IN TODAY’S RADIO REPORT: ’60 Minutes’ becomes a dirty word – Inside their new hit piece on America’s clean energy industry; Don’t tell the Fox ‘News’-ified CBS News, but clean tech is booming; PLUS: Record drought in California, with no end in sight … All that and more in today’s Green News Report!
Got comments, tips, love letters, hate mail? Drop us a line at GreenNews@BradBlog.com or right here at the comments link below. All GNRs are always archived at GreenNews.BradBlog.com.
IN ‘GREEN NEWS EXTRA’ (see links below): Nature Bombshell: Observations point to 10°F warming by 2100; Global warming warning stickers at gas pumps?; Food industry’s secret plan for a GMO (non)-labeling law; Radio Disney’s pro-fracking elementary school tour sparks outrage; Mass Extinction: Let’s not.; Big Oil moves to overturn oil export ban in U.S.; The endgame of GMO controversy; Record heat wave kills 100k bats in Australia; Senegal siezes Russian factory trawler; Not enough bees for Europe’s crops; Hungarian town goes green after massive toxic sludge spill; Rising sea levels threaten L.A. … PLUS: Stephen Colbert calls out Fox News on climate change: “Well Done. All The Best News Reports End With ‘I Don’t Know Where We Got This'” … and much, MUCH more! …
STORIES DISCUSSED ON TODAY’S ‘GREEN NEWS REPORT’…
- Inside the CBS News/60 Minutes Hit Piece on Clean Energy:
- The Fox ‘News’-ification of CBS News and ’60 Minutes’: ‘The Cleantech Crash’ (The BRAD BLOG)
- Anatomy Of A Hit Job: Expert Featured On 60 Minutes Exposes How Show Knowingly Ignored Facts On Clean Energy (Climate Progress)
- 60 Minutes Hit Job On Clean Energy Ignores The Facts (Climate Progress):
As documented in the recent Department of Energy (DOE) report, “Revolution Now: The Future Arrives for Four Clean Energy Technologies,” the only thing in cleantech that is crashing is the cost of key components.
- What’s The Matter With 60 Minutes?: Cleantech Edition (Media Matters)
- 60 Minutes’ ‘Cleantech Crash’ segment misses the point, critics charge (Grist)
- ’60 Minutes’ does about-face on cleantech (San Jose Mercury News) [emphasis added]:
I’m not sure what the “Cleantech Crash” refers to, exactly: In the past four years, the United States has more than doubled electricity generation from wind and solar, even as we’ve experienced a boom in domestic oil and natural gas production. … Jonathan Silver, who used to oversee the loan program for the DOE, tweeted Monday that he spoke to the producer for over an hour but “facts did not seem to affect his analysis.”
- 60 Minutes in Toilet Again. Is Fox in the Henhouse? (Climate Crocks)
- Clean Energy Entrepreneurs Call On 60 Minutes For A Correction: And Thousands Asking CBS To Appoint Public Editor (Media Matters)
- How the “60 Minutes” Clean-Tech Takedown Missed the Bigger Picture (Re/Code)
- Don’t Tell CBS: ‘Clean Tech’ Is Booming:
- Official: Wind emerges as Spain’s dominant power source as emissions plummet (Business Green)
- Renewables Now Cheaper Than Fossil Fuels in Australia (Without Subsidies) (Environmental News Network)
- Solar Power Craze on Wall St. Propels Start-Up (NY Times):
In all, an estimated $13 billion was invested in solar projects in 2013, a tenfold increase since 2007, according to GTM Research, which tracks the industry.
- California added more rooftop solar capacity in 2013 than in the past 30 years combined (Treehugger)
- NY Governor Announces $1 Billion For Solar Energy (Climate Progress)
- Spain Achieves Renewable Milestone. Italian Town Grows With Renewables. (Climate Crocks)
- China on world’s ‘biggest push’ for wind power (BBC)
- Renewable energy use at record high in Scotland (BBC)
- The Clean Energy Economy in Three Charts (WhiteHouse.gov)
- It’s Official: 2013 California’s Driest Year on Record:
- Check Out This Shocking Map of California’s Drought (Mother Jones)
- No Relief Forecast After One Of California’s Driest Years Ever (NPR)
- Record-setting drought threatens salmon survival (Greenwire): California’s intensifying drought is forcing water managers to make tough choices that pit fish species against one another for survival.
