SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
michael mann
Climate Experts Rebuke Musk Over 'Dumbest' Interview With Trump
"Why is Musk doing this?" asked 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben. "My only conjecture is that he hopes the world will become barren enough that we simply have to pony up for his big trip to Mars."
Aug 14, 2024
Elon Musk thinks he knows more about climate issues than the entire staff of a major international newspaper, but on Wednesday, experts on the planetary emergency offered the billionaire businessman a reality check.
Responding to a Guardianarticle critical of Monday's glitch- and lie-laden interview of former U.S. President Donald Trump on Musk's X social media platform, Musk proclaimed that "my little fingernail knows more about climate issues than the entire staff of The Guardian."
Bill McKibben, who co-founded the climate action group 350.org, is quoted in that article calling the Musk-Trump interview "the dumbest climate conversation of all time."
Responding to Musk's diss, McKibben said Wednesday on X that he would "be pleased to debate you (or your little fingernail) at any point about why we don't, in fact, have a century to spare in solving this crisis."
Climate scientist Michael Mann, who calls Musk a "climate denier" in the Guardian piece, also weighed in, telling Musk on X that "if you've got a beef, take it up with me."
Some X users noted that once upon a time, Musk—who is the CEO of electric carmaker Tesla—acknowledged the urgency of the climate crisis. In 2018, he said: "Why not go renewable now and avoid [the] increasing risk of climate catastrophe? Betting that science is wrong and oil companies are right, is the dumbest experiment in history, by far."
In an opinion piece published Tuesday by Common Dreams, McKibben noted that after Musk—who endorsed Trump and created a pro-Trump super political action committee—the former president's biggest funder may be fracking billionaire Harold Hamm.
"He took Trump up on his offer that for a billion dollars he'd give the oil industry whatever it wanted, and he's been working the phones ever since," McKibben wrote of Hamm.
Trump returned the favor by calling Hamm "so boring to be with... because all he wants to talk about is oil and gas."
During his first White House run, Trump infamously called climate change "a Chinese hoax." He staffed his administration with climate deniers and rolled back previous administrations' climate policies under the "drill, baby, drill" mantra popularized by former Alaska governor and GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.
"Why is Musk doing this?" McKibben asked. "Who knows? After all, the success of Tesla has been mostly driven by government subsidy that grows out of the effort to slow the growth of carbon in the atmosphere."
"My only conjecture," McKibben added, "is that he hopes the world will become barren enough that we simply have to pony up for his big trip to Mars."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Scientists Won't Classify Anthropocene as 'Epoch' Yet, But Say Human Impact Undeniable
The Anthropocene is classified as a geological "event" at this point—as are mass extinctions and rapid expansions of biodiversity.
Mar 05, 2024
The idea underpinning scientists' push to recognize the current time period as a new geological epoch called the Anthropocene dates back more than 100 years, but on Tuesday, a committee of experts voted down the proposal to officially declare a new age defined by human beings' impact on the Earth.
The panel, organized by the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), was tasked with weighing whether the Holocene—the epoch that began at the close of the last ice age, more than 11,000 years ago—has ended, and if so, when precisely the Anthropocene began.
Another group, the Anthropocene Working Group (AWG), had previously posed that an Anthropocene—an epoch during which "the scale and character of human activities have become so great as to compete with natural geological and geophysical forces," as British geologist Robert Lionel Sherlock argued in 1922—began in the mid-20th century.
Around that period, the U.S. and other countries began testing nuclear weapons while fossil fuel production began ramping up significantly, intensifying planetary heating, ocean acidification, and other climate impacts.
AWG presented geological evidence compiled at Crawford Lake in Canada, where radioactive isotopes dating back to the 1950s are embedded in the lake bed, to argue in favor of an Anthropocene that began decades ago.
Several members of the IUGS committee found that the time period proposed began too recently and "failed to capture the earlier impact of humans during, say, the development of farming or the onset of the Industrial Revolution," as Yale Environment 360 noted.
AWG members Simon Turner of University College London and Colin Waters of the University of Leicester told New Scientist Tuesday that the voting result was "very disappointing given the huge contribution by AWG to develop our case."
"All these lines of evidence indicate that the Anthropocene, though currently brief, is—we emphasize—of sufficient scale and importance to be represented on the Geological Time Scale," they said.
The academics who opposed recognizing a new geological epoch in the 12-4 vote are among the scientists who "prefer to describe the Anthropocene as an 'event,' not an 'epoch,'" The New York Times reported.
