Joseph J. Romm's Blog, page 1083

Around the world, activists arrested for protesting coal's destruction, including NASA's James Hansen

UPDATE:  Listen to Hansen LIVE on WPFW in DC, online here, from 10 to 11 am.

Yesterday, scientists, youth, and coal-field residents came together to protest the coal industry's destruction of our future in a global day of action.  Wonk Room's Brad Johnson has the story.

In Washington, DC, top climate scientist James Hansen, who warned Congress of the coming scourge of global warming in 1989, joined over a hundred others who were arrested at the White House for protesting mountaintop removal, which Barack Obama has called an "environmental disaster."  The Rainforest Action Network, which helped organize the Appalachia Rising protest, reports on the arrests:

More than 100 people were arrested today during Appalachia Rising, the largest national protest to end mountaintop removal (MTR) coal mining. Arrests included Appalachian residents; retired coal miners; renowned climate scientist, James Hansen; and faith leaders. After a march from Freedom Plaza and a rally at Lafayette Park, more than 100 staged a sit-in in front of the White House to demand President Obama follow his own science and end mountaintop mining.

"In a stark reminder of the national connection to the coalfields," journalist Jeff Biggers described, "the Obama administration officials looked on from their White House offices, as their electricity came from a coal-fired plant generated partly with coal strip-mined from Appalachia."

On the other side of the planet, activists "shut down the world's largest coal export operation" in Newcastle, Australia:

Climate activists brought Newcastle's billion-dollar coal-loaders to a grinding halt yesterday, suspending themselves midair to effectively shut down the world's largest coal export operation. Police arrested 41 members of the Rising Tide group, which launched a simultaneous protest at three coal-loader sites at dawn yesterday.

Meanwhile, Los Angeles hit an all-time record 113°, freak floods hit Minnesota and Wisconsin, and Wall Street remains bullish on coal. On October 10, thousands of people around the world will come together in a global day of activism for clean energy.

JR:  Hansen said, "The science is clear, mountaintop removal destroys historic mountain ranges, poisons water supplies and pollutes the air with coal and rock dust. Mountaintop removal, providing only a small fraction of our energy, can and should be abolished. The time for half measures and caving in to polluting industries must end."

Related Posts:

Hansen on why he became an activist: "Our planet is close to climate tipping points" and it is "clear that needed actions will happen only if the public, somehow, becomes forcefully involved."
Science bombshell explodes myth of clean coal: Mountaintop "mining permits are being issued despite the preponderance of scientific evidence that impacts are pervasive and irreversible and that mitigation cannot compensate for losses."

Energy and Global Warming News for September 28: Water use in Southwest heads for a Day of Reckoning; East coast's offshore wind could power half of its demand; Future Volvo car bodies are also the battery

Water use in Southwest heads for a Day of Reckoning

LAKE MEAD NATIONAL RECREATION AREA, Nev. — A once-unthinkable day is looming on the Colorado River.

Barring a sudden end to the Southwest's 11-year drought, the distribution of the river's dwindling bounty is likely to be reordered as early as next year because the flow of water cannot keep pace with the region's demands.

For the first time, federal estimates issued in August indicate that Lake Mead, the heart of the lower Colorado basin's water system — irrigating lettuce, onions and wheat in reclaimed corners of the Sonoran Desert, and lawns and golf courses from Las Vegas to Los Angeles — could drop below a crucial demarcation line of 1,075 feet.

If it does, that will set in motion a temporary distribution plan approved in 2007 by the seven states with claims to the river and by the federal Bureau of Reclamation, and water deliveries to Arizona and Nevada would be reduced.

This could mean more dry lawns, shorter showers and fallow fields in those states, although conservation efforts might help them adjust to the cutbacks. California, which has first call on the Colorado River flows in the lower basin, would not be affected.

But the operating plan also lays out a proposal to prevent Lake Mead from dropping below the trigger point. It allows water managers to send 40 percent more water than usual downstream to Lake Mead from Lake Powell in Utah, the river's other big reservoir, which now contains about 50 percent more water than Lake Mead.

Huge wind energy potential off Eastern U.S. – study

BOSTON, Sept 28 (Reuters) – The densely populated U.S. East Coast could meet close to half its current electric demand by relying on offshore wind turbines, a study by an ocean conservation group found.

North Carolina, South Carolina, New Jersey and Virginia offer the most potential for easily captured wind energy, according to the Oceana study, which estimates that the 13 coastal states could together generate 127 gigawatts of power.

That represents the potential for far more wind power than the United States currently generates. At the end of 2009, the nation's land-based turbines were capable of producing some 35,000 megawatts of power — enough to meet the needs of 28 million typical American homes.

Investment in new wind turbines has surged in recent years, boosting sales at turbine makers including General Electric Co, Vestas Wind Systems A/S and Siemens AG.

However, all the U.S. wind farms built so far are on land. Advocates of offshore wind installations, led by backers of the Cape Wind facility proposed off the Cape Cod beach area in Massachusetts, have been working for almost a decade to try to win approval to build offshore turbines.

Opponents of Cape Wind argue that it could harm fisheries as well as sully views in a region dependent on tourism.

Future Volvos could have bodies made from batteries

Car manufacturer Volvo has teamed up with the Imperial College in London in an attempt to solve one of the biggest problems currently facing electric cars: the size and weight of their batteries. Though it's still a ways off, one potential solution could see future Volvos with batteries actual built into the body panels.

The new technology consists of a composite blend of carbon fibres and polymer resin, which is able to both store and charge energy. And according to Volvo it can do this faster than the current generation of electric car batteries. The material is also very flexible so that it can be molded into a variety of shapes, but strong enough that it can actually be used to serve as the vehicle's body. According to Volvo, replacing steel panels with the new material could reduce vehicle weight by up to 15 percent.

"Our role is to contribute expertise on how this technology can be integrated in the future and to input ideas about the advantages and disadvantages in terms of cost and user-friendliness," Per-Ivar Sellergren, development engineer at the Volvo Cars Materials Centre, said. The project will begin experimenting by turning a spare wheel recess into a composite battery. "This is a relatively large structure that is easy to replace. Not sufficiently large to power the entire car, but enough to switch the engine off and on when the car is at a standstill, for instance at traffic lights."

Research is expected to continue for the next three years and is also being funded in part by the European Union.

Japan to drill for controversial "Fire Ice"

In a bid to shore up its precarious energy security, Japan is to start commercial test drilling for controversial frozen methane gas along its coast next year.

The gas is methane hydrate, a sherbet-like substance consisting of methane trapped in water ice—sometimes called "fire ice" or MH—that is locked deep underwater or under permafrost by the cold and under pressure 23 times that of normal atmosphere.

A consortium led by the Japanese government and the Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation (Jogmec) will be sinking several wells off the southeastern coast of Japan to assess the commercial viability of extracting gas from frozen methane deep beneath local waters. Surveys suggest Japan has enough methane hydrate for 100 years at the current rate of usage.

Lying hundreds of meters below the sea and deeper still below sediments, fire ice is exceedingly difficult to extract. Japan is claiming successful tests using a method that gently depressurizes the frozen gas.

Tokyo plans to start commercial output of methane hydrates by 2018. At present, Japan imports nearly all its gas—about 58.6 million tons of liquified gas annually—and is heavily dependent on oil imports. In a desperate attempt to secure more oil, for example, Japan recently did a deal with the United Arab Emirates. In exchange for using Japan as a base for Asian oil trading, Japan now has priority to purchase rights to up to 4 million barrels of immediately accessible crude.

At a school in Bali students to learn how to consume without pollution or waste

Touring the campus of the Green School, an international organisation at Sibang Kaja on the island of Bali in Indonesia, you might think you were exploring a castaway's hideout. Set in an earthly paradise the buildings are made of bamboo, bricks or dried mud, pebbles mark the edge of paths, furniture is made of carved timber and sails from boats take the place of windows in some of the classrooms. We also spotted terraced paddy fields, beehives, buffalo in enclosures fenced with manioc branches, and vegetable patches growing tomatoes, cucumbers, sugar palms and cocoa.

In this environmentally friendly academy, visitors are greeted with a glass of fresh water, drawn straight from the well. "We do not want to be dependent on anything," says John Hardy, a Canadian who worked as a jeweller before founding this ground-breaking school in 2008. "We drink our own water, serve our own produce at the cafeteria, generate our own electricity and build accommodation compliant with sustainable development guidelines," he says.

In a setting worthy of Robinson Crusoe, 120 pupils aged three to 14 are being taught the basic principles of environmental awareness. On top of a conventional curriculum, accredited by Cambridge University, most of the lessons address issues related to conservation. The children soon find out about organic agriculture, recycling and green transport.

"We want to raise a generation of responsible citizens, capable of acting sustainably for our planet. We teach them to base consumption on fair trade, to save energy, to till the earth and reap its benefits without pollution or wastage," Hardy adds.

Protesters shut down Australian coal port

NEWCASTLE, Australia — The world's largest coal terminal in Australia was inoperable for several hours Sunday because of an "emergency intervention" by environmental activists.

The protesters claimed that the massive amount of coal exported is a main cause of global warming in Australia.

Several of the protesters, who broke into the facility about 5 a.m., suspended themselves from coal-loaders, effectively shutting down Newcastle Coal Terminal, north of Sydney.

The coal-loaders, which normally continue non-stop, were operational by about 2:30 p.m. Sunday, The Newcastle Herald reports. Police arrested 45 members of protest organizer Rising Tide Newcastle.

"We are exporting global warming to the world. Here in Newcastle, already the world's biggest coal port, multinational mining corporations are planning to triple exports over the next decade. It's a similar story at all coal ports in the country," said Annika Dean, spokeswoman for Rising Tide Newcastle.

Australia is the world's biggest exporter of coal.

For U.S. wildlife, a climate change blueprint

New efforts to measure what warming temperatures are doing to forests, streams and animals at a regional level are at the core of a strategic plan by the Fish and Wildlife Service to respond to the effects of climate change.

The Service said Monday that it had created a scientific team charged with identifying animals that are particularly vulnerable to climate change — not only obviously susceptible cold-weather species like polar bears and walruses, but also animals less visibly at risk like the wolverine, for example.

The service said it would also be working with eight new climate stations run by the United States Geological Survey that will take detailed measurements of how local ecologies are changing as global temperatures rise. The new centers, three of which are already active, will measure things like changes in snow pack, soil moisture and stream temperatures — seemingly small details that can mean life and death to some creatures.

In addition, the Fish and Wildlife Service said it was working with partners to establish the first generation of landscape conservation cooperatives, 21 in all. The idea behind the cooperatives, which are to include land managers for other federal and state agencies, is to prepare resource managers so they can be better equipped to deal with changing conditions on the landscape.

Scotland to get 100 pct green energy by 2025

LONDON, Sept 28 (Reuters) – Scotland should produce enough renewable electricity to meet all its power demand by 2025, First Minister Alex Salmond said on Tuesday.

"Scotland has unrivalled green energy resources and our new national target to generate 80 percent of electricity needs from renewables by 2020 will be exceeded by delivering current plans for wind, wave and tidal generation," Salmond said.

"I'm confident that by 2025 we will produce at least 100 percent of our electricity needs from renewables alone, and together with other sources it will enable us to become a net exporter of clean, green energy," he said a statement ahead of a renewable energy investment conference.

Last week, Scotland raised its 2020 renewable electricity target from 50 to 80 percent of total demand, much of which is expected to be met by offshore wind despite costs soaring over the last few years.

Philadelphia Navy yard reborn as $122 million energy innovation hub

The Philadelphia Navy Yard, once home mainly to mothballed ships and notorious for asbestos contamination, has undergone a gradual transformation in the last ten years since the site was cleaned up and new businesses moved in. Now things are really starting to heat up. The U.S. Department of Energy will put up $122 million for a new "Energy Innovation Hub" to be located at the Navy Yard, featuring a partnership between United Technologies and Pennsylvania State University.

The Philadelphia Navy Yard and New Green Jobs

At its peak during World War II, the Philadelphia Navy Yard had a workforce of 40,000, but things trickled down to a crawl after the war and the last Navy ship was built there in 1970. The site was cleaned up in the 1990′s and by 2000 the first of about 80 new businesses started to move in.  The current workforce is about 7,500, and that seems due to shoot up with additional clean energy investments. Aside from new green jobs generated by the Energy Hub, the Navy Yard has just been tapped to host the largest urban solar energy installation in the U.S.

A Miniature City to Test-Run New Clean Technologies

The new Energy Hub is one of three such facilities being developed by the Department of Energy. Its full name is the Energy-Efficient Building Systems Design Hub, and the Navy Yard was selected as an ideal location because it includes more than 200 buildings that are powered by an independent electric microgrid. This "virtual municipality" will become a real-life testing ground for  new energy saving technologies as well as greenhouse gas reduction related to building systems, presumably in United Technologies's areas of expertise which include heating and air conditioning systems as well as elevators and escalators, along with various aerospace products.

Koch-funded book argues against mine safety laws in West Virginia

Lee Fang wrote this Think Progress cross-post.

Paul Nyden, writing in the Charleston Gazette this Sunday, revealed that Koch Industries — the massive conglomerate of oil, chemical, manufacturing, timber, hedge fund, coal, and shipping interests run by the right-wing ideologues David and Charles Koch — has seeded West Virginia with several conservative front groups. Koch foundations provide the cash for anti-government efforts in the Mountain State, including a right-wing "think tank" called the Public Policy Foundation of West Virginia and for free-market faculty members at West Virginia University.

Nyden notes that Russell Sobel, a local economist whose research and writing has been underwritten by Koch fronts, argues against the minimum wage and against mine safety laws:

Sobel also works closely with the Public Policy Foundation of West Virginia, the Morgantown think tank which published his book, "Unleashing Capitalism: Why Prosperity Stops at the West Virginia Border and How to Fix It," in 2007. The Sobel book is a collection of 12 essays, arguing that government regulations hurt West Virginia's economy. One essay questions the value of "mandated" mine safety laws, stating government regulations may increase accident rates.

The Koch-funded think tank recently started a phony news service in West Virginia, called the "West Virginia Watchdog." Americans for Prosperity, the fake grassroots group founded and financed by David Koch, has been running television ads in West Virginia attacking progressive reforms. David and Charles Koch, each worth $21.5 billion, have postured as great philanthropists, slapping their names on New York opera houses and the private prep school David attended, Deerfield Academy. But much of Koch's wealth has been quietly spent lobbying against consumer protections, environmental regulations, and other efforts to erode the ability for Americans to provide accountability to powerful corporations. As the New Yorker's Jane Mayer reported, Koch lobbied aggressively to prevent the EPA from "classifying formaldehyde, which the company produces in great quantities, as a 'known carcinogen' in humans."

– Lee Fang

Related Posts:

New Yorker exposes Koch brothers along with their greenwashing and whitewashing Smithsonian exhibit
Rand Paul: "I believe business should be left alone from government."
Rand Paul: Mine safety regulations aren't needed since "no one will apply" for jobs at dangerous mines

Churches going green - Excerpting the book Greening Our Built World

[image error]More and more communities of faith—including Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, and Quaker groups— are embracing green design and green building. While beliefs, traditions, and practices vary in many respects, care for the earth is a value that transcends religious distinctions and emerges as a common motivation for incorporating environmentally friendly designs into construction projects. Belief in a higher being, respect for creation, and a mandate to care for one's neighbor are at the core of many faiths. Many religious traditions call upon members to be good stewards of the earth and its resources.

The results of a more qualitative survey in Greening Our Built World of 17 faith-based institutions that have built green buildings reveals a common sense that building green is a way of committing an entire community to the moral imperative to care for the earth and help all people share in the benefits of a healthy, sustainable environment. For a growing number of religious institutions, building green has become not just a cost-effective investment but, more importantly, a way to embody and demonstrate a religious and moral commitment to care for the earth and for life. The process of learning about and undertaking greening, in turn, commonly reinvigorates the religious community. According to Rose McKenney, a faculty member at Pacific Lutheran University in Tacoma Washington, the presence of the green building on campus is a major recruiting tool for new students.

That's an excerpt from a fact- and chart-filled book, "Greening Our Built World: costs, benefits and strategies" (Island Press) by my long-time friend and former DOE colleague Gregory Kats.  Greg is director of climate change at Good Energies, a multi-billion dollar global clean energy investor, where he leads the firm's investments in energy efficiency and green buildings. Greg is a founder of the American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE). He is founding chair of the Energy and Atmosphere Technical Advisory Group for LEED, and was the principal advisor in developing Green Communities, the national green affordable housing design standard. Previously, Greg served as the director of financing for energy efficiency and renewable energy at the U.S. Department of Energy.

Felician Sisters convent and school in Coraopolis, Pennsylvania, just outside of Pittsburgh recently built green. Sister Mary Christopher Moore, one of the community's members noted that the more the community learned about green buildings, the more they began to realize that renovating their building to be LEED certified had a moral dimension: "building green was the morally right thing to do, because it not only considered the sustainability of our community but also the sustainability of our world."

The Jewish Reconstructionist Congregation (JRC) in Evanston, Illinois completed its synagogue in 2008 as a LEED Platinum building. In both cases, the decision to build green began as a grassroots effort, driven by interest from within the community and guided by leadership of the rabbis. According to Temple Rabbi Rosen, environmental concerns are inherent in the Jewish principles of bal tashchit, meaning "do not destroy or waste," and tikkun olam, which means "healing the earth." Rabbi Rosen observed that  "it goes back to the Torah, a value we've inherited in our own spiritual tradition . . . energy efficiency, not destroying natural resources. The world does not belong to us. . . . We're reminded repeatedly of that in the Torah".

At Calvin College, a Christian institution in Grand Rapids, Michigan, the decision to construct the Vincent and Helen Bunker Interpretive Center as a LEED Gold building

Stemmed from the biblical concept of stewardship of the earth within various departmental curricula. The Department of Geology, Geography, and Environmental Studies Web states that: "faculty, students and staff: analyze Earth's environmental systems and foster the commitment to serve God in their care and preservation." According to Frank Gorman, college architect, this focus on the integration of Christian principles and academics is at the heart of Calvin College's Statement on Sustainability, which declares, "Our purpose is to infuse Calvin's vigorous liberal arts education with thoughtful, Biblically based practical guidelines that lay a foundation for living in away that honors the Creator and his beloved creation."

The Washington DC-based Quaker Sidwell Friends School (attended by the Obama girls) found a similar congruence between green building and institutional values. Michael Saxenian, Assistant Head of School and Chief Financial Officer at Sidwell comments that; "Building green substantially altered our culture. Environmental stewardship is now seen as one of the pillars of the school philosophy, along with academic excellence and diversity." The Sidwell Web site states: "With the decision to construct a new Middle School, Sidwell Friends chose sustainable design as a logical expression of its values. We believe that a 'green building' provides an opportunity to achieve an outstanding level of integration between the curriculum, values and mission of the school."

Green renovations significantly reenergized community life at the Muslim Khatri Association in Leicester, England. The process of planning the renovations and becoming educated as a community on green features, such as solar panels and energy efficiency, brought together younger and older generations of the community. While interest and energy from younger community members inspired and drove initial inquiries into green design, the older community members were able to provide guidance and education on Islamic values and stories dealing with issues of sustainability. Use of the center increased by more than tenfold after the renovations, from 150 users per week to 2,000 users per week.

The cost-effectiveness of green building among a wide range of faith groups represented in this study had a significant impact on broadening the potential spiritual and material contributions each faith community could make.

The Green Initiative for Environmental Evangelical Renewal (GIVER) is being launched as a partnership between the Evangelical Environmental Network, the National Association of Evangelicals, and the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference. The founding document for GIVER states that

Energy efficiency offers the largest potential opportunity to slow global climate change and limit global warming. A broad consensus of scientific experts warns that avoiding the worst effects of climate change will require that we sharply reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses. The most important of these is CO2, caused primarily by burning fossil fuels. Cutting energy waste in buildings is one of the largest and most effective potential ways reduce greenhouse gasses.[1] GIVER will rally the Evangelical Church around this potential.  Greening churches and other religious buildings has recently been demonstrated to be cost effective and to provide large financial and other returns to church communities and to society at large. [2] We believe an average 30% to 35% reduction in energy and water use in religious buildings is achievable and cost effective and represents a morally and financially compelling opportunity for religious groups to improve their facilities while reaffirming their mission and social commitments.

For more information please contact: The Rev. Mitchell C. Hescox, President/C.E.O. The Evangelical Environmental Network; mitch@creationcare.org

[1] World Energy Outlook, International Energy Agency, Paris, 2009.

[2] Greg Kats, Greening Our Built World; Costs, Benefits and Strategies (Island Press, Washington DC, 2009)

Related Posts:

How deep CO2 reductions can help the economy
Costs and benefits of green buildings

Extinction: It's not just for Polar Bears any more

Our favorite climate de-crocker, Peter Sinclair has a new video:

Related Posts:

Are walruses the latest canaries in the climate-destroying coal-mine?
Will polar bears go extinct by 2030?

Best damn Guardian piece ever: This is a news website article about a scientific paper - In the standfirst I will make a fairly obvious pun about the subject matter before posing an inane question I have no intention of really answering: is this an import

In this paragraph I will state the main claim that the research makes, making appropriate use of "scare quotes" to ensure that it's clear that I have no opinion about this research whatsoever.

In this paragraph I will briefly (because no paragraph should be more than one line) state which existing scientific ideas this new research "challenges".

Oh, this Guardian piece is just too damn good not to reprint in its entirety.  If the Brits had The Onion, Martin Robbins of The Lay Scientist would be their science reporter.  His generic science story continues:

If the research is about a potential cure, or a solution to a problem, this paragraph will describe how it will raise hopes for a group of sufferers or victims.  This paragraph elaborates on the claim, adding weasel-words like "the scientists say" to shift responsibility for establishing the likely truth or accuracy of the research findings on to absolutely anybody else but me, the journalist.

In this paragraph I will state in which journal the research will be published. I won't provide a link because either a) the concept of adding links to web pages is alien to the editors, b) I can't be bothered, or c) the journal inexplicably set the embargo on the press release to expire before the paper was actually published.

"Basically, this is a brief soundbite," the scientist will say, from a department and university that I will give brief credit to. "The existing science is a bit dodgy, whereas my conclusion seems bang on" she or he will continue.

I will then briefly state how many years the scientist spent leading the study, to reinforce the fact that this is a serious study and worthy of being published by the BBC the website.

This is a sub-heading that gives the impression I am about to add useful context.

Here I will state that whatever was being researched was first discovered in some year, presenting a vague timeline in a token gesture toward establishing context for the reader.

To pad out this section I will include a variety of inane facts about the subject of the research that I gathered by Googling the topic and reading the Wikipedia article that appeared as the first link.

I will preface them with "it is believed" or "scientists think" to avoid giving the impression of passing any sort of personal judgement on even the most inane facts.

This fragment will be put on its own line for no obvious reason.

In this paragraph I will reference or quote some minor celebrity, historical figure, eccentric, or a group of sufferers; because my editors are ideologically committed to the idea that all news stories need a "human interest", and I'm not convinced that the scientists are interesting enough.

At this point I will include a picture, because our search engine optimisation experts have determined that humans are incapable of reading more than 400 words without one.

This picture has been optimised by SEO experts to appeal to our key target demographics

This subheading hints at controversy with a curt phrase and a question mark?

This paragraph will explain that while some scientists believe one thing to be true, other people believe another, different thing to be true.

In this paragraph I will provide balance with a quote from another scientist in the field. Since I picked their name at random from a Google search, and since the research probably hasn't even been published yet for them to see it, their response to my e-mail will be bland and non-committal.

"The research is useful", they will say, "and gives us new information. However, we need more research before we can say if the conclusions are correct, so I would advise caution for now."

If the subject is politically sensitive this paragraph will contain quotes from some fringe special interest group of people who, though having no apparent understanding of the subject, help to give the impression that genuine public "controversy" exists.

This paragraph will provide more comments from the author restating their beliefs about the research by basically repeating the same stuff they said in the earlier quotes but with slightly different words. They won't address any of the criticisms above because I only had time to send out one round of e-mails.

This paragraph contained useful information or context, but was removed by the sub-editor to keep the article within an arbitrary word limit in case the internet runs out of space.

The final paragraph will state that some part of the result is still ambiguous, and that research will continue.

Related Links:

The Journal (not the actual paper, we don't link to papers)

The University Home Page (finding the researcher's page would be too much effort).

Unrelated story from 2007 matched by keyword analysis.

Special interest group linked to for balance

Ouch!

How I wish I had written that.

As an aside, it is amazing to me how many newspapers still refuse to provide links in their articles to anything useful.

Related Posts:

Exclusive: Journalism professor Jay Rosen on why climate science reporting is so bad
Exclusive: Former correspondent and editor explains the drop in quality of BBC's climate coverage
With science journalism "basically going out of existence," how should climate scientists deal with well-funded, anti-science disinformation campaign?

Best damn Guardian piece ever: This is a news website article about a scientific paper - In the standfirst I will make a fairly obvious pun about the subject matter before posing an inane question I have no intention of really answering: is this an import

In this paragraph I will state the main claim that the research makes, making appropriate use of "scare quotes" to ensure that it's clear that I have no opinion about this research whatsoever.

In this paragraph I will briefly (because no paragraph should be more than one line) state which existing scientific ideas this new research "challenges".

Oh, this Guardian piece is just too damn good not to reprint in its entirety.  If the Brits had The Onion, Martin Robbins of The Lay Scientist would be their science reporter.  His generic science story continues:

If the research is about a potential cure, or a solution to a problem, this paragraph will describe how it will raise hopes for a group of sufferers or victims.  This paragraph elaborates on the claim, adding weasel-words like "the scientists say" to shift responsibility for establishing the likely truth or accuracy of the research findings on to absolutely anybody else but me, the journalist.

In this paragraph I will state in which journal the research will be published. I won't provide a link because either a) the concept of adding links to web pages is alien to the editors, b) I can't be bothered, or c) the journal inexplicably set the embargo on the press release to expire before the paper was actually published.

"Basically, this is a brief soundbite," the scientist will say, from a department and university that I will give brief credit to. "The existing science is a bit dodgy, whereas my conclusion seems bang on" she or he will continue.

I will then briefly state how many years the scientist spent leading the study, to reinforce the fact that this is a serious study and worthy of being published by the BBC the website.

This is a sub-heading that gives the impression I am about to add useful context.

Here I will state that whatever was being researched was first discovered in some year, presenting a vague timeline in a token gesture toward establishing context for the reader.

To pad out this section I will include a variety of inane facts about the subject of the research that I gathered by Googling the topic and reading the Wikipedia article that appeared as the first link.

I will preface them with "it is believed" or "scientists think" to avoid giving the impression of passing any sort of personal judgement on even the most inane facts.

This fragment will be put on its own line for no obvious reason.

In this paragraph I will reference or quote some minor celebrity, historical figure, eccentric, or a group of sufferers; because my editors are ideologically committed to the idea that all news stories need a "human interest", and I'm not convinced that the scientists are interesting enough.

At this point I will include a picture, because our search engine optimisation experts have determined that humans are incapable of reading more than 400 words without one.

This picture has been optimised by SEO experts to appeal to our key target demographics

This subheading hints at controversy with a curt phrase and a question mark?

This paragraph will explain that while some scientists believe one thing to be true, other people believe another, different thing to be true.

In this paragraph I will provide balance with a quote from another scientist in the field. Since I picked their name at random from a Google search, and since the research probably hasn't even been published yet for them to see it, their response to my e-mail will be bland and non-committal.

"The research is useful", they will say, "and gives us new information. However, we need more research before we can say if the conclusions are correct, so I would advise caution for now."

If the subject is politically sensitive this paragraph will contain quotes from some fringe special interest group of people who, though having no apparent understanding of the subject, help to give the impression that genuine public "controversy" exists.

This paragraph will provide more comments from the author restating their beliefs about the research by basically repeating the same stuff they said in the earlier quotes but with slightly different words. They won't address any of the criticisms above because I only had time to send out one round of e-mails.

This paragraph contained useful information or context, but was removed by the sub-editor to keep the article within an arbitrary word limit in case the internet runs out of space.

The final paragraph will state that some part of the result is still ambiguous, and that research will continue.

Related Links:

The Journal (not the actual paper, we don't link to papers)

The University Home Page (finding the researcher's page would be too much effort).

Unrelated story from 2007 matched by keyword analysis.

Special interest group linked to for balance

Ouch!

How I wish I had written that.

As an aside, it is amazing to me how many newspapers still refuse to provide links in their articles to anything useful.

Related Posts:

Exclusive: Journalism professor Jay Rosen on why climate science reporting is so bad
Exclusive: Former correspondent and editor explains the drop in quality of BBC's climate coverage
With science journalism "basically going out of existence," how should climate scientists deal with well-funded, anti-science disinformation campaign?

Best damn Guardian piece ever: This is a news website article about a scientific paper - In the standfirst I will make a fairly obvious pun about the subject matter before posing an inane question I have no intention of really answering: is this an import

In this paragraph I will state the main claim that the research makes, making appropriate use of "scare quotes" to ensure that it's clear that I have no opinion about this research whatsoever.

In this paragraph I will briefly (because no paragraph should be more than one line) state which existing scientific ideas this new research "challenges".

Oh, this Guardian piece is just too damn good not to reprint in its entirety.  If the Brits had The Onion, Martin Robbins of The Lay Scientist would be their science reporter.  His generic science story continues:

If the research is about a potential cure, or a solution to a problem, this paragraph will describe how it will raise hopes for a group of sufferers or victims.  This paragraph elaborates on the claim, adding weasel-words like "the scientists say" to shift responsibility for establishing the likely truth or accuracy of the research findings on to absolutely anybody else but me, the journalist.

In this paragraph I will state in which journal the research will be published. I won't provide a link because either a) the concept of adding links to web pages is alien to the editors, b) I can't be bothered, or c) the journal inexplicably set the embargo on the press release to expire before the paper was actually published.

"Basically, this is a brief soundbite," the scientist will say, from a department and university that I will give brief credit to. "The existing science is a bit dodgy, whereas my conclusion seems bang on" she or he will continue.

I will then briefly state how many years the scientist spent leading the study, to reinforce the fact that this is a serious study and worthy of being published by the BBC the website.

This is a sub-heading that gives the impression I am about to add useful context.

Here I will state that whatever was being researched was first discovered in some year, presenting a vague timeline in a token gesture toward establishing context for the reader.

To pad out this section I will include a variety of inane facts about the subject of the research that I gathered by Googling the topic and reading the Wikipedia article that appeared as the first link.

I will preface them with "it is believed" or "scientists think" to avoid giving the impression of passing any sort of personal judgement on even the most inane facts.

This fragment will be put on its own line for no obvious reason.

In this paragraph I will reference or quote some minor celebrity, historical figure, eccentric, or a group of sufferers; because my editors are ideologically committed to the idea that all news stories need a "human interest", and I'm not convinced that the scientists are interesting enough.

At this point I will include a picture, because our search engine optimisation experts have determined that humans are incapable of reading more than 400 words without one.

This picture has been optimised by SEO experts to appeal to our key target demographics

This subheading hints at controversy with a curt phrase and a question mark?

This paragraph will explain that while some scientists believe one thing to be true, other people believe another, different thing to be true.

In this paragraph I will provide balance with a quote from another scientist in the field. Since I picked their name at random from a Google search, and since the research probably hasn't even been published yet for them to see it, their response to my e-mail will be bland and non-committal.

"The research is useful", they will say, "and gives us new information. However, we need more research before we can say if the conclusions are correct, so I would advise caution for now."

If the subject is politically sensitive this paragraph will contain quotes from some fringe special interest group of people who, though having no apparent understanding of the subject, help to give the impression that genuine public "controversy" exists.

This paragraph will provide more comments from the author restating their beliefs about the research by basically repeating the same stuff they said in the earlier quotes but with slightly different words. They won't address any of the criticisms above because I only had time to send out one round of e-mails.

This paragraph contained useful information or context, but was removed by the sub-editor to keep the article within an arbitrary word limit in case the internet runs out of space.

The final paragraph will state that some part of the result is still ambiguous, and that research will continue.

Related Links:

The Journal (not the actual paper, we don't link to papers)

The University Home Page (finding the researcher's page would be too much effort).

Unrelated story from 2007 matched by keyword analysis.

Special interest group linked to for balance

Ouch!

How I wish I had written that.

As an aside, it is amazing to me how many newspapers still refuse to provide links in their articles to anything useful.

Related Posts:

Exclusive: Journalism professor Jay Rosen on why climate science reporting is so bad
Exclusive: Former correspondent and editor explains the drop in quality of BBC's climate coverage
With science journalism "basically going out of existence," how should climate scientists deal with well-funded, anti-science disinformation campaign?

Best damn Guardian piece ever: This is a news website article about a scientific paper - In the standfirst I will make a fairly obvious pun about the subject matter before posing an inane question I have no intention of really answering: is this an import

In this paragraph I will state the main claim that the research makes, making appropriate use of "scare quotes" to ensure that it's clear that I have no opinion about this research whatsoever.

In this paragraph I will briefly (because no paragraph should be more than one line) state which existing scientific ideas this new research "challenges".

Oh, this Guardian piece is just too damn good not to reprint in its entirety.  If the Brits had The Onion, Martin Robbins of The Lay Scientist would be their science reporter.  His generic science story continues:

If the research is about a potential cure, or a solution to a problem, this paragraph will describe how it will raise hopes for a group of sufferers or victims.  This paragraph elaborates on the claim, adding weasel-words like "the scientists say" to shift responsibility for establishing the likely truth or accuracy of the research findings on to absolutely anybody else but me, the journalist.

In this paragraph I will state in which journal the research will be published. I won't provide a link because either a) the concept of adding links to web pages is alien to the editors, b) I can't be bothered, or c) the journal inexplicably set the embargo on the press release to expire before the paper was actually published.

"Basically, this is a brief soundbite," the scientist will say, from a department and university that I will give brief credit to. "The existing science is a bit dodgy, whereas my conclusion seems bang on" she or he will continue.

I will then briefly state how many years the scientist spent leading the study, to reinforce the fact that this is a serious study and worthy of being published by the BBC the website.

This is a sub-heading that gives the impression I am about to add useful context.

Here I will state that whatever was being researched was first discovered in some year, presenting a vague timeline in a token gesture toward establishing context for the reader.

To pad out this section I will include a variety of inane facts about the subject of the research that I gathered by Googling the topic and reading the Wikipedia article that appeared as the first link.

I will preface them with "it is believed" or "scientists think" to avoid giving the impression of passing any sort of personal judgement on even the most inane facts.

This fragment will be put on its own line for no obvious reason.

In this paragraph I will reference or quote some minor celebrity, historical figure, eccentric, or a group of sufferers; because my editors are ideologically committed to the idea that all news stories need a "human interest", and I'm not convinced that the scientists are interesting enough.

At this point I will include a picture, because our search engine optimisation experts have determined that humans are incapable of reading more than 400 words without one.

This picture has been optimised by SEO experts to appeal to our key target demographics

This subheading hints at controversy with a curt phrase and a question mark?

This paragraph will explain that while some scientists believe one thing to be true, other people believe another, different thing to be true.

In this paragraph I will provide balance with a quote from another scientist in the field. Since I picked their name at random from a Google search, and since the research probably hasn't even been published yet for them to see it, their response to my e-mail will be bland and non-committal.

"The research is useful", they will say, "and gives us new information. However, we need more research before we can say if the conclusions are correct, so I would advise caution for now."

