaling campaign.

Walking into the base on Saturday morning I could hear there were a lot of radio messages going between our base and the ship to ensure strict protocol was adhered to for an inflatable boat and helicopter operations conformed to wildlife guidelines.

Showing nearly 40 people around Cape Denison in groups of three at a time inside of Mawson’s Hut took an entire day.

Dinner that night on the Steve Irwin was excellent, although only vegan food — vegetable fritters, vegetable sushi and vegetable coconut curry.

Around the Steve Irwin mess table were accents from all over the globe — Swedish, Brazilian, Dutch, English, Canadian, Australian/Irish and American.

Later, Watson invited our leader and I up to his cabin to share a drink and cheese platter and chat about the Sea Shepherd’s campaign in the Southern Ocean.

Commercial whaling was banned under a 1986 treaty, but the Japanese have continued to cull whales for research and monitor their impact on fish stocks, deflecting criticism from anti-whaling nations such as Australia, Britain and New Zealand.

Japan says whaling is a cultural tradition, and while most Japanese do not eat whale meat regularly, many are bemused by accusations that the practice is cruel given that other cultures hunt many other wild animals without as much controversy.

Near the night’s end, I overheard the senior producer of the Sea Shepherd documentary say she would love to spend the night at our base, so I offered to swap my tent for an overnight berth on the Steve Irwin.

A night in a bed, not a sleeping bag, and without an icy wind battering me as I slept, was very peaceful.

MORE FROM PAULINE ASKIN
The Poo run

Living on the ice

Setting up home on ice

Snow, gales and Merlot

Icebergs, penguins, pyjamas

Sailing into an icy cauldron

The only laughs in Copenhagen on Friday were for a news conference that never happened.

Rumours spread fast among thousands of journalists, particularly if they have spent a day watching climate talks slowly implode in Copenhagen, waiting hours for anyone to hand out snippets of information about what was going on.

Add in U.S. President Barack Obama’s star power and you have a recipe for pandemonium.

Which is exactly what ensued when news got out on twitter that Obama was giving a news conference.

Normally sluggish journalists were sprinting through the halls of the Bella Centre, there was a scrum at the conference room door and a rush for seats.

Only the news wasn’t news, it was just a rumour.

A bemused conference official eventually appeared on stage, to tell around four hundred people gathered with cameras and laptops that there might have been a mistake but he had no booking. Were we expecting the U.S. President? He looked slightly incredulous.

Five minutes later he was back to confirm that there were no plans from the U.S. delegation. We were welcome to stay for the next scheduled event in two hours, he added.

The whole room, after a day of gloom, burst out laughing. It was probably that or cry.