scientific uncertainty
Policy Implications of Accelerating Warming
If warming is coming more quickly, we need to pick up the pace on policy responses.
There seems to be an emerging scientific consensus that the rate of global warming is rising. After screening out the effects of natural factors like El Niño, scientists have concluded that the pace of warming has roughly doubled since the 1970s. What does this tell us about policy? Some of the implications are more obvious than others, and at least one implication may be unsettling for some climate advocates. Most obviously, we need to accelerate our efforts to carbon emissions. We will be closing in on possible tipping points faster than expected. Climate impacts that we might have expected twenty years from now could hit in half that time.
CONTINUE READINGThe Environment is a System, Not an Array.
In 1969, Barry Commoner summed up much of environmental science in six words. Today’s conservatives don’t get it.
People have an intuitive tendency to focus on an action’s immediate direct effects. The same intuition leads us to downplay effects that are indirect, long-range, and cumulative. This can lead us astray, as it has the Supreme Court, when dealing with impacts on environmental systems. Writing at the outset of the modern environmental world, biologist Barry Commoner tried to crystalize what was known about the environment into four crisply phrased laws. The first law read simply: “Everything is connected to everything else.” What we have learned since Commoner published The Closing Circle in 1969 has only confirmed that insight.
This interconnected means that the environment is a system (really, a nested set of systems), where interactions are paramount. It’s not just an array of different things happening independently in different places or times. That’s true, as we’ve learned, not only of the environment but the global economy to which it is linked and of the geopolitical realm linked to that.
CONTINUE READINGEarth is Getting Darker. Here’s Why That’s Alarming
Some climate scientists are calling attention to yet another alarming recent climate trend: Earth’s declining reflectivity and what it may mean for feedback effects on future warming.
Some recent Earth observations are spreading new alarm among climate scientists. The observations have been reported in many scientific and environmental outlets, and have provoked a fair amount of confusion and some misrepresentation. Some scientists have been informally calling these observations “the most important climate risk you’ve never heard of.” But they have not yet …
Continue reading “Earth is Getting Darker. Here’s Why That’s Alarming”
CONTINUE READINGNew Trump Nuclear Reactor Policy: “Trust Us”
The Administration is eliminating safeguards and courting greater skepticism about nuclear safety
The Trump Administration is quietly dismantling safeguards for nuclear power. I’m neutral. But not if it’s being built with a “safety last” policy. Trump’s Department of Energy wants us to trust them to protect the public. But blind trust for federal agencies is in scarce supply these days. Trying to sneak through regulatory changes may speed things up in the short run but is likely to cause delays later. We know that the changes will be made by political appointees, with experts relegated to minor roles. This will build a legacy of distrust.
CONTINUE READINGIs This the End of Cost-Benefit Analysis?
Trump’s EPA is effectively abandoning economic analysis
Maybe the Administration means to keep cost-benefit analysis in place for some other kinds of regulations at EPA or elsewhere. But if the courts uphold the EPA’s refusal to quantify the enormous harms caused by air pollution, it’s hard to see an argument for quantifying many other regulatory benefits. In other settings, environmentalists might applaud the repeal of cost-benefit analysis. In the current setting, however, the purpose is all too plain: to make it easier for the Administration to ignore the ways it is endangering human life and health.
CONTINUE READINGScience and Democracy
The scientific process is crucial for a well-functioning democracy.
Beyond its utility, science also models some important features of democracy. It aspires to a marketplace of ideas in which everyone with the needed background knowledge can participate, and in which conclusions are based on debate and data rather than power. As a recent D.C. Circuit case illustrates, the law calls on government agencies to make decisions in the same, considering all the scientific evidence and arguments, then providing a reasoned explanation for its decision.
CONTINUE READINGThe Energy Secretary Pushes Pseudoscience
The Drain is a weekly roundup of environmental and climate news from Legal Planet.
Remember alternative facts? That catch phrase from Season 1, Episode 1 where Trump officials lied about the size of his inauguration crowd has now metastasized into a governing philosophy for how federal agencies plan to ignore, and ultimately exacerbate, the climate crisis. Trump 2.0 is pushing alternative science. Late last month, Energy Secretary Chris Wright …
Continue reading “The Energy Secretary Pushes Pseudoscience”
CONTINUE READINGDoes the Law Require Cost-Benefit Analysis?
According to the D.C. Circuit, the answer is no.
Putting aside the particulars of the case, it seems wrong to apply the same standard (monetized cost-benefit analysis) to every provision in environmental law. These provisions have different language, reflecting differences in congressional priorities. Some provisions, for instance, may be designed push industry to find innovative solutions; others may reflect Congress’s value judgments or a desire to limit EPA’s discretion. We shouldn’t assume that the myriad differences in statutory language are irrelevant and that Congress wanted agencies to adopt the same method of making decisions in every case.
CONTINUE READINGThe Emperor’s New Endangerment Theory (Part III)
How did EPA get to the absurd conclusion that 1.5 billion tons of carbon emissions aren’t significant? Well might you ask.
There is a very good chance that a court would strike down a EPA’s current finding that carbon emissions from the U.S. power sector are too insignificant to regulate. EPA’s effort to explain its ultimate conclusion rests on a hodgepodge of poorly analyzed considerations, which obviously have been reverse engineered to lead to EPA’s preferred conclusion.
CONTINUE READINGTrump Goes Nuclear
Four new executive orders try to launch a nuclear renaissance.
Diluting safety and environmental reviews is also likely to lead to a lot of litigation, which will slow nuclear licensing to a crawl. In addition, the industry knows that what one President can do by executive order, the next President can undo. So it could be risky to make investments in facilities that will be around for many decades, based on what could be an evanescent presidential policy. And the public will have good reason to fear that public safety won’t be a priority.
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
