Joseph J. Romm's Blog, page 164

Wyoming Is Suing The Federal Government Over New Fracking Rules

A trailer park sits on the edge of Rock Springs, Wyo., in the Green River Basin in this June 14, 2001 photo. In recent years, the Green River Basin has struggled with air quality issues, due largely to the oil and gas boom.

CREDIT: AP Photo/Robert W. Black

When the federal government introduced stronger standards for fracking on public lands earlier this month, the oil and gas industry was quick to file lawsuits. On Thursday, the state of Wyoming joined the fray.

Claiming that the new Bureau of Land Management (BLM) set of rules released last week “unlawfully interferes” with the state’s existing fracking regulations, Wyoming filed a suit Thursday against the U.S. Department of the Interior, Sec. Sally Jewell, and BLM, requesting judicial review of the rules.

In the lawsuit, Wyoming claims that BLM cannot put these restrictions on fracking because the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has “exclusive authority” to regulate any underground injections under the Safe Water Drinking Act of 1974.

However, under the so-called “Halliburton Loophole,” added to the SWDA in 2003, fracking activities are specifically excluded from the definition of underground injections, unless diesel fuel is being used — which is fairly uncommon.

“It appears the state just has it wrong legally,” Mike Freeman, an attorney with Earth Justice told ThinkProgress. “Wyoming’s petition actually cites the definition of underground injection that excludes fracking.”

The new BLM rules require oil and gas companies to disclose all the chemicals used while fracking on protected lands. During the fracking process, a liquid, usually water, is mixed with chemicals and injected into shale, releasing pockets of natural gas or oil. The water generally cannot be recycled and is toxic after use. Under the new rules, companies will be prohibited from storing fracking wastewater in open pits on national public land and required to periodically test the integrity of every well to help prevent pollution.

Two oil and gas industry groups, Independent Petroleum Association for America and the Western Energy Alliance, have also filed a lawsuit against BLM on similar overreach grounds, saying that the “final rule as issued is contrary to law.” North Dakota is also reportedly considering a lawsuit. Both Wyoming and North Dakota have experienced an oil and gas boom in recent years.

BLM manages more than 17.5 million acres of public lands in Wyoming, and also has the mineral rights to another 40.7 million acres in the state. In 2013, the most recent year data has been released, 620 new oil and gas wells were started in the state. According to that data, more than 7 million acres of public land in Wyoming are currently under lease by oil and gas developers.

The BLM’s new rules apply only to oil and gas extraction on federally managed land. As of 2013, the United States managed 247 million acres of public land and had another 700 million acres of mineral rights. Some in Congress want that to change, though. A nonbinding amendment introduced by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) would support state efforts to sell public lands, including national forests, wildlife refuges, wilderness areas, historic sites, and national monuments. The amendment, which would require further legislation in order to become law, passed the Senate on Thursday. The amendment echoes similar proposals made by House Natural Resources Committee Chair Rob Bishop (R-UT) and Republican presidential hopeful Ted Cruz (R-TX).

The post Wyoming Is Suing The Federal Government Over New Fracking Rules appeared first on ThinkProgress.

The Endangered Animal Bracket, Round 7: Sea Otter Vs. Penguin

Click image to expand. Now updated with Thursday’s winners: Polar Bear and Wolverine

CREDIT: Dylan Petrohilos

Welcome back to March Sadness, ClimateProgress’ educational bracket tournament of animals impacted by climate change and other environmental threats. For whichever animal wins, ClimateProgress will write a feature-length article exploring the story behind what’s ailing your chosen critter, and who is working to save them. Read the rules here.

Today, we’re in round two of the Sweet Sixteen, and the winners of our Fins and Flippers division are going head to head. In what promises to be two close matches, Sea Otter will face off against Penguin, and ThinkProgress office-favorite Sea Horse will battle the severely endangered North Atlantic Right Whale.

Only your votes can decide who moves on for a chance at a deep-dive feature story. Vote in the embedded tweets below, on Twitter with the hashtag #CPMarchSadness, or on our Facebook page.

Sea Otter vs. Penguin

CREDIT: Shutterstock

Sea Otter: We mentioned last time that sea otters are threatened by toxic algal blooms, which are exacerbated by climate change. A 2010 study found that a toxin found in blue-green algae called microcystin had killed at least 21 California sea otters. In addition, severe weather can make it difficult for sea otters to forage for and find food. According to the IUCN, this can make it hard for otters “to meet their high metabolic needs, leading to malnutrition or starvation.”

But sea otters’ relationship with climate change goes two ways. The marine creatures also serve as fighters of climate change: their main prey — sea urchins — like to eat kelp, so by keeping the sea urchin population at a sustainable level, they keep kelp forests lush. And kelp forests are good at storing carbon: a study in 2012 found that the presence of otters helped carbon storage in North American kelp forests surge.

Penguin: There are a lot of different types of penguins, and climate change is affecting all of them. Decreasing sea ice cover is preventing Emperor penguins from finding food and sheltering their babies. African penguins are declining in part due to fluctuations in water temperature and increased storms on their breeding grounds. And baby Magellanic penguins in Argentina are dying at an unprecedented rate due to heavy rains, strong storms and heat.

Another interesting tidbit about penguins is that 15,000 years ago, they were actually able to tolerate a warming climate. In Antarctica, the Adélie, chinstrap, and gentoo penguins flourished under warming that caused ice sheets to shrink. Now, however, it’s different — there is too little sea ice, which is impacting the food supply. Two out of those three species are now in decline.

Who will make it to the next round for a chance at a feature story?

Who will win? RETWEET for Penguin or FAVE for Sea Otter #CPMarchSadness http://t.co/lzQh1SAaxZ pic.twitter.com/D7Tlow3Pad

— Climate Progress (@climateprogress) March 27, 2015

Whale vs. Seahorse

CREDIT: Shutterstock

Whale: The North Atlantic right whale’s name — “right” — comes from the belief that it was the right whale to hunt. It is slow moving, floats when killed, and is full of oil and baleen. Partially due to that, it’s believed to be the most endangered cetacean in the world, a category that includes whales, dolphins, and porpoises. There are only 450 left in the world.

Decades of efforts to help the dark gray baleen whale recover through international protection have done little to improve the species’ prospects. Warming oceans and changing marine conditions due to climate change and ocean acidification make it harder for the whale, which has an exceptionally long migratory and gestation period, to prosper and further threaten the species’ survival.

Seahorse: Last time we talked about seahorses, we mentioned their fragile coastal ecosystems — coral reefs and mangroves, for instance, are especially vulnerable to disturbances brought on by warming ocean temperatures, ocean acidification, and increased flooding. The Knysna seahorse is extremely vulnerable to increases in water temperatures; in 1991, more than 3,000 were found dead after heavy rainfall resulted in higher than normal temperatures.

Habitat degradation due to development and accidental bycatch from shrimp and fishing vessels also endanger these charismatic creatures. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, out of around 50 species of seahorses, all but one are vulnerable or threatened. In the U.S. the dwarf seahorse, one-inch-long seahorse, found in seagrass beds in the Gulf of Mexico, Florida and the Caribbean, is threatened with extinction due to decline of seagrass and lingering pollution from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, according to the Center for Biological Diversity.

Which would you like to know more about? Vote below.

Who will you choose? RETWEET for Whale or FAVE for Sea Horse #CPMarchSadness http://t.co/lzQh1SAaxZ pic.twitter.com/WPiCEtbbDt

— Climate Progress (@climateprogress) March 27, 2015

***

TOURNAMENT UPDATES:

Day 1 – 3/19: Paws and Claws pt. 1 — Polar Bear vs. Wombat; Tasmanian Devil vs. Pangolin; (voting closed) WINNERS: Polar Bear and Pangolin.

Day 2 – 3/20: Paws and Claws pt. 2 — Lemur vs. Koala; Panda vs. Wolverine (voting closed) WINNERS: Koala and Wolverine.

Day 3 – 3/23: Fins and Flippers — Sea Lion vs. Sea Horse; Penguin vs. Manatee; Walrus vs. Sea Otter; Whale vs. Salmon (voting closed) WINNERS: Sea Horse, Sea Otter, Whale, and Penguin

Day 4 – 3/24: Horns and Hooves — Elephant vs. Horned Lizard; Rhino vs. Narwhal; Saola vs. Moose; Mountain Goat vs. Reindeer (voting closed) WINNERS: Elephant, Narwhal, Moose, and Mountain Goat.

Day 5 – 3/25: Shells and Wings — Sea Turtle vs. Pelican; Sage Grouse vs. Peregrine Falcon; Oyster vs. Butterfly; Lobster vs. Red Knot (voting closed)

Day 6 – 3/26: Polar Bear vs. Pangolin; Koala vs. Wolverine (voting closed)

Day 7 – 3/27: Sea Horse vs. Whale; Sea Otter vs. Penguin (voting NOW OPEN)

Day 8 – 3/30: Elephant vs. Mountain Goat; Moose vs. Narwhal

Day 9 – 3/31: Sea Turtle vs. Red Knot; Butterfly vs. Peregrine Falcon

Day 10 – 4/1: TBD

Day 11 – 4/2: TBD

Day 12 – 4/3: THE FINAL FOUR: TBD

Day 13 – 4/6: THE CHAMPIONSHIP: TBD

PAST ROUNDS:

Round 6: Sweet Sixteen, part 1

Round 5: Shells and Wings

Round 4: Horns and Hooves

Round 3: Fins and Flippers

Round 2: Paws and Claws, part 2

Round 1: Paws and Claws, part 1

The post The Endangered Animal Bracket, Round 7: Sea Otter Vs. Penguin appeared first on ThinkProgress.

EPA: New Cars Are More Efficient Than Ever, Beating Standards By A ‘Wide Margin’

CREDIT: shutterstock

For the second year in a row, new cars are ahead of the game when it comes to reducing their carbon footprint.

According to a new report from the Environmental Protection Agency, the auto industry beat out domestic greenhouse gas emissions standards by a “wide margin” in 2013, with cars getting an average of 1.4 more miles per gallon than required.

This trend is promising as the EPA is tightening greenhouse gas compliance regulations on light-duty vehicles — cars and small trucks — each year in an effort to meet the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards’ target of an average fuel economy of 54.5 mpg by 2025. Nine of the 13 biggest-selling automakers beat the CAFE targets.

Vehicles from 2013 achieved an all-time record fuel economy of 24.1 mpg, a 0.5 mpg increase over 2012 and an increase of nearly 5 mpg in the last decade. The CAFE standards covering vehicles made between 2012 and 2025 are projected to save 12 billion barrels of oil, cut 6 billion metric tons of greenhouse gases and save drivers more than $8,000 in fuel costs, according to the EPA.

The standards also help protect consumers from the pocketbook pain that can come from volatile gas prices.

“I think everybody is familiar with the fact that gas prices go up and down over time,” Janet McCabe, the acting assistant administrator of the EPA, said on a press call. “The best way for people to make sure that they’re going to be able to weather high gas prices or low is to invest in a fuel efficient vehicle.”

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), 2013 cars are emitting 9 percent less carbon pollution than in 2010.

“The EPA report shows that tailpipe emissions are falling, improvements in air-conditioning technology are happening even faster than expected, and on average, vehicles are a full year ahead of where they need to be to keep up with the standards,” said Don Anair, the research and deputy director of the Clean Vehicles program at UCS.

Two-thirds of the over-compliance in 2013 vehicles came from reductions in tailpipe emissions, according to the EPA, with the remaining third deriving from air conditioning improvements and automakers using credits for building things like flex fuel systems.

“In the design of the program, we anticipated automakers taking advantage of these different market mechanisms, so this was always part of our projections,” Chris Grundler, the EPA’s director in the Office of Transportation and Air Quality, said on the press call. “The fact that the industry is doing substantially better is very good news and tells us that this kind of innovative policy design is indeed producing the results that we expected.”

While consumers turned towards fuel-efficient cars during the economic downturn and sustained period of high gas prices, the recent plummet in gas prices has caused interest in large, heavy-emitting vehicles to spike again. As Bloomberg reports, interest in “gas guzzling trucks and SUVs” started to pick up early in 2014 and has continued to increase as gas prices fell to their lowest levels in half a decade, approaching $2 a gallon.

At the same time, interest in electric vehicles is ramping up as companies like Tesla and GM plan more affordable models of their EVs. Last year Tesla announced it was building its $5 billion lithium-ion battery “gigafactory” in Nevada. The plant is primarily meant to provide batteries for the forthcoming Model III EV, expected to be released in 2017 with a price tag of around $35,000.

In January, Chevrolet, a division of GM, revealed plans to launch the $30,000 Bolt, a car that the company thinks will directly compete with Tesla’s the Model III, which will have a similar price tag and a similar range of slightly over 200 miles-per-charge.

According to a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change, EV battery prices have been falling faster than expected and these vehicles may be able to compete economically with gas-powered cars sooner than expected.

“If prices keep falling at this rate, we could be on course to reach $150 per kWh — the price point around which some people believe EVs can become directly competitive with petrol-driven cars — in the next decade,” said the authors of the study, who work for the Stockholm Environment Institute.

The post EPA: New Cars Are More Efficient Than Ever, Beating Standards By A ‘Wide Margin’ appeared first on ThinkProgress.

House Science Committee Subpoenas EPA Head Gina McCarthy For Deleted Texts

Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, head of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.

CREDIT: AP Photo/Drew Angerer

The House Committee on Science, Space and Technology issued a subpoena for Environmental Protection Agency head Gina McCarthy Wednesday, in an attempt to gain access to the administrator’s text messages and emails.

The Committee — which is chaired by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), who issued the subpoena — asked for McCarthy’s phone records after sending multiple similar requests to the EPA. According to Smith, McCarthy said that of the more than 5,000 text messages she sent during her time as EPA administrator, only one was related to official EPA business and the rest were deleted.

Smith wasn’t happy with this explanation.

“Of the almost 6,000 text messages sent by Administrator McCarthy over a period of several years, it is difficult to believe that only one was related to EPA business,” he said in a statement. “The single text message produced by EPA was received at the start of this year, within days of receiving a letter of inquiry from this Committee. The EPA’s pattern of withholding, concealing and possibly destroying records must come to an end.”

The text message that was turned over to the Science Committee was between McCarthy and League of Conservation Voters president Gene Karpinski.

“Great job on the EPA comments on keystone,” Gene wrote. “I feel like the end is very near…”

In response, McCarthy said: “Gene — I received your text message earlier today but I do not use text messaging for work purposes. Please make sure in the future to use my email address.”

David Schnare, a former senior attorney at the EPA, served as a witness at a hearing on the issue Thursday. Schnare also served as the lead attorney in the suit that tried to gain access to climate scientist Michael Mann’s emails — a suit that ultimately failed.

Schnare said he thought that the the EPA’s culture of transparency had changed for the worse under the Obama administration, and that he had occasionally heard staff members saying things like “I got rid of all that” or “I’ve washed that machine clean.”

During the hearing, Schnare was called out by Rep. Donna Edwards (D-MD) for calling himself a “skeptic” of climate change and for his role in the Mann emails case, which, since he may have been working for the federal government while involved in the case, raised questions about ethics rules.

“You have submitted legally deficient responses; you have misled a general council; you’ve witnessed wrongdoing and not reported it. Why is it that someone shouldn’t file a claim against you to have you disbarred and have your licence removed?” Edwards said to Schnare.

This isn’t the first time in recent years that EPA has been criticized for its lack of transparency. Last year, a group of science and journalism organizations spoke out against the EPA’s policy of limiting its scientific advisers from speaking to the media.

“The new policy undermines EPA’s efforts to increase transparency,” the groups said in a letter to the EPA. “It also contradicts the EPA’s new scientific integrity policy as well as the Science Advisory Board’s handbook. In addition, the new policy only reinforces any perception that the agency prioritizes message control over the ability of scientists who advise the agency to share their expertise with the public.”

Also last year, InsideClimate News published a story in July detailing the three months that reporters spent trying to get on-the-record interviews with EPA officials regarding air pollution in Texas’ oil and gas country. In August, the EPA did sit down with the Center for Environmental Integrity about oil and gas production, the story notes in an update.

Still, this also isn’t the first time that members of the House Science and Technology Committee have targeted the EPA. Earlier this month, Smith sponsored a “Secret Science” bill that would prohibit the agency from using science that include data that’s private or not easily reproduced. Smith has also attacked the EPA’s carbon rules, calling the agency’s latest proposed rule on existing power plants a “sweeping mandate” and accusing the agency of “bias.”

Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK), who’s also a member of the committee, sponsored the Science Advisory Board Reform Act, which would make it more difficult for scientists who have applied for EPA grants to join the Science Advisory Board, a group that reviews the science the EPA uses to come up with its regulations. In addition, 13 out of the 21 Republicans on the committee deny that human caused climate change is happening.

The post House Science Committee Subpoenas EPA Head Gina McCarthy For Deleted Texts appeared first on ThinkProgress.

New Report: Canada’s Government Has Removed Regulations That Protect Its Rivers And Lakes

Increasing shipments of crude oil from Canada could pose serious risks to Lake Superior, shown here.

Canada’s federal government, under the leadership of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, is systematically removing regulations and putting the country’s water at risk, according to a new report released this week by the Council of Canadians.

“Blue Betrayal,” written by Maude Barlow, a former UN adviser on water and national chairperson of the Council of Canadians, states that the Harper government has allowed mining companies to dump toxic waste into lakes, exempted oil and gas pipelines from environmental review, and allowed for-profit companies to sue for the right to use clean, potable water in fracking and other commercial applications.

The oil and gas industry in Canada is booming. Since 2008, when Harper took office, Canadian tar sands production has nearly doubled, according to an industry report. This has huge implications for water. Alberta’s tar sands alone could eventually use 20 million barrels of water each day, scientists estimate. Already, according to the report, nearly 3 million gallons of “toxic water” enters Canada’s watershed every day. Water used for oil and gas extraction is contaminated with a variety of toxic chemicals that are difficult, if not impossible, to remove.

“There is a clear and intimate link between energy policy and fresh water protection,” Emma Lui, a representative for the Council of Canadians, told ThinkProgress.

Environmentalists say the drastic reductions in regulatory oversight for Canada’s waterways are largely due to pressure from the oil and gas industry.

The Polaris Institute, a Canadian think tank, found that since 2008, two years after Harper took office, federal officials met with oil industry representatives more than four times as often as they met with environmentalists. Harper previously worked for the Exxon-owned Imperial Oil Limited.

In 2012, Canada’s federal omnibus bill modified the 120-year-old Navigable Waters Protection Act, a move that stripped environmental protections from 99 percent of Canada’s lakes and rivers. The reduced legislation is now called the Navigation Protection Act. The government also gutted the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, immediately causing 3,000 environmental reviews to be cancelled, including on some oil and gas projects. One of the changes made pipelines running under waterways exempt from environmental review, Lui said.

Canada has a two-pronged domestic energy extraction industry: shale oil and gas, and tar sands oil. Both are the subject of environmental concern as well as litigation.

A member of Ontario’s provincial parliament this week proposed a fracking ban for his province. Meanwhile, under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), an American oil and gas company is challenging Quebec’s right to ban fracking.

But while provincial governments seek to curb fracking, Alberta’s tar sands oil industry pumps on.

Tar sands produce heavy, bitumen crude. Unlike most types of oil, bitumen sinks in water, which makes spills more difficult to clean up and more environmentally destructive. In 2010, a pipeline in Michigan ruptured, spilling 800,000 gallons of bitumen into the Kalamazoo River. It was the costliest inland oil spill in U.S. history.

Crude oil is primarily transferred via pipeline and rail, but in a move that could threaten water even more, some companies are proposing shipping the crude by boat in the Saint Lawrence River and across the Great Lakes. At the end of last year, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources delayed approval of a crude oil transfer dock proposed on Lake Superior.

The Great Lakes supply drinking water for 40 million people and supports 250 different species of fish. A bitumen spill in the lakes could be disastrous.

“The U.S. Coast Guard will tell you they do not have the ability to respond to and clean up a spill of heavy crude oil in the Great Lakes,” Joel Brammeier, president and CEO of Alliance for the Great Lakes, a U.S.-based environmental group, told ThinkProgress. “Canadian energy policy could have a significant effect on the Great Lakes region.”

