Weather, Water, Energy 11-1-06

Don't tell Sen. Inhofe (REPUB-OK). Americans now see climate change as our top environmental issue and would be willing to pay 50% more a month on their electricity bill to "solve" it compared to 5 years ago ($21 from $14--don't think Americans think small, eh?). Wind, solar, and efficiency were the preferred solutions but nuclear and carbon storage are hanging on. Only 28% agreed that immediate action was needed, though. (We still think terrorism and Iraq are more important overall because, you know, they can affect climates and change civilizations. Too bad there isn't something like a political party that could have made global warming a rallying cry for united effort and set the foundation of fast action if it won coming elections. . . oh, wait.) . . . Had they polled insects, they might have gotten different results, since the little buggers will thrive the warmer climates (go, mosquitoes!!!) . . . Glaciers going in WA. Not just global warming issue--the loss of water in the area will have an impact, too. . . . Turns out conservation of ecosystems also conserves greenhouse emissions by acting as carbon capture mechanisms. Score that two points in favor now (especially when arguing with "econ dev rules" types) . . . . Here's another way conservation can win--new means of constructing homes to cut greenhouse emissions by 60%. One participant says it's "44 years ahead of its time," which means it's 279 years ahead of Bushnev and Inhofe. . . . Maybe folks in these "solar salons" will make it a topic, once they convince people to convert to solar panels we may not have the silicon for. With solar becoming cost-effective, maybe they'll pull it off.