- After California’s driest year on record, water experts push conservation (MyDesert.com)
- Sacramento officials push for mandatory water reductions by residents (Sacramento Bee)
- Lawmakers call on Gov. Jerry Brown to halt fracking in California (LA Times)
‘GREEN NEWS EXTRA’ (Stuff we didn’t have time for in today’s audio report)…
- Nature Bombshell: Observations Point To 10°F Warming by 2100 (Climate Progress):
A major new study in Nature finds “our climate is more sensitive to carbon dioxide than most previous estimates.” … [O]n our current emissions path we are headed toward a “most-likely warming of roughly 5°C [9°F] above modern [i.e. current] temperatures or 6°C [11°F] above preindustrial” temperatures this century.
- VIDEO: Colbert Calls Out Fox’s Hollow Climate Change Attack: (Media Matters): Colbert: “Well Done. All The Best News Reports End With ‘I Don’t Know Where We Got This'”
- Radio Disney’s pro-fracking elementary school tour sparks outrage (Al Jazeera America)
- VIDEO: Mass Extinction: Let’s Not (Climate Crocks)
- U.S. oil exports have been banned for 40 years. Is it time for that to change? (Washington Post)
- Thousands of railcars need updating after crude crashes: Greenbriar CEO (Reuters)
- Food industry’s secret plan for a GMO (non)-labeling law (Grist) [emphasis added]:
The captains of the food industry have decided it’s time for a federal GMO-labeling law. Specifically, they’re aiming for a labeling law that doesn’t actually require labeling at all “” but does pre-empt all of the more stringent labeling laws now making their way through state legislatures. In other words, they want a voluntary-labeling law that stops states from enacting anything else. (Yes, food makers can already voluntarily label their products as non-GM.)
- What I learned from six months of GMO research: None of it matters (Grist)
- Global warming warning stickers at gas pumps? (SF Gate):
A group of Bay Area environmentalists wants to slap warning stickers on gasoline pumps, telling drivers that the fuel they’re buying is cooking the planet. The stickers would constantly remind consumers of the link between driving and climate change.
- About 100,000 bats dead after heatwave in southern Queensland (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
- Industrial Fishing: Russia accuses Greenpeace of encouraging Senegal to seize trawler (Guardian UK): Russian official renews hostilities with Greenpeace over the seizure and detention of factory trawler
- Bee shortage threatens crops (BBC): Europe’s honeybees are struggling to keep crops pollinated because of a growing demand for biofuel.
- How the Hungarian town flooded by red toxic sludge went green (Guardian UK): Devecser, an environmental disaster zone in 2010, reinvents itself as a hub for sustainable energy
- This looks like a fluorescent tube, but it’s actually a 41% more efficient LED lamp (Treehugger)
- Projected Sea-Level Rise Could Land Coastal Los Angeles Underwater (Red Orbit)
- How to repair your broken goods – from an iPhone to a washing machine (Guardian UK): Cracked cupboards, socks, washing machines and iPhones can all be repaired at home ““ giving new life to items that may otherwise be thrown away.
- Antarctic penguins forced up 100-foot ice walls, study shows (Guardian UK)
- Global warming is being caused by humans, not the sun, and is highly sensitive to carbon, new research shows (Guardian UK)
FOR MORE on Climate Science and Climate Change, go to our Green News Report: Essential Background Page
















Nobody is commenting so old Davey (aka Davy) will chime in.
Cannot overstate the hilarity of the Clitanic adventure. But I cannot do it the justice that Mark Steyn does in this article:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/feat...ip-of-fools-2/
…and this Turney fellow…he laughs at everything he says…very annoying.
I wonder of Chevy Chase has been tapped to do a movie of this adventure.
Davey — well, then you’ll probably find this article hilarious: Nature Bombshell: Observations Point To 10°F Warming by 2100
DD #2
Nope, not funny. If I want to watch a scary movie, I will watch JAWS. Good try though 🙂
Davey you should study up on how denial of the sort that impairs your science is the fear of death:
(Convergence – Fear of Death Syndrome). We all have it so the best we can do is to alleviate the things that will bring it faster and to more people.
Burying the head in the sand in the middle of the railroad tracks is not as mature as tackling the problem so the fear can subside to some useful extent.
That is hilarious, Davey!
BTW, while I got ya here, maybe you can explain something to me. Do you guys actually like being lied to? Or are you just too stupid to know the difference?
It’s actually a serious question. Steyn’s piece, of course, is largely just one complete lie and misrepresentation after another. But the thing is, they are easily demonstrable lies. Anyone who bothers to look into any of them will see them as lies almost immediately. Yet, I’ve seen the very same ones repeated over and over again all week (and longer of course).
Example, Steyn tells you: “In December 2008 Al Gore predicted the ‘entire North Polar ice cap will be gone in five years’.” And yet, every time I’ve seen that claim, with an occasional link to the video where he supposedly says it, he obviously says nothing of the kind. Yet you guys repeat the same lie over and over to each other, as if it’s real.
So, again, do you guys just enjoy living in a world where demonstrable facts and evidence don’t actually matter? Or is there something else going on that I’m too smart to understand?
Hey, Brad,
Never read your stuff and I don’t know you, but I had to comment after I read your “note to spammers”. I ended up on your site, believe it or not, by typing in Angela’s name! How about that!
On that score, it seems she is now working hard to send traffic to you! I Love the irony. So, putting your spam note in here has served you very well!
Well Done. I love it!
David Trounce
Mallee Blue Media
Brad #5
Gore said that there was a 75% chance that the north polar ice caps would be completely ice free sometime in the Summer in 5-7 years. Gore was not telling a lie however. So far, he is just plain wrong and it is not looking good for his prediction panning out in the next two years.
Then there is the Maslowski prediction which, since he is a scientist (unlike Mr. Gore), should carry even more weight. He appears to be wrong as well.
Dredd #4
My oh my you continue to tickle my innards with your posts!
#1 I dont fear death
#2 AGW is bullshit
But thank you for your concern!
I am surprised that you could not weave in your method for calculating volume–like a 5th grader.
A joint US Navy/Dept. of Energy study projects the Arctic could be ice-free in summer as early as 2016, “84 years ahead of conventional model projections”. (Note use of the word “could”)
Davey, you don’t mention that Maslowski projected 2016 +/- 3 years, so he’s not actually yet ‘wrong’ yet. You also don’t mention that Maslowski emphasized the uncertainty within his own study: “Regardless of high uncertainty associated with such an estimate, it does provide a lower bound of the time range for projections of seasonal sea ice cover.”
In the end, it won’t matter who “wins” in accurately predicting which year the final nail is hammered into the coffin of Arctic summer sea. Or who “wins” on which year Antarctica ice sheets begin “irreversible” decline.
Within our lifetimes, at least one major planetary feature will shift into a new regime, and that will impact the entire system.
Davey Crocket @ 7:
You wouldn’t mind offering a cite to back up your assertion, would ya? As far as I recall, he was citing a report by someone else, as opposed to “predicting” anything. But perhaps you saw something that I didn’t. Please send the URL. Thanks!
Beyond that: a) See Desi’s reply to you. b) You really don’t understand science, do you? c) Hopefully you’ve got no kids or grand kids, because you’ll likely be dead as they “enjoy” the “bullshit” you either don’t understand or don’t want to understand, so fuck ’em, eh, “Davey”?
Davey @8,
You said:
Actually v=l*w*h (volume = length x width x height) is not my method.
That formula was known by mathematicians before you killed your first “bar” when you were only three:
(Ballad of Davy Crockett).
Get indoors once in awhile, and bring Sarah Palin in with you!
BTW v=l*w*h will still be the formula when your kids are in fifth grade … assuming you allow them to be educated, rather than being like their pa.
Brad #XXX
Here is the clip where Gore quotes maslowski: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsioIw4bvzI
You will argue that this is not Gore’s assertion–I know how you think.
Glory to elephant balls folkies:
(The Government of the Government – 4, quoting Natural News).
Thanks, Davey. Your reply @ 12 helps answer several questions I asked you in previous comments (that you failed, as usual, to answer) all at once, particularly my question to you @ 5:
As your response @ 12 above highlights, yes, you like living in a world where facts and evidence don’t actually matter. And while I wasn’t sure why someone would enjoy living in such a world, your response highlights the likely explanation: You are a dishonest person, so avoiding demonstrable facts and evidence seems to be a feature for folks like you, not a bug.
As you know, since you linked to the very video I expected you would, Gore does not make the “prediction” that you lied about him making. He simply cited, accurately, that “Some of the models suggest to Dr. Maslowsky that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during some of the summer months, could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years.”
That, of course, is nothing like the dishonest claim you cited approvingly from Mark Steyn’s dishonest column that “In December 2008 Al Gore predicted the ‘entire North Polar ice cap will be gone in five years’.”
Rather than disavow Steyn’s lie, you doubled down, proving that you knew it was a lie at the very same time when you wrote @ 5:
You knew that was a lie when you wrote it, else you would not have separated Maslowski’s claim from Gore’s, since they were one in the same, as you know, since you cited Gore’s video in which he does not make the claim you say he does. He simply cites Maslowski’s study and does not make a “prediction” as you grotesquely lied. There is no “Gore prediction” and “then…Maslowski’s prediction”. They are the same. Gore is citing Maslowsk’s study.
That makes you a liar for claiming, dishonestly, that someone else is a liar.
What you just offered us is knowing disinformation. That is a strict violation of one of the very few rules we have for commenting here at The BRAD BLOG. Consider this your final warning. While I’ve enjoyed your reminders over the years of why it’s important for truth tellers to counter disinformed dopes like yourself, crossing the line into purposeful knowing deception, as you just gleefully have, is grounds for permanent banning.
Do it again, and you will not be writing here again. I’m sure we’ll all be sorry to not hear from you again. I’m sorry you couldn’t make your case without making shit up. But we’ve come to expect that type of bullshit from you.
Wind energy is working in Europe and causing prices to drop for energy.
Bradley,
Actually, reference that I recalled is here:
http://youtu.be/GPLD8aylRiw
He does not mention Maslowski.
Nevertheless, this is a red herring as Gore does not do any science himself…everything he says on such matters is quoting/referencing scientists! You are disingenuous to try to separate what he says from his sources. Really??
The models have been wrong about the polar ice so far. To be fair, perhaps I should give Gore/Maslowski another couple of years.
If your only defense is to call me a liar, so be it.
Brad,
A couple of things on my radar:
1. By using an antiquated industrial process, 8human activity adds extra nitrogen to the environment by the manufacturing of chemical fertilizers. It is literally raining nitrogen down on the earth and causing major problems. Heavily forested Missouri is known for its treeless open areas called glades which could be one to 100 acres in size. Glades here are home to collard lizards and wildflowers that are threatened when the thin, rocky Ozark soils are fertilized by an increase in usable nitrogen in the atmosphere and soil. Not really explained in pro-organic discussions.
2. Missouri’s LaMotte and St. Peter Sandstone formations are being harvested for fracking sand material. The mines usually tap rural, municipal groundwater wells and use around 200k gallons/day. Farmington area has some formations close to the surface and easy to acquire.
Davey lied again @ 16 with:
Nice try. He doesn’t say what you claimed he said there either. He is, again, citing experts/scientists as is quite clear to anyone who bothers to watch either video that you linked to. Since you insist on knowingly attempt to disinform readers (lying), here’s what Gore actually said in that 2007 video:
So, you are still a liar. Gore never said what you claimed above that he did, in either of the two videos you’ve offered to prove he said it. You are a dishonest person. You have, again, violated the very few rules we have for commenting here at The BRAD BLOG because, apparently, you take no personal responsibility for failure and seem to feel the rules don’t apply to you.
Wow. That was some impressively deceptive sleight of hand there, “Davey”. You call me disingenuous for doing what you did? Really?? I pointed out that he made no such predictions, that he was quoting/referencing scientists and that you were disingenuous to lie otherwise. But I’m the dishonest one here, “Davey”? The record above tells the tale quite clearly. You are an incredibly dishonest person.
Great. Last chance, since I am nothing if not fair, but have, frankly, had enough of your bullshit. What “models have been wrong about the polar ice”? Please cite the URLs to the “models” you refer to. Last chance. Be smart. Or be gone.
It not a “defense”. It happens to be the truth, as documented for all to see above. Also, it’s not the only response I have. You’ll find out what the next response is after your next reply, depending on if you are smart or not. I doubt that you will be. Why start now?