Canadians will have a chance to change those policies come October, when Harper is up for re-election. Thomas Mulcair, the New Democratic Party candidate, has called for increasing the review process for pipeline projects and criticized Harper’s “gutting” of the process. Justin Trudeau, the leader of Canada’s Liberal Party, approves of the Keystone pipeline project but not of the Northern Gateway Pipeline.

Beyond North America, the election could have implications globally, as well. To date, Canada, under Harper, is the only country to have ratified and then withdrawn from the Kyoto Protocol. Both of Harper’s main challengers believe Canada should be at the forefront of addressing climate change.

The post New Report: Canada’s Government Has Removed Regulations That Protect Its Rivers And Lakes appeared first on ThinkProgress.

Senate Votes To Help States Sell Off Public Lands

A toadstool rock formation in the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument.

CREDIT: Shutterstock

The new chair of the powerful Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee secured a vote Thursday afternoon in the U.S. Senate on a controversial proposal to sell off America’s national forests and other public lands.

U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski’s (R-AK) amendment to Congress’s budget resolution passed by a vote of 51-49. The legislation would support and fund state efforts — which many argue are unconstitutional — to seize and sell America’s public lands. These include all national forests, wildlife refuges, wilderness areas, historic sites, and national monuments.

Murkowski’s amendment follows a similar proposal from House Natural Resources Committee Chair Rob Bishop (R-UT) to spend $50 million of taxpayer dollars to fund the sale or transfer of U.S. public lands to states.

The land grab proposals in Congress this year appear to echo the calls of outlaw rancher Cliven Bundy, best known for his armed standoff with federal officials last year, who has infamously refused to recognize the authority of the federal government, including over public lands.

Murkowski’s proposal to sell off public lands, however, is meeting stiff opposition from other western senators. On a conference call yesterday, Senators Martin Heinrich (D-NM) and Michael Bennet (D-CO) said that they are determined to turn back legislative attacks on the outdoors. Bennet called efforts to sell off lands to reduce the federal deficit “an assault on our public lands.”

Senator Heinrich also introduced an amendment Wednesday which would block any effort to sell off public lands to reduce the federal deficit. Heinrich said that “selling off America’s treasured lands to the highest bidder would result in a proliferation of locked gates and no-trespassing signs in places that have been open to the public and used for generations.”

Public opinion research has found that a majority of Westerners oppose land grab efforts and believe that transferring public lands to state control will result in reduced access for recreation; higher taxes; increased drilling, mining and logging; and a high risk that treasured public lands will be auctioned off to the highest bidder.

Over the past few months, sportsmen’s groups have also been battling state efforts to seize and sell off public lands by rallying in state capitols across the West. Land Tawney, Executive Director of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, thanked Senator Heinrich for introducing his amendment and fighting for public lands.

“American hunters and anglers have consistently stood up in support of U.S. public lands since Theodore Roosevelt set them aside for all Americans more than a century ago,” Tawney said. “Today, Congress has responded.”

The dueling Senate amendments are expected to be voted on during the Senate’s “vote-o-rama” budget amendment series later on Thursday.

Update
Share



facebook
twitter

This post has been updated to reflect the result of the vote.

The post Senate Votes To Help States Sell Off Public Lands appeared first on ThinkProgress.

New Heat-Resistant Beans Could Stave Off Hunger In A Warming World

Beans that can take the heat might feed a warming world.

CREDIT: Flipser/Shutterstock

Beans: they’re not fruit (technically, they’re legumes) but when it comes to feeding a growing, warming world, they might be magical. One of the world’s oldest staple crops, beans provide cheap, stable protein for some 400 million people in the developing world. Until recently, scientists worried that the food security provided by beans could be threatened by climate change, as global temperature rise would decimate world bean populations.

Now, they’ve got 30 reasons for optimism, as researchers at CGIAR, a global food research consortium, recently announced the discovery of new, heat-resistant beans that can survive even under the worst-case scenarios for global warming. In experiments, these 30 bean strains were able to tolerate nighttime temperatures of up to 72 degrees Fahrenheit, about 7 degrees warmer than the common bean can usually handle.

“Even if [the heat-tolerant beans] can only handle a 3 degree [Celsius] rise, that would still limit the bean production area lost to climate change to about five percent,” Steve Beebe, a senior CGIAR bean researcher, said in a press release.

Traditionally, beans are grown in places where nighttime temperatures stay below 64-degrees Fahrenheit. Because beans pollinate themselves during the night, and pollination is incredibly sensitive to temperature change, night temperatures are a valuable indicator of a bean’s ability to withstand temperature fluctuations.

Previous studies warned that by 2050, climate change could threaten 50 percent of land suitable for growing beans. For places like Latin America and Africa — where beans are an especially critical source of nutrients — the disappearance of farmland capable of growing beans endangers basic food security. Scientists also estimate that to keep up with a growing world population, food production will need to increase by 60 percent by 2050, which means that losing half of the world’s bean production would be dire for the world’s food security.

The new bean varieties — or “lines,” as plant breeders call them — are the result of cross-breeding between popular lines of beans, like the pinto or the white bean, with less popular strains, like the tepary bean. The tepary bean, grown mostly by indigenous communities in the American Southwest, is a particularly hardy bean, showing resistance to both heat and drought. But it’s also small and low-growing, causing it to often be overlooked by bean farmers.