If the subject is politically sensitive this paragraph will contain quotes from some fringe special interest group of people who, though having no apparent understanding of the subject, help to give the impression that genuine public "controversy" exists.

This paragraph will provide more comments from the author restating their beliefs about the research by basically repeating the same stuff they said in the earlier quotes but with slightly different words. They won't address any of the criticisms above because I only had time to send out one round of e-mails.

This paragraph contained useful information or context, but was removed by the sub-editor to keep the article within an arbitrary word limit in case the internet runs out of space.

The final paragraph will state that some part of the result is still ambiguous, and that research will continue.

Related Links:

The Journal (not the actual paper, we don't link to papers)

The University Home Page (finding the researcher's page would be too much effort).

Unrelated story from 2007 matched by keyword analysis.

Special interest group linked to for balance

Ouch!

How I wish I had written that.

As an aside, it is amazing to me how many newspapers still refuse to provide links in their articles to anything useful.

Related Posts:

Exclusive: Journalism professor Jay Rosen on why climate science reporting is so bad
Exclusive: Former correspondent and editor explains the drop in quality of BBC's climate coverage
With science journalism "basically going out of existence," how should climate scientists deal with well-funded, anti-science disinformation campaign?

Best damn Guardian piece ever: This is a news website article about a scientific paper - In the standfirst I will make a fairly obvious pun about the subject matter before posing an inane question I have no intention of really answering: is this an import

In this paragraph I will state the main claim that the research makes, making appropriate use of "scare quotes" to ensure that it's clear that I have no opinion about this research whatsoever.

In this paragraph I will briefly (because no paragraph should be more than one line) state which existing scientific ideas this new research "challenges".

Oh, this Guardian piece is just too damn good not to reprint in its entirety.  If the Brits had The Onion, Martin Robbins of The Lay Scientist would be their science reporter.  His generic science story continues:

If the research is about a potential cure, or a solution to a problem, this paragraph will describe how it will raise hopes for a group of sufferers or victims.  This paragraph elaborates on the claim, adding weasel-words like "the scientists say" to shift responsibility for establishing the likely truth or accuracy of the research findings on to absolutely anybody else but me, the journalist.

In this paragraph I will state in which journal the research will be published. I won't provide a link because either a) the concept of adding links to web pages is alien to the editors, b) I can't be bothered, or c) the journal inexplicably set the embargo on the press release to expire before the paper was actually published.

"Basically, this is a brief soundbite," the scientist will say, from a department and university that I will give brief credit to. "The existing science is a bit dodgy, whereas my conclusion seems bang on" she or he will continue.

I will then briefly state how many years the scientist spent leading the study, to reinforce the fact that this is a serious study and worthy of being published by the BBC the website.

This is a sub-heading that gives the impression I am about to add useful context.

Here I will state that whatever was being researched was first discovered in some year, presenting a vague timeline in a token gesture toward establishing context for the reader.

To pad out this section I will include a variety of inane facts about the subject of the research that I gathered by Googling the topic and reading the Wikipedia article that appeared as the first link.

I will preface them with "it is believed" or "scientists think" to avoid giving the impression of passing any sort of personal judgement on even the most inane facts.

This fragment will be put on its own line for no obvious reason.

In this paragraph I will reference or quote some minor celebrity, historical figure, eccentric, or a group of sufferers; because my editors are ideologically committed to the idea that all news stories need a "human interest", and I'm not convinced that the scientists are interesting enough.

At this point I will include a picture, because our search engine optimisation experts have determined that humans are incapable of reading more than 400 words without one.

This picture has been optimised by SEO experts to appeal to our key target demographics

This subheading hints at controversy with a curt phrase and a question mark?

This paragraph will explain that while some scientists believe one thing to be true, other people believe another, different thing to be true.

In this paragraph I will provide balance with a quote from another scientist in the field. Since I picked their name at random from a Google search, and since the research probably hasn't even been published yet for them to see it, their response to my e-mail will be bland and non-committal.

"The research is useful", they will say, "and gives us new information. However, we need more research before we can say if the conclusions are correct, so I would advise caution for now."

If the subject is politically sensitive this paragraph will contain quotes from some fringe special interest group of people who, though having no apparent understanding of the subject, help to give the impression that genuine public "controversy" exists.

This paragraph will provide more comments from the author restating their beliefs about the research by basically repeating the same stuff they said in the earlier quotes but with slightly different words. They won't address any of the criticisms above because I only had time to send out one round of e-mails.

This paragraph contained useful information or context, but was removed by the sub-editor to keep the article within an arbitrary word limit in case the internet runs out of space.

The final paragraph will state that some part of the result is still ambiguous, and that research will continue.

Related Links:

The Journal (not the actual paper, we don't link to papers)

The University Home Page (finding the researcher's page would be too much effort).

Unrelated story from 2007 matched by keyword analysis.

Special interest group linked to for balance

Ouch!

How I wish I had written that.

As an aside, it is amazing to me how many newspapers still refuse to provide links in their articles to anything useful.

Related Posts:

Exclusive: Journalism professor Jay Rosen on why climate science reporting is so bad
Exclusive: Former correspondent and editor explains the drop in quality of BBC's climate coverage
With science journalism "basically going out of existence," how should climate scientists deal with well-funded, anti-science disinformation campaign?