Unofficial Paul Krugman Archive Comments
Now that the scientific debate over global warming is all but over, Paul Krugman looks at what we can do limit greenhouse gas emissions:
Colorless Green Ideas, by Paul Krugman, Commentary, NY Times: The factual debate about whether global warming is real is, or at least should be, over. The question now is what to do about it.
Aside from a few dead-enders on the political right, climate change skeptics seem to be making a seamless transition from denial to fatalism. In the past, they rejected the science. Now, with the scientific evidence pretty much irrefutable, they insist that it doesn’t matter because any serious attempt to curb greenhouse gas emissions is politically and economically impossible.
Behind this claim lies the assumption, ... that any substantial cut in energy use would require a drastic change in the way we live. To be fair, some people in the conservation movement seem to share that assumption.
But the assumption is false. Let me tell you about ... an advanced economy that has managed to combine rising living standards with a substantial decline in per capita energy consumption, and managed to keep total carbon dioxide emissions more or less flat for two decades, even as both its economy and its population grew rapidly. And it achieved all this without fundamentally changing a lifestyle centered on automobiles and single-family houses.
The name of the economy? California.
There’s nothing heroic about California’s energy policy... [T]he state has adopted ... conservation measures that are ... the kind of drab, colorless stuff that excites only real policy wonks. Yet the cumulative effect has been impressive...
The energy divergence between California and the rest of the United States dates from the 1970s. Both the nation and the state initially engaged in significant energy conservation after that decade’s energy crisis. But conservation in most of America soon stalled...
In California, by contrast, the state continued to push policies designed to encourage conservation, especially of electricity. And these policies worked.
People in California have always used a bit less energy ... because of the mild climate. But the difference has grown much larger since the 1970s. Today, the average Californian uses about a third less total energy than the average American, uses less than 60 percent as much electricity, and ... emit[s] only about 55 percent as much carbon dioxide.
How did the state do it? In some cases conservation was mandated directly, through energy efficiency standards for appliances and rules governing new construction. Also, regulated power companies were given new incentives to promote conservation...
And yes, a variety of state actions had the effect of raising energy prices. In the early 1970s, the price of electricity in California was close to the national average. Today, it’s about 50 percent higher. ... As the higher price of power indicates, conservation didn’t come free. Still, it’s striking how invisible California’s energy policy remains...
So is California a role model for climate policy? No and yes. Even if America as a whole had matched California..., we’d still be emitting about as much carbon dioxide now as we were in 1990. That’s too much.
But California’s experience shows that serious conservation is a lot less disruptive, imposes much less of a burden, than the skeptics would have it. And the fact that a state government, with far more limited powers than those at Washington’s disposal, has been able to achieve so much is a good omen for our ability to do a lot to limit climate change, if and when we find the political will.
Posted by Mark Thoma on February 23, 2007
http://
economistsview.typepad.co...krugman_co.html
Thank you, DJM.
Reducing CO2 from 19 tons per capita to 13 is probably very easy. Most European countries lie in the 7-10 ton span and still has a living standard very much comparable to the US. But we have to reduce it to about 1 to get clear - and that would probably require some life-style change.
But not too much. Houses don't really need heating or cooling from external sources if you use modern technology. Food has to be grown nearer to the consumer. And cars have to be scrapped and replaced with PRT solutions. But that is all, probably.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/2...0cnd-
light.html
February 20, 2007
Australia Plans to Phase Out Incandescent Lights
By TIM JOHNSTON
SYDNEY — Australia intends to phase out incandescent light bulbs completely within three years, the country's environment minister said today.
The minister, Malcolm Turnbull, said the government would use both persuasion and regulation to get the whole country to switch to compact fluorescent bulbs, which use less energy, as part of its drive to cut down on the amount of "greenhouse" gases, implicated in global warming, that it releases into the atmosphere....
Imagine, the lunatic threatening of China by an American vice president in Australia. Suddenly, China is the military problem.
http://maxspeak.org/mt/archives/...ves/
002875.html
February 22, 2007
"WAR IS GOD'S WAY OF TEACHING AMERICANS GEOGRAPHY"
By Max Sawicky
U.S. troops are in in 135 countries and 14 territories.
Quotable:
"Is there really any reason why the United States still has 64,319 troops in Germany, 33,453 troops in Japan, and 10,449 troops in Italy sixty years after World War II? And what are we doing with 1,521 troops in Spain, 414 troops in Honduras, and 347 troops in Australia? And why do we have 31 soldiers in Cote D'Ivoire? Cote D'What? Cote D'Where?"
I am still not convinced that all democratic candidates have the same position on Iraq. There are basically two positions: one held by Vilsack, Richardson, Hillary Clinton and Joseph Bidden. These candidates now say that it was a mistake to invade Iraq. Had they known then what they know now, they would not have voted in favour of the war.
The other position is held by Obama, Gravel and Kucinich. These candidates opposed the war from the outset. I think Edwards deserves to be in this category because he recognises that he made a personal mistake in supporting the president’s decision, regardless of the president’s misrepresentations. The difference isn’t that he was fooled by the president, but that he let himself be fooled.
As much as I would like to see a female president, I don’t think that Hillary’s has shown enough self-awareness. She doesn’t seem to want to understand the real reasons why she voted in favour of the Iraq war. If she did, she would come out into the open and recognise them as did Edwards.
Gravel said that someone who voted in favour of the war based on what the president (mis)represented is unqualified to be president. I do not agree entirely with that. To be fair, a candidate who can learn from a mistake and admit it should be just as qualified, if not more than someone who cannot. The point is to admit a mistake, right? I think Edwards has taken full responsibility for his support rather than blame Bush. This makes him just as qualified as any other candidate in the same category.
George, thank you for explaining what has puzzled and bothered me. I think I understand and then I do not. I do not really want Democrats fighting, but possibly a fight for clarity is worth the while.
I think the clarity is that all candidates want us to leave Iraq soon.
What experience have any of you had with florescant lighting? What of the new energy saving bulbs from Wal-Mart? Do you like the quality of light?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/0...serland&
emc=rss
January 2, 2007
Power-Sipping Bulbs Get Backing From Wal-Mart
By MICHAEL BARBARO
As a way to cut energy use, it could not be simpler. Unscrew a light bulb that uses a lot of electricity and replace it with one that uses much less.
While it sounds like a promising idea, it turns out that the long-lasting, swirl-shaped light bulbs known as compact fluorescent lamps are to the nation's energy problem what vegetables are to its obesity epidemic: a near perfect answer, if only Americans could be persuaded to swallow them....
"Part of the problem today is that we have a surplus
of simple answers and a shortage of simple problems."
- Syracuse Herald
In my opinion part of our problem with energy solutions ( just part of it ) is that Americans have become unwilling to take baby steps, we want one simple answer that will fix everything right NOW. We also want solutions that do not interfere with our out of control consumption.
We should always be on the lookout for things we can do...we may not all be able to build a new home off the grid, but we can support and encourage as many green solutions as possible. In order to support them, we need to know as much about what is already available and what is practical and what is not. We especially need to understand that a lot of the solutions that the administration wants to promote with our tax dollars is more about profit for corporations that are friendly to the politicians, than actually the best solutions for the country or the world.
http://www.motherearthnews.com/
My words, but that is a good site to read about a lot of currently available energy alternatives.
Yes; I try to do many little things and must make a list. Nice idea.
Yes; the list will make me more conscious of what I do and can do.
Emma,
I do in fact use the compact fluorescent light bulbs. They're very nice. I like the shade of light better, they're cooler to the touch, and vastly less consumptive of electricity. An 18-watt fluorescent will produce as much light as a 75-watt incandescent.
There are two problems, both minor. First, they are quite a bit more expensive than the incandescent bulbs. I don't really mind this because they last longer and the pay-back period is pretty short. You can get maximum bang for the buck by replacing bulbs that are used a lot with the fluoros and using the incandescents for lights that aren't used a lot.
One other minor problem arises because the compact fluorescents are slightly larger than incandescent bulbs, so they don't fit in some lamps because the shade apparatus does not leave enough space. In traditional table or floor lamps with cloth shades, you can just bend the metal shade supports to make room. In lamps with those small cone-shaped metal or frosted-glass shades, however, you might not have that option.
One of the bigest missed opportunities is not taking advantage of passive solar heating in northern climates. Heating is enormously consumptive of power, which is why electric stoves are usually hard-wired, electric clothes dryers are on their own 220-volt line, and why hir dryers can require as much electric power as 15 incandescent reading lights or 80 compact fluorescents.
Even hanging out the clothes would make a difference. Not requiring passive solar heating in new housing construction in northern climates where it is possible to do is just plain retarded.
DJM,
Thanks for the link to Mother Earth News. I just got my subscription after a lapse of many years.
temporary change of subject;
Please, Please, Please - Don't Do This to Us
by Stephen Pizzo | Feb 23 2007
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/node/5676
I just want to beg those Democrats that keep putting Hillary at the top of polls to think before they answer that question next time. Get off your Hillary fixation and make an effort to get to know the many other Democrats running for that nomination, some of whom are far more likely to win and be good Presidents than Hillary Clinton. And, far more likely to heal and reunite our abused and bleeding nation.
Because if your support for Hillary continues and she wins the Democratic Party nomination, there are only two possible outcomes and they are both too awful to contemplate: she'll lose to her Republican opponent or -- she'll win.
The room off the back garden is glassed and planted, and the bird room. The white florescent lighting from various angles seems especially suited to plants and birds and I am repeatedly told is attractive. But, the lighting draws suspicion. (Also, I find the coolness of florescence an advantage.)
Helix, I agree completely. I prefer to have about 75 watts in equivalent lighting from a lamp. The coolness is nice for plants and birds. I use a master timer.
About Hillary Clinton; she is better than any Republican, but I do not think she can win. She is not Joe Lieberman but a real Democrat. I just do not find her able to win.
DJM, do you find the resistance to Hillary Clinton as profound as the article you cited?
Did Hillary Clinton learn anything from her support of the war and occupation? Can she change in any way? Can she ever admit a mistake? I do not know. I keep on asking myself. Why does she seem so arrogant? Is it me?
I really haven't talked to enough people personally about Hillary Clinton recently to even make an educated guess about the strength of resistance to her as president. I believe though that the Republicans will be happy if she gets the nomination since they are well practiced in attacking the Clintons.
I don't think I could vote for her myself. I would probably vote for a third party that I liked before her, or even write in a name (even though I would be accused of throwing my vote away)
I will certainly never vote for anyone in this generation of Repugnant Republicans ! But also, I will never be as naive about the caliber of the candidates.... I am afraid I am more skeptical than ever about what they claim to be and what the media reports. That is the Bush legacy.
If Hillary gets the nomination -- as I believe she will - Rudy Giuliani will be the next President of the United States, and both houses of congress will be recaptured by the GOP.
And I will seek permanent resident status in New Zealand.
In other words, get ready for many, many more wars.
I understand, and I suppose for just these sentiments Hillary Clinton will not gain nomination. Fine, we have Edwards and Obama and I could not be happier with either.
As long as the elections are being influenced by BIG money (since there are so many ways to get around the laws that were supposed to prevent that) we will not have many real choices, only those who have the ability to raise money on a national scale. Some say $100 million is necessary just to be considered a serious contender for the nomination, after which more hundreds of millions of dollars are necessary to campaign for the election.....it is a growing concern and I believe it is an obscene perversion of what should be a democratic process to find the best person to lead the country to prosperity.
I would like to level the playing field a little, and force the candidates to put their money where their mouth is, I think that any money over a certain predetermined amount, or perhaps 50 percent of the money over a certain amount, should be required to go immediately to something related to one of the candidates campaign promises . Support the troops ?... have half of the contributions made to that candidate used to build new veterans facilities or fund care for all those returning injured from this insane war. A candidate who wants to make health care a priority should perhaps put the money into building or funding free clinics. We might still end up with corrupt politicians but at least we would get something tangible out of the elections, a way to force the corporations to give back to the community instead of just buying influence.
Helix6, I understand it isn't easy to get permanent resident status in New Zealand.
Although I suppose those with the right skills and or personal finances will be considered first.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/2...s/
24ottawa.html
February 24, 2007
Canadian Court Limits Detention in Terror Cases
By IAN AUSTEN
OTTAWA — Canada's highest court on Friday unanimously struck down a law that allows the Canadian government to detain foreign-born terrorism suspects indefinitely using secret evidence and without charges while their deportations are being reviewed.
The detention measure, the security certificate system, has been described by government lawyers as an important tool for combating international terrorism and maintaining Canada's domestic security. Six men are now under threat of deportation without an open hearing under the certificates.
"The overarching principle of fundamental justice that applies here is this: before the state can detain people for significant periods of time, it must accord them a fair judicial process," Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote in the ruling....
There will be no problem by 2009. The Democrats have the House and will keep it, and will add to the Senate majority no matter what Joe Lieberman does.
