An Inconvenient Truth

I saw "An Inconvenient Truth" this afternoon.

Let me say the end first: go see it. Those of us who have lived with this data as it's been released over the years (ice cores, and glaciers, ocean currents and species migration), seeing all this at once may be personally overwhelming. It was for me.

That is not sufficient reason to avoid this film.

For those not already in the choir, I expect this film to be revelatory. The truths in it are inescapable: global warming is real, and we must do something about it. If you have family, tell them to see it. And make sure they do -- buy them a copy for Christmas when it's available. Make sure they sit all the way through it until the end, and read aloud the list of things we all can do to make a difference. And then go do them.

Gore clearly, and very plainly, links CO2 and temperature rise, explains how the greenhouse effect works, explains the importance of the polar ice caps to the engine of the Earth, demolishes the faux "debate" business in the modern media about climate change, and works his way methodically through a host of the impacts of human endeavor on this planet. Human beings are a force of nature, Gore calls us, and I think that's entirely accurate.

There is one thing that I thought demonstrated his target audience was more of a college-student level than older adults, and that was the sparse reference to parenting. I think bringing that closer to the fore might make sense. Because what parent wouldn't sacrifice for their child, so that they can have a better life than we do?

So, I'll close with a reference to the Roger Ebert review of "An Inconvenient Truth": "In 39 years, I have never written these words in a movie review, but here they are: You owe it to yourself to see this film. If you do not, and you have grandchildren, you should explain to them why you decided not to."

Carabell/Rapanos Decision

I haven't read the decision announced yesterday yet, but these are of course critical questions in environmental law: for the purposes of the Clean Water Act, when is a water a "navigable water"?

Justice Kennedy writes:

[W]etlands possess the requisite nexus, and thus come within the statutory phrase 'navigable waters,' if the wetlands either alone or in combination with similarly situated lands in the region, significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of other covered waters more readily understood as 'navigable.' When, in contrast, wetlands’ effects on water quality are speculative or insubstantial, they fall outside the zone fairly encompassed by the statutory term 'navigable waters.'

[NB: I pulled this quote from SCOTUSBlog The blog's first note on the decision is here, and others follow the one from which I quoted.]

This is a very interesting, result-oriented approach to the definition. Rather than tackling a more positive definition of width or length or seasonality (i.e., does it dry up for part of the year), the Justice seems to be trying to avoid all that and instead ask, "what is the effect of this water?"

Thoughts? Predictions? Effects peculiar to Massachusetts or New England?

Fossil Fuel Dependency Solved?

Hydrogen Technologies out of Clearwater, Florida has developed a system to turn H2O into HHO allowing a car to go 100 miles on four ounces of water. This is a video:
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/2006/06/waterfuel.html

Volunteer Opportunity

What are you doing July 8th? Life is Good is sponsoring their annual Watermelon Festival on the Boston Commons and is looking for volunteers. If you are interested, please go to their site at www.lifeisgood.com

Will Idling Engines Cease?

This article in the Boston Globe posits that if drivers idling for more than 10-seconds would turn off their engines, emissions will be reduced. Granted, that seems like a logical result, but will this "inconvenience" catch on?

Three Towns Urge Drivers to Shut Down Idling Engines

My first concern was addressed at the end of the article; more wear and tear on a vehicle's starter. It seems characteristic of any environmental issue to sit inconveniently between an opportunity for positive change (however small) and lack of practical implementation (cost) for either the individual or big business.

We can say, that it begins with the individual, that one person can make a difference, if we change our habits...now, if we can just change that electoral voting...

New Orleans is Leaking

Water leaking faster than city is using it, at the New Orleans Times-Picayune.

[New Orleans Sewage and Water Board spokesman] Jackson also said S&WB employees cannot enter private property without the owner's permission to fix a leak, even if water has flowed onto public ground. And he said some problems that may appear to be water board issues, such as sinkholes, may actually be the responsibility of the city streets or public works departments; those are referred to City Hall.

How to get around this? Less than half of New Orleans' residents have returned, or something like that. That's a lot of empty houses that might need traipsing across to fix a leak.

Climate Change, Etc., Books

RealClimate offers reviews of three climate change-related books:
* Eugene Linden's The Winds of Change,
* Elizabeth Kolbert's Field Notes from a Catastrophe, and
* Tim Flannery's The Weather Makers.

Now that it's summer, I hope most of us have a little time for leisure reading -- why not add one of these to your list? Anyone have further recommendations or reviews?

I just read an article by Joel Salatin, written in 2003, on sustainable agriculture and the regulatory constraints a modern farmer operates under. Everything I Want To Do Is Illegal. I think it illustrates neatly the difficulty of adhering to a standard higher than the "floor" established by federal regulation.