According to NPR, Colombian scientist Alvaro Mejia-Jimenez was one of the first to try and blend the heat resistant properties of the tepary with more common bean varieties. In the late-1990s, Mejia-Jimenez succeeded, growing a hybrid bean by fertilizing a common bean flower with pollen from a tepary bean plant. After a few generations, Mejia-Jimenez had created a line of bean that could grow on its own.

Mejia-Jimenez’s work sat largely unnoticed for years, until an alarming report warned of the extensive damage rising temperatures might have on world bean production. Hoping to find varieties of beans that could withstand a warming world, researchers at the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) went looking through the thousands of bean strains that they keep in stored in seed banks (part of CIAT’s mission is to safeguard the genes of vital staple crops, like beans and cassava). They tested the beans in controlled plots along Colombia’s Caribbean coast, as well as in greenhouses, where researchers could adjust the temperature at will.

One variety of the heat-resistant beans researchers found through their testing is currently being grown in Costa Rica, and farmers are seeing double the yields of traditional beans.

“What this shows us is that heat may already be hurting bean production in Central America far more than we thought and farmers could benefit from adopting the new heat-beater beans right now,” Beebe said.

The post New Heat-Resistant Beans Could Stave Off Hunger In A Warming World appeared first on ThinkProgress.

Arctic Death Spiral: Sea Ice Extent Hits Record Winter Low As Thickness Collapses

The 2015 Arctic sea ice maximum is the lowest on record. Here it’s compared to the 1979-2014 average maximum shown in yellow. A distance indicator shows the difference between the two in the Sea of Okhotsk north of Japan. Via NASA.

Arctic sea ice has been in a virtual death spiral for over three decades now with serious implications for extreme weather, sea level rise, and permafrost melt. Not only has the surface area or extent of sea ice declined sharply, but so has the ice thickness during the summer minimum (when the melt season ends in September) — dropping a remarkable 85 percent from 1975 to 2012, according to a recent study.

The extent of Arctic sea ice hits a winter maximum in early March. This year, the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) — along with NOAA and NASA — said the maximum extent was likely reached on February 25. This was not only the second earliest maximum, “it is also the lowest in the satellite record.”

NASA explains what happened in this short video:

As NASA points out, this record low winter maximum does not guarantee a record summertime minimum. Moreover the maximum is less significant than the minimum.

“Scientifically, the yearly maximum extent is not as interesting as the minimum. It is highly influenced by weather and we’re looking at the loss of thin, seasonal ice that is going to melt anyway in the summer and won’t become part of the permanent ice cover,” explained NASA sea ice scientist Walt Meier. “With the summertime minimum, when the extent decreases it’s because we’re losing the thick ice component, and that is a better indicator of warming temperatures.”

The best indicator of the sustained impact of global warming on the Arctic is the stunning decline in the thickness of the sea ice that has accompanied the shrinking of its surface area. A February study published in The Cryosphere, “Arctic sea ice thickness loss determined using subsurface, aircraft, and satellite observations,” offers the most comprehensive and up-to-date analysis of the Arctic death spiral, combining eight different data sets, including ones from submarines, aircraft, and satellites. This study’s conclusion is alarming:

… annual mean ice thickness has decreased from 3.59 meters [11.8 feet] in 1975 to 1.25 m [4.1 feet] in 2012, a 65% reduction. This is nearly double the 36% decline reported by an earlier study….

In September the mean ice thickness has declined from 3.01 to 0.44 m [from 9.9 to 1.4 feet!], an 85 % decline.

“The ice is thinning dramatically,” explained climatologist Ron Lindsay, the lead author — much faster than previously estimated. The study includes this chart of the average annual sea ice thickness, in meters, for the central Arctic Ocean, in recent decades:

The steadily dropping trend (in meters) of average annual sea ice thickness (green line) is compared to the trend from an earlier study (orange line) for the central Arctic. Red dots are submarine records.

This thinning is faster than the researchers had expected. Co-author Axel Schweiger noted that, “At least for the central Arctic basin, even our most drastic thinning estimate was slower than measured by these observations.”

Summertime Arctic sea ice is not long for this world. Because of Arctic amplification, the Arctic warms twice as fast (or more) than the Earth as a whole does. Earlier this month, a study projected the rate of warming for the Arctic will soon exceed 1.0°F (0.55°C) per decade — and could hit 2°F per decade post-2050 if we don’t reverse carbon pollution trends ASAP.

This is especially troublesome because a key accelerator of Arctic amplification is sea ice loss. Global warming melts highly reflective white ice and snow, exposing in its place the dark blue sea or dark land, both of which absorb much more solar energy.

A great deal of recent research suggests that Arctic amplification, including sea ice loss, is already worsening extreme weather. Similarly, such amplified warming means that the rapidly-melting Greenland ice sheet, which warming has already made unstable, is likely to start collapsing even faster, which would push sea level rise higher than previously estimated, upwards of six feet this century.

Finally, a 2008 study, “Accelerated Arctic land warming and permafrost degradation during rapid sea ice loss,” concluded that “simulated western Arctic land warming trends during rapid sea ice loss are 3.5 times greater than secular 21st century climate-change trends. The accelerated warming signal penetrates up to 1500 km [930 miles] inland.” So our current period of rapid sea ice loss threatens to triple Arctic land warming, which would speed up the release of large amounts of carbon from defrosting permafrost — a dangerous amplifying feedback which could add as much as 1.5°F to total planetary warming this century.