Geological "events" don't appear on the official Geological Time Scale, "yet many of the planet's most significant happenings are called events, including mass extinctions, rapid expansions of biodiversity, and the filling of Earth's skies with oxygen 2.1 to 2.4 billion years ago," according to the Times.
Michael Mann, director of the Center for Science, Sustainability, and the Media at University of Pennsylvania, called the disagreement over the terminology "a tempest in a teapot" that won't stop scientists from identifying the current time period as one in which humans are significantly and negatively impacting the planet.
While the scientific community is not yet labeling the current time period as a new epoch, committee member Jan Piotrowski of Aarhus University in Denmark told the Times, "Our impact is here to stay and to be recognizable in the future in the geological record."
"There is absolutely no question about this," Piotrowski said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
170 Scientists Urge Biden to Kill 'Staggering' LNG Buildout
Experts warn that expanding liquefied natural gas infrastructure will put the United States "on a continued path toward escalating climate chaos."
Dec 19, 2023
Echoing recent calls from frontline leaders, green groups, and healthcare workers, 170 scientists on Tuesday pressured U.S. President Joe Biden to reject a proposed liquefied natural gas terminal in Louisiana known as CP2 and other pending LNG projects.
"We are scientists who write to you with ever-increasing urgency as our climate continues to deteriorate to implore you to stop the dash to increase exports of liquified natural gas (LNG)," wrote the scientists, including Rose Abramoff, Robert Howarth, Mark Jacobson, Peter Kalmus, Michael Mann, Sandra Steingraber, Farhana Sultana, and Aradhna Tripati.
While stressing their opposition to Venture Global's Calcasieu Pass 2 (CP2) project, they also emphasized that "the magnitude of the proposed buildout of LNG over the next several years is staggering."
"As scientists we are telling you in clear and unambiguous terms that approving CP2 and other LNG projects will undermine your stated goals of meaningfully addressing the climate crisis."
"For years, the science has been overwhelmingly clear that we must stop expanding fossil fuel extraction and infrastructure and rapidly transition to renewable energy. We have simply no runway left and little margin for error," the scientists warned. "In fact, we are rapidly passing tipping points that are further escalating the climate crisis."
"Altogether, the science to date shows that spiraling emissions of the climate super-pollutant methane are a major contributor to the ongoing failure to meet agreed-upon global emissions targets and stabilize the climate," they explained. "The science also shows that LNG facilities are inherently leaky operations and prodigious emitters of methane."
Their letter cites a forthcoming study by Howarth, a Cornell University scientist, that shows LNG is at least 24% worse for the climate than coal.
CP2 alone would produce over 20 times more planet-heating pollution than ConocoPhillips' Willow oil project in Alaska, which the Biden administration is also under fire for greenlighting. The letter highlights that "these climate-wrecking emissions are on top of prodigious amounts of toxic air pollutants, including carcinogenic benzene, released into local environments both from the LNG facilities themselves and the upstream drilling and fracking operations that feed them."
"LNG plants and their associated infrastructure pose serious health harms to surrounding communities and worsen environmental injustice," the scientists pointed out. "These facilities are disproportionately located in communities of color and low-income communities on the Gulf Coast already overburdened with pollution."
"You have often said that your policies will be guided by listening to the science," they wrote to Biden. "As scientists we are telling you in clear and unambiguous terms that approving CP2 and other LNG projects will undermine your stated goals of meaningfully addressing the climate crisis and put us on a continued path toward escalating climate chaos. We implore you to turn back from this course, reject CP2 and other fossil fuel export projects, and put us on a rapid and just trajectory off fossil fuels."
Opposition to CP2 may already be having some effect. Advocates had expected the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to consider the project this fall but so far, the agency hasn't. Louisiana Bucket Brigade director Anne Rolfes said last week that "every month it is not on the agenda, we consider a victory because it means that it's not getting part of the federal approval that it needs."
While Venture Global lacks the permission required for CP2, the Biden administration has infuriated frontline communities, scientists, and voters concerned about the climate emergency by expanding LNG exports, enabling projects like Willow and the Mountain Valley Pipeline, and continuing fossil fuel lease sales for public lands and waters.
Biden, who was elected in 2020 after running on bold climate promises, is now seeking reelection next year and could again face Republican former President Donald Trump, a major ally to the fossil fuel industry.
The president "must reject new fossil fuel projects, starting with CP2, that poison communities and that will harm young people far into the future," Michele Weindling, political director of the youth-led Sunrise Movement, said Friday. "He can't one day cave to fossil fuel millionaires and the next throw a bone to young people. That's not how science works, and young voters know it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular