Climate Change Deniers of California

California is leading the charge in setting and meeting goals to reduce the use of fossil fuels that are causing climate change. Utilities are expected to be using 40% renewable energy sources by 2025, and by 2050, the state will have reduced greenhouse emissions by 80%. Not bad for a state whose GDP is nearly one eighth of the entire country.

So, California must have a gangbuster team of environmentally-minded elected officials, you’d think, right?

Climate Change Deniers of CaliforniaFor the most part, the answer is yes. But of California’s 53 members of Congress, eight just can’t bring themselves to accept that climate change is caused by human beings.

Congressman Duncan Hunter said in a September debate, “There is climate change. Is there human-caused climate change? I don’t buy that.” Doug LaMalfa agrees, remarking in October that “the climate of the globe has been fluctuating since God created it.”

Hunter and LaMalfa represent the moderate climate change deniers, believe it or not. Some don’t even accept that climate change exists at all. So what do they believe?

Dana Rohrabacher, an elected Congressman in California, has an interesting theory:

“Just so you know, global warming is a total fraud, and it’s being designed because what you’ve got is…you’ve got liberals who get elected at the local level, want state government to do the work and let them make the decisions. Then, at the state level, they want the federal government to do it. And at the federal government, they want to create global government to control all of our lives.”

Darrell Issa presented another theory in a 2013 written statement…

“This political gathering isn’t being done to support science, it is being staged by and is intended to promote President Obama’s radical campaign to raise energy costs that will kill Americans jobs.”

He goes on, but it is it really worth it?

A message to Californians – though we are making great strides in this state, our progress is a veritable house of cards. Particularly in light of the 32 disaster declarations over the past four years, it’s important that we continue to win the ridiculous debates over whether climate change exists, and whether we should be trying to do something to prevent potential catastrophe.

California Businesses Preparing for Climate Change

peter getty californiaThe Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) released this year a state-by-state analysis of the business response to climate change in America, including California. The CDP measures and discloses the greenhouse gas emissions of many of the largest corporations, accounting for more than 25% of the world’s emissions.

The report, released in June, outlines how businesses are responding to global warming. Many businesses are taking climate change into consideration for 2015 budgets and strategies, and are considering responding to climate change as a way build a competitive advantage.

In California, businesses are not only preparing for climate change, but also engaging policy makers to help pave the way to a low-carbon economy. These companies see these moves toward sustainability as an opportunity to transform their business and products to make them cleaner and more desirable.

Climate change in California already affects operations. Costs attributed to the drought and wildfires are already considered part of the cost of doing business.

All companies are expecting more regulations, so most are already preparing. While they would like more certainty surrounding future regulations and incentives, the companies that report to the CDP are reducing annual carbon pollution by 619,000 t CO2e, adding to financial savings of $3.5b.

Companies working proactively to integrate climate change into business models, turning risks into profit-drivers, may be coming a little later than some of us would have preferred, but it finally demonstrates that leaders of industry understand that working with the environment in mind doesn’t need to hurt profit – it can help.

Increases in demand for energy-efficient products are generating new revenue. Companies that produce household goods are reducing emissions during the entire product lifecycle. IT Companies like HP are seeing rapid growth in ‘green’ product lines. Many are incorporating natural gas, wind, and solar energy.

Take a look at some of these infographics from the report, which you can read in full here.

Republicans Fall Flat Attempting to Loosen Regulations

peter getty delta smeltDelta Smelt, the small endangered species of fish that inhabits the upper Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary, must be worried about the next Congress, which takes office January 6th.

A message to environmentalists and California Democrats that the water wars are far from over, Congress passed a California drought bill Tuesday designed to loosen regulations that protect a number of species. Dressed up as relief for farmers who have suffered the most from the years-long drought, the bill is just the latest battle in the ongoing work of House Republicans to help California agribusiness loosen regulations that negatively impact their bottom line.

House Republican Doc Hastings denounced the regulations during floor debate, remarking that they “have diverted water supplies in order to help a 3-inch fish.”

Can we assume that if the endangered fish were larger, it would be more worthy of surviving? Imagine if Hastings learned that the average Delta Smelt comes in well under 3 inches!

The Congressman doesn’t get all of his math wrong, though. Over his 15+ year career, he has received $1.25m from Agribusiness, far and away his leading source of campaign funds. That adds up to a lot of support for companies looking to reduce or eliminate regulations like those designed to prevent extinction at our own hands.

It turns out that Agribusiness may have spent all that money in vain. Last week, President Obama vowed to veto the bill, which faces major opposition from state Democrats (including Diane Feinstein & Jerry Brown) and environmental groups too.

In a tirade, Central Valley Republican Devin Nunes compared Democrats to communists. He said that “this is about San Francisco and Los Angeles getting all of their water, never giving up one drop, and they have taken the water from our communities.” His extensive research of communist bureaucracy must have left little time to figure out that Los Angeles no longer receives delta water.

This attempted show of power doesn’t look so strong from this group.

Visualize the California Drought

Though I’ve written a good deal about California’s three-year-strong drought and its various devastating consequences, sometimes the best way to really understand an event is visually. We can discuss the threat to animal life and ecosystems, the struggle to deal with challenges both politically and socially, and even present ideas for long-term water and energy sustainability goals.

But what could be more moving than simply looking at these before and after shots of Lake Oroville…

peter getty before


peter getty after



Depending on the chart-maker’s whim, the drought may be communicated with varying degrees of alert, but there’s no denying the one-year increase in intensity before January 2014, when Gov. Jerry Brown declared a state-wide emergency.

peter getty one year change


Inexplicably, there are drought naysayers who point to the worse drought in the 1920s in order to block any action in the present. But pay careful attention the very right side of this 100+ year chart of statewide precipitation. Is this a trend we’d like to see continue?

peter getty historic precipitation


And keep in mind that the above chart is state-wide. But the brunt of the drought is being felt much more in the south of the state.

peter getty regional


And finally, a sobering satellite shot from space, a before and after of the current drought.

peter getty satellite before


peter getty satellite after


Affordable Planet Saving

peter getty climateA central argument against moving to renewable energy sources, or even combating climate change in general, is that it would be too costly. According to a recent report by the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, the costs aren’t as high as most people would imagine. Hopefully this will help shift some worldviews of those who are inexplicably still believe that the economy couldn’t handle a shift in the energy sector.

The report looked at the generally accepted estimation that there will be about ninety trillion dollars invested in infrastructure around the world. To implement a complete transition to renewable energy sources over those same years, the cost would be four trillion dollars. That’s not much of an increase at all. One of the reasons the costs are so low is because of the dropping costs of renewable energy, which I’ve reported on here before.

Of course, there are many benefits to spending this extra capital than just saving the planet. It also means that the rapid rate of deforestation wouldn’t be a part of our energy system anymore. And the potential for job creation, innovation, and economic growth are really endless.

Is it possible, though? Getting countries on board with the plan, including our own, will be a political minefield. And a 15-year plan might be affordable, but it would still be hard work and require a number of agencies and private companies working very efficiently to pull it off. There’s a reason to be hopeful, particularly as we hear more and more about realistic solutions that can help change the tide of public opinion.

Solar Power Becoming More Efficient

For many of us, solar energy has always made sense. Decades ago, the technology was criticized for being too inefficient to be considered at scale. These days, the technology has advanced so much, it’s clear that soon solar energy will be a major part of our renewable energy plan. I discuss this in more detail in my most recent Huffington Post article.

The International Energy Agency has made a prediction that solar power will be the largest source of electricity within the next forty years. A recent study from Cambridge says that we’re ready to smash the solar efficiency ceiling. So what changed?

Traditional solar cells have consisted of inorganic semi-conductors, like silicon. Silicon conductors only stimulate one electron. But now, we’re figuring out how to harness organic materials like pentacene to be used as semi-conductors. These conductors double the electron stimulation, and therefore energy output, of its inorganic counterparts. Cells are already being built using a hybrid of both semi-conductors.

Wind and hydro-electric power have together dominated the alternative energy industry. Solar is about to enter the ring with renewed gusto. This new competition is expected to help bring prices down, decrease the overall environmental impact of energy production, and increase efficiency.

When we look at Los Angeles amidst this drought, it is evident how important it is to create more efficient ways to create power. The heat wave from last week caused city-wide blackouts. Could there be a future where we can avoid that? Solar energy produces energy with little cost. That’s a renewable energy source worth pursuing.

Climate Protection – Sense & Cents

My recent Huffington Post article, Climate Protection: A Portfolio of Good Sense and Cents for Our Planet, points out that the argument that it isn’t financially feasible to move toward renewable energy sources no longer holds water. There are just too many studies out now that find the exact opposite to be true. Unfortunately, the right wing and general climate change deniers are mongering on fear of hurting the fragile economy.

Low-carbon energy has huge potential for growth as an industry. Sweden has closed coal plants in favor of factories that convert trash into fuel, saving their marine life, itself the cornerstone of another important industry for the country.