The post Arctic Death Spiral: Sea Ice Extent Hits Record Winter Low As Thickness Collapses appeared first on ThinkProgress.

Thanks To Conservatives, Florida Is Now One Step Closer To Making Solar Energy More Accessible

CREDIT: Shutterstock

A pro-solar conservative group in Florida cleared a major hurdle this week in its journey to make solar more accessible in the state.

Floridians for Solar Choice reached 72,000 signatures on a petition that seeks to allow Floridians to purchase solar power directly from other consumers — something that isn’t currently allowed in the state. That number of signatures clears the way for the petition to be reviewed by the state’s Supreme Court, which will decide whether or not the petition’s language legally qualifies it to be a ballot initiative for Floridians in 2016. Getting its petition on the 2016 ballot is the main goal for Floridians for Solar Choice.

“We are thrilled to reach this important milestone,” Tory Perfetti, founder of Floridians for Solar Choice, said in a statement. “It shows broad support among Florida’ families and businesses for removing barriers to commerce in solar power.”

The petition for the initiative seeks to “encourage and promote local small-scale solar-generated electricity production and to enhance the availability of solar power to customers.” Under Florida’s current law, only utilities can sell electricity directly to consumers. Florida is one of only five states in the country with a law like that, and solar advocates say that it’s holding the Sunshine State back from its solar potential. If the ballot initiative is successful in 2016, businesses and property owners in the state would be able to produce up to 2 megawatts of solar power and sell it directly to consumers.

If the state Supreme Court does approve the petition’s language for a ballot initiative, Floridians for Solar Choice will still have some work to do. In order to get on the ballot in Florida, an initiative must collect 683,149 signatures from Floridians in at least seven congressional districts by February 1. Any delays in the Supreme Court’s approval of the petition means there’s less time for Floridians for Solar Choice to collect signatures. Already, supporters have expressed frustration that the state took too long to acknowledge that they had received enough signatures for Supreme Court review.

Perfetti’s group began circulating the petition in January, and he said at the time that he received “overwhelming” response to it. Perfetti and Debbie Dooley, a tea party activist who founded the original chapter of Conservatives for Energy Freedom in Georgia, say that they’re tackling solar in Florida because increasing access to the energy source makes sense from a conservative standpoint.

“Free market and the freedom to choose — those are core conservative principles,” Dooley told ThinkProgress in January. “Unless you cherry-pick your principles, if you’re a true conservative, this is something that resonates with you. I think the residents are fed up with the government telling them who to purchase their power from.”

Floridians from Solar Choice has gained multiple backers of the ballot initiative. The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) voiced its support of the initiative earlier this week, and it’s also gained the support of the Tea Party Network, the Christian Coalition, the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, the Florida Retail Federation, the Sierra Club, and other groups.

“This fight is about consumer choice and private property rights — cherished, long-standing American principals that we strongly support as an organization and an industry,” Rhone Resch, president and CEO of SEIA, said in a statement. “We urge Floridians to sign this critically important, freedom-of-choice petition, allowing it to be placed on next year’s ballot.”

Conservative group Americans for Prosperity has attacked the initiative, however, saying that it’s “about money, and using government and taxpayers to prop up the solar industry.” Supporters reject that claim, saying the measure isn’t calling for solar subsidies or mandates; instead, it simply wants to make it easier for Floridians to gain access to solar.

The post Thanks To Conservatives, Florida Is Now One Step Closer To Making Solar Energy More Accessible appeared first on ThinkProgress.

The March Sadness Animal Bracket, Round 6: Koala Vs. Wolverine

Click image to expand. Now updated with Wednesdsay’s winners: Sea Turtle, Peregrine Falcon, Butterfly, and Red Knot. Today, the Sweet Sixteen begins!

CREDIT: Dylan Petrohilos

We’ve reached the Sweet Sixteen in March Sadness — ClimateProgress’ educational bracket tournament of animals impacted by climate change and other environmental threats. For whichever animal wins, ClimateProgress will write a feature-length article exploring the story behind what’s ailing your chosen critter, and who is working to save them. Read the rules here.

Today, things are getting pretty real. For the first time since this competition began, we’re bringing back the winners from the first rounds to battle against each other — and adding a little more information about the environmental threats they face. The first two to go head-to-head will be the winners of our Paws and Claws division: Polar Bear, Pangolin, Koala, and Wolverine. Pangolin pulled off a tight win against Tasmanian Devil in the first round, while Polar Bear easily sailed by Wombat for the title. But Wolverine was the big upset, beating the second-seeded Panda. Can it do the same to fan-favorite Koala?

Only your votes can decide who moves on for a chance at a deep-dive feature story. Vote in the embedded tweets below, on Twitter with the hashtag #CPMarchSadness, or on our Facebook page.

Polar Bear vs. Pangolin

CREDIT: Shutterstock/AP

Polar Bears: Whether they like it or not, Polar Bears have been the unofficial symbol of climate change for more than a decade. We touched on why a little bit in our last round — as ice coverage in the Arctic Sea declines, mother bears have less time on the ice to hunt seals. Indeed, the number one cause of death for cubs right now is a lack of food, or lack of fat on nursing mothers.