Even if Lieberman becomes a Republican, which I hope, the Democrats will keep the Senate majority these 2 years. I am not worried. The Bush Cheney days are almost over.
Democrats are winning from state levels on, and we only need a decent candidate for President and we have 2 superb candidates in Obama and Edwards. I will however work for any and every Democrat, other than the horrid rotter Lieberman.
We are winning, and I am completely confident in winning more. I expect an election change in Aiustralia also, by the way.
Also, no matter the forever bearish lunatic advisers, this is the finest international investment period since 1945 and likely ever. A perfect investment period for middle class households. Middle class households who have attented to self-serving vicious bears have been terribly harmed.
Bears have been playing on political fears for rotten bearish purposes and have hurt any household that has given these self-serving creeps a hearing and not understood how self-serving they are.
I agree that campaign finance reform is sorely needed, but that will not come before the coming election. So, we can pay attention to secondary candidate such as Dennis Kucinich but must go with a major candidate. We have though 2 superb candidates in Obama and Edwards.
Another US Attorney, from Michigan, is "resigning." We may have a legal purge going on.
Sorry for not staying on subject but I think this is awful and we should be aware...; Families Behind Bars: Jailing Children of Immigrants
By Kari Lydersen
http://www.truthout.org/docs_200...6/
022307L.shtml
"It's just a concentration camp by another name," says John Wheat Gibson, a Dallas attorney .....
"Everyone I have talked to about this is shocked that here on American soil we are treating helpless mothers and innocent children as prisoners," says Johnson-Castro, who had previously walked 205 miles along the border to protest the proposed border wall. "This flies in the face of everything we claim to represent internationally."
I have no idea why we would go to such lengths. No idea at all. You always find important articles.
There is an articles I cannot post from Walrus by Ben Kiernan of Yale describing the bombing in Cambodia during the Johnson Administration, of which I was not aware, well, the public was not aware but is finally. The effect on generating the terrible Cambodian revolution is beyond my understanding. My God.
I am considering the article carefully, because Kiernan wants us to consider the effect of our constant bombing in Iraq. Kiernan is a brilliant scholar who needs to be taken seriously indeed.
Bombing displaced enraged population groups in Cambodia, became part of a hitherto minor revolutionary force and became endlessly destructive when the Cambodian government fell. What does this mean? I do not understand, but am thinking and worrying.
http://www.yale.edu/cgp/us.html
U.S. Involvement in the Cambodian War and Genocide
DJM, you are a wonder at searching. I will be doing some reading these coming days, though this is scary stuff to think about.
Ahhhh gee thanks, I owe most of my success to Google and just putting the right combination of words into a search.
Helix6 - why bother fleeing to New Zealand when you could come to Australia? Most of the Kiwis do that - something which is said to raise the average IQ in both countries, right Stuart!
There may be a change of federal government in Australia towards the end of the year as Emma suggests. The new Labour leader Kevin Rudd is enjoying a healthy lead in the opinion polls at present but is still in his 'honeymoon' phase with voters and a lot can happen in 8 months. The economy and national finances are very strong here, John Howard is a wily campaigner(but may have passed his electoral use-by date), and a large swing against the Liberals would be needed for Labour to take power.
Whatever happens politically, the sun still shines, the beaches are great and El Nino and with it the drought may be over. C'mon down!
I saw an anti war film once with footage from the Vietnam war ...taken from a plane while it was destroying a tiny village...it was devastating to know "we" would be so heartless...(lost for a better word to describe the feeling ) I wish I could find that again because I read a statement recently that reminded me of that scene;
During the 18 months to January 14,1999, US aircraft flew 24,000 combat missions over Iraq in what the Americans and British then called Iraq's "no fly zones; almost every mission was bombing or strafing. "We're down to the last outhouse," a US official protested. "There are still some things left [to bomb], but not many."
Sorry I don't recall where I found that....I think it was an article on Truthout, but I am not sure.
Notice....
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/2...ney/
25view.html
February 25, 2007
Job Security, Too, May Have a Happy Medium
By LOUIS UCHITELLE
FOR more than a decade, many American economists have pointed to Europe and Japan as prima facie evidence that layoffs in the United States are a good thing. The economies in those countries were not nearly as robust as this country's. And the reason? Too much job security in Europe and Japan, the economists said.