Unfortunately, it makes sense that some sit on the fence on this issue. There is a lot of misinformation being disseminated by anti-environmentalists and self-interest groups. The more informed we get, however, the more we are beginning to realize collectively that the environment is as important a priority as the economy…maybe more so, long-term. And we can prioritize both the economy and the environment successfully. Going green can add profit to business when properly handled. As more and more success stories unfold, eventually the positive will drown the negative.

The fact of the matter is that our very future depends on the decisions we’re making now. It’s important to enact some economically stable sustainability measures now.

Is Extinction Extinct?

Peter Getty de-extinctionDe-extinction is the idea of cloning animals and plants from preserved DNA, and it’s the subject of an increasing number of conversations about climate change. As we move into an era where prevention may not be possible, de-extinction is being offered as a solution to trying to protect wildlife and ecosystems. It’s a viable option, and is worth a shot. If extinction happens at our hands, we ought to try and do everything we can to revive a given species.

The challenges are big. Reintroducing an extinct species into a new or different ecosystem has all the potential for disaster as introducing an existing species. And we wouldn’t want to grow a societal feeling that we wouldn’t have to worry about extinction because we could ‘just bring it back.’ But bringing back a species isn’t ‘playing God’ any more than enforcing our will generally in any number of other arenas of science and society. There would be mistakes along the way, but rehabilitating a failed ecosystem is worth it.

Napa Earthquake : Drought :: Apples : Oranges

peter getty drought earthquakesEver since the Napa Quake, which thankfully didn’t claim any lives, there has been a lot of chatter regarding what could have caused it. Some are writing that it could be linked to the California drought and the groundwater depletion that goes along with it. Since I don’t think this thinking will likely be enough to tip the scales and cause a major political & social charge to conserve water in a more concerted way, it’s best we just dispel this pure rumor now.

It’s likely we’ll never now the direct cause, because it’s basically impossible to name the cause of an earthquake at all. In fact, we don’t yet know if the earthquake was due to the San Andreas fault lines, responsible for the 1906 quake that destroyed early San Francisco, or the Franklin Fault. That crack has been dormant 1,600,000 years.

The argument for the drought-causes-earthquake theory is that the lack of water causes stress to fault lines. What scientists are pointing out, however, is that the stress is equal to the daily stress of typical plate movement. Additionally, plate tectonics are not affected by climate change – a happy piece of mother nature that escapes the fallout.

There were earthquakes before the drought, and were the drought to end in a year, there could still be more. California has a long history of earthquakes. Napa’s was the biggest earthquake in northern California since 1989.

It’s best we completely separate the causes of earthquakes and the causes of drought; we can’t do anything about the former, and it’s up to us to rectify the latter.

Pulse Flow

peter getty pulse flowThe average Californian probably wouldn’t know what a pulse flow is. Thanks to a cooperative joint effort by the US and Mexico, pulse flows may have a major positive environmental impact on the entire southwest region.

Let’s start with the problem – the Colorado River is supposed to flow into the Gulf of California. Thanks to years of drought, the 1,450 mile journey has been cut short by about 100 miles. The Colorado is not alone. Other major rivers in the world are experiencing similar droughts, including the Ganges, the Nile, and the Yellow rivers.

The Colorado River Delta, which used to benefit from the presence of flowing water, has been decimated. The dry landscape, once filled with lush vegetation, now features mostly dry & prickly tamarisk shrubs. The effect on wildlife has been astronomical, even affecting migratory patterns of hundreds of species of birds. This area was once a resting location for the arduous journey across the Sonora Desert.

Here’s where pulse flows come in. Though the ground of the Colorado River Delta is dry and cracked, it’s not quite dead yet. In fact, there’s reason to believe that much of the delta could be restored with even modest renewal programs. Realizing this, Mexico and the US came together in an agreement called Minute 319, back in November of 2012. In March of 2013, work began.

Pulse flows are basically simulated flooding. They’re designed to replicate spring floods that used to occur in the region. The results, more than a year later, have been very promising. Sites of water making its way for the first time in years along the old path of the river and the beginnings of wildlife and vegetation are hinting that ecologists were correct – it’s possible to bring it back. As long as the modest funding continues, there’s a chance we could even restore the region.

What’s even more exciting is that the US and Mexico have come together on a project of the exclusive benefit of the environment. That’s a landmark in an age of tight budgets and a lack of political capital for environmental and sustainability issues. In a time of great drought like this, it’s important to celebrate when we get things right. Remember that even in times of trouble, the health of our environment is still a top priority.