But over the years, the climate story behind these iconic bears has become complicated and controversial. In a small number of cases, polar bears have defied the odds, and in those cases their success story has become fodder for conservatives to support their argument that climate change isn’t real. At the same time, most scientists agree polar bears are in danger of extinction as the planet warms.

Pangolins: Pangolins — the rare animal reminiscent of the Pokemon Sandshrew — is believed to be the most trafficked animal in the world. As we mentioned last time, they are killed because of the widespread belief that they have powerful medical benefits in Traditional Chinese Medicine, though there exists no medical evidence supporting these beliefs.

While trafficking is the pangolin’s biggest threat, the heavily-scaled mammal is also threatened by deforestation and habitat loss. Climate change can impact pangolin habitat by altering rainfall patterns and shifting ecological regions, thus further stressing the creatures. What’s more, pangolins are easily stressed — they don’t do well in captivity, and have rarely been bred successfully, making it unlikely that human intervention can keep them from extinction.

Which would you like to know more about? Vote below.

Who's moving on? RETWEET for Polar Bear or FAVE for Pangolin #CPMarchSadness http://t.co/YWpk7cttcB pic.twitter.com/oGZc8sFUvF

— Climate Progress (@climateprogress) March 26, 2015

Koala vs. Wolverine

CREDIT: Shutterstock

Koalas: As we noted last time, the koala is facing a serious threat from Australian bushfires, which are decimating their habitat. Bushfires — which are becoming worse in a hotter, drier Australia — are particularly dangerous for the slow-moving koala, which were just recently affected by fires roaring through the country. To help, animal welfare groups sent out a call for koala mittens to help ease the pain from burns.

In addition, bushfires cause stress, and stress makes koalas prone to chlamydia. The bacterial infection affects almost all koalas in South East Queensland, according to the Queensland government. Chlamydia can make koalas unable to reproduce — in fact, infertility from chlamydia is partially responsible for the current decline in koala numbers.

Wolverines: The wolverine needs snow for survival, so the idea of global warming is obviously not the best for the large and solitary member of the weasel family. Wolverines rely on deep, consistent snow in the American West — snow that lasts late into the spring for breeding. So as snowpacks across that area of the country diminish, the overall evidence is stacked heavily against them in the coming decades.

What’s more, the wolverine already neared extinction early last century after hunting and trapping dwindled its numbers even lower than they are today. Now, climate change exacerbates that threat — according to the Center for Biological Diversity, snow melt in the Rockies is occurring about two weeks earlier now than it did in the 1960s and over the next 75 years climate change is projected to wipe out 63 percent of the snowy habitat wolverines they need to survive.

Who will advance for a chance at a feature story?

The competition is getting fierce. RETWEET for Koala or FAVE for Wolverine #CPMarchSadness http://t.co/YWpk7cttcB pic.twitter.com/1QMQqEI8yu

— Climate Progress (@climateprogress) March 26, 2015

***

TOURNAMENT UPDATES:

Day 1 – 3/19: Paws and Claws pt. 1 — Polar Bear vs. Wombat; Tasmanian Devil vs. Pangolin; (voting closed) WINNERS: Polar Bear and Pangolin.

Day 2 – 3/20: Paws and Claws pt. 2 — Lemur vs. Koala; Panda vs. Wolverine (voting closed) WINNERS: Koala and Wolverine.

Day 3 – 3/23: Fins and Flippers — Sea Lion vs. Sea Horse; Penguin vs. Manatee; Walrus vs. Sea Otter; Whale vs. Salmon (voting closed) WINNERS: Sea Horse, Sea Otter, Whale, and Penguin

Day 4 – 3/24: Horns and Hooves — Elephant vs. Horned Lizard; Rhino vs. Narwhal; Saola vs. Moose; Mountain Goat vs. Reindeer (voting closed) WINNERS: Elephant, Narwhal, Moose, and Mountain Goat.

Day 5 – 3/25: Shells and Wings — Sea Turtle vs. Pelican; Sage Grouse vs. Peregrine Falcon; Oyster vs. Butterfly; Lobster vs. Red Knot (voting closed)

Day 6 – 3/26: Polar Bear vs. Pangolin; Koala vs. Wolverine (voting NOW OPEN)

Day 7 – 3/27: Sea Horse vs. Whale; Sea Otter vs. Penguin

Day 8 – 3/30: Elephant vs. Mountain Goat; Moose vs. Narwhal

Day 9 – 3/31: Sea Turtle vs. Red Knot; Butterfly vs. Peregrine Falcon

Day 10 – 4/1: TBD

Day 11 – 4/2: TBD

Day 12 – 4/3: THE FINAL FOUR: TBD

Day 13 – 4/6: THE CHAMPIONSHIP: TBD

PAST ROUNDS:

Round 5: Shells and Wings

Round 4: Horns and Hooves

Round 3: Fins and Flippers

Round 2: Paws and Claws, part 2

Round 1: Paws and Claws, part 1

The post The March Sadness Animal Bracket, Round 6: Koala Vs. Wolverine appeared first on ThinkProgress.