Climate Change week in review

Washington Post endorses carbon tax 

The idea of a revenue-neutral tax on carbon is starting to gain traction. In an editorial headlined “Cap and Rage,” the Washington Post suggested – as Citizens Climate Lobby has – that the carbon tax is the option lawmakers need to examine if they reach an impasse with cap and trade legislation. The Post editorial starts out by saying that political will for the cap and trade bill is running out of steam in the Senate. “The growing agitation within the chamber over the creation of another complex system to buy, sell and trade pollution credits only adds to our doubts,” the Post said. They go on to suggest that a Plan B exists, should cap and trade stall out in the Senate.

From the Post: “Yet there are other options worthy of consideration. Yes, we're talking about a carbon tax. It would be relatively simple to devise and easy to implement. It would require no new bureaucracy, and the revenue generated could be rebated to the taxpayer in any number of ways -- through a payroll tax reduction, for instance.”

The source for many of the points brought up in the Post editorial is former Undersecretary of Commerce Rob Shapiro, one of the speakers at the Senate briefing last month sponsored by Citizens Climate Lobby. Shapiro outlined his case for the carbon tax in a two-part essay in the The Globalist. 

Climate change and security

The New York Times followed up its font-page story about the link between climate change and national security with an editorial, “The Climate and National Security,” suggesting that concerns about military entanglements associated with climate-change induced disasters may provide the leverage needed to get legislation passed through Congress. 

From the Times: “This line of argument could also be pretty good politics — especially on Capitol Hill, where many politicians will do anything for the Pentagon. Both Senator John Kerry, an advocate of strong climate change legislation, and former Senator John Warner, a former chairman of the Armed Services Committee, say they have begun to stress the national security argument to senators who are still undecided about how they will vote on climate change legislation… National security is hardly the only reason to address global warming, but at this point anything that advances the cause is welcome.”

Regardless of whether advocates are promoting cap and trade or carbon tax, getting climate change legislation enacted is shaping up as a tough battle, and the national security angle presents a great talking point. Two letters to the Times serve as great examples in using the security angle to press for climate change legislation. As one letter writer so succinctly put it: “Climate change may be the ultimate destabilizer, serving to shake up every hornet’s nest around the world.”

How to kill a coal plant

An article in Salon.com reports the growing trend of citizens taking the path of civil disobedience to stop climate change. In a precedent-setting case in England, activists were put on trial for trespassing and damages caused when they cut the power to a coal-fired power plant and climbed up the inside of the plant’s chimney so they could paint their demand on the outside of the chimney. The activists were acquitted when they employed a defense that is opening the door for more such actions:

 “The case took on historic weight only after the Kingsnorth Six went to court, where they presented to a jury what is known in the United States as a "necessity" defense. This defense applies to situations in which a person violates a law to prevent a greater, imminent harm from occurring: for example, when someone breaks down a door to put out a fire in a burning building.”

The article goes on to cite the radicalization of Dr. James Hansen – renowned climate scientist and carbon tax advocate – who was arrested in West Virginia after crossing a police line at Massey Energy, a company involved with mountaintop removal for coal mining.

Astro-turf rallies begin

The entrenched, moneyed interests that stand to lose the most from climate change legislation are pushing back in a big way. One example is the American Petroleum Institute, which is backing a series of Energy Citizens rallies in cities across the United States. The first such rally was held in Houston last week. The Houston Chronicle had this account of the rally, attended by 3,500 people.

Climate change close to home

Never mind the polar bears, in a front-page article, the Cleveland Plain Dealer told readers that climate change is already having an impact in Ohio. It turns out the area – and many more throughout the country – is experiencing twice as many days with an inch or more of rainfall than it did at the beginning of the 20^th century. The heavier rainfalls in short periods of time cause flash flooding and results in heavy property damage. Rainfall is more severe because as temperatures increase, the atmosphere holds more moisture, which is then discharged in greater amounts.

From the Plain Dealer: “ ‘A longer season when thunderstorms dominate means you can either get too wet, too quick - or missed entirely,’ said Jeff Rogers, an Ohio State University professor and appointee as official state climatologist for Ohio. ‘There would be all kinds of problems with this, depending on the luck of the draw where you live, not the least of which is flooding.’ ”