American employers, in sharp contrast, have operated with much more "flexibility." Hiring and firing at will, they shift labor from where it is not needed to where it is needed. If Eastman Kodak is struggling to establish itself in digital photography, then Kodak downsizes and labor moves to industries and companies that are thriving — software, for example, or health care, or Wal-Mart Stores or Caterpillar....
Yeah; a fair portion of the astonishingly intense bombing in Cambodia was simply indiscriminate. I am taking this in spurts because I am not liking what I am finding, to be mild. Darn.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/2...lawyers.html?
hp
February 25, 2007
Dismissed U.S. Attorneys Received Strong Evaluations
By DAVID JOHNSTON
WASHINGTON — Internal Justice Department performance reports for six of the eight United States attorneys who have been dismissed in recent months rated them "well regarded," "capable" or "very competent," a review of the evaluations shows.
The performance reviews, known as Evaluations and Review Staff Reports, show that the ousted prosecutors were routinely praised for playing a leadership role with other law enforcement agencies in their jurisdictions....
We must leave Iraq immediately, and offer aid to settle the country as much as possible, but we cannot continue to attack Iraqis in urban settings as we are continually doing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/2...serland&
emc=rss
February 23, 2007
After 200 Years, a Beaver Is Back in New York City
By ANAHAD O'CONNOR
A crudely fashioned lodge perched along the snow-covered banks of the Bronx River — no more than a mound of twigs and mud strewn together in the shadow of the Bronx Zoo — sits steps away from an empty parking lot and a busy intersection.
Scientists say that the discovery of this cone-shaped dwelling signifies something remarkable: For the first time in two centuries, the North American beaver, forced out of town by agricultural development and overeager fur traders, has returned to New York City....
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/2...serland&
emc=rss
February 25, 2007
History Swims in the Bronx
How clean can the Bronx River get? And how much biological diversity can such an urban river sustain? These are the questions posed by the recent appearance of a male beaver, lodge and all, in the Bronx. Unlike the manatee that swam up the Hudson last year — its species has never called New York home — beavers were synonymous with this city until they were trapped out 200 years ago. Like so many species, they display an extraordinary tolerance for the presence of humans, as long as humans are able to leave them alone....
Wow, imagine a beaver lodging in New York City. How wonderful.
Sadly Richard, Muldoon's dictum doesn't really hold true anymore. I think Helix would be an asset to either country, but then, I'm off back to Korea in a week or two. (Oh frabjous day!)
NZ is determinedly pacifistic - it's cheaper after all - but is presently experiencing a minor real estate boom that mirrors that described by the pessimist on smirking chimp.
Somehow Australia persistently elects worse governments, but keeps the creeps under greater public control to retain better results. NZ politicians are essentially inert and seek lower energy states, but they are a wretched crew, I wouldn't feed most of them to my notional dog - Gerry Brownlee alone carries enough publicly funded subcutaneous fat that, converted to biodiesel he could power Auckland for a long weekend, and it may be said that Parekura Horomia's nervous dislike of the Nisshan Maru is possibly ancestral.
This country is for the birds...
www.yellow.co.nz/.../images/Savage%20Kaka.jpg
Quite an evaluation, and from afar it makes sense. New Zealand should have a far more robust economy but appears to have the worst monetary policy in the developed world, and fiscal policy not much better. Nonetheless, the real estate boom is international and real as can be.
The bearish economic analysis was absurd, even if there should be a slowing of growth internationally which I do not expect soon.
Richard and Stuart,
Actually, I have lived in both NZ and Oz, albeit in the '70s. I liked both of them, Oz because of its frewheeling attitudes and its excellent beaches and NZ because of the beauty of its countryside and the wonderfully compassionate outlook of many Kiwis that I knew.
I hope that some vestiges of those traits still remain. Insofar as the politics are concerned, I've long since grown accustomed to the idea that politicians everywhere are similar - boorish, deceitful, and arrogant. But on the whole, American politicians are the worst of the lot: given America's economic and military prowess, you can add ignorant, corrupt, contemptuous and imperious to the list of traits above. And since I am required by law to pay taxes, that makes me part of the system here that is presently spreading chaos and darkness throughout much of the world.
If things go from bad to worse in the 2008 election, I suspect I will find myself no longer being able to justify my participation in this system, however unwillingly. New Zealand may be my best option. Which is not to say that Canada and Oz would not also be excellent choices.
All will be well with this coming election.
Commenting by HaloScan
