1. Call it Tom Friedman’s Worst Nightmare: Asia’s already outpacing the United States in clean technology investment by hundreds of billions of dollars — which will mean the U.S. will be importing trillions of dollars in green tech down the road, says a new report. (Hat tip: CleanTechnica.)
2. Call it a Whale’s Worst Nightmare: Japan’s whaling fleet is off to the Southern Ocean for its annual hunt. Dot Earth quotes ocean explorer Sylvia Earle on why eating whale isn’t at all like eating a farm-raised cow, which is what Japanese whaling interests claim.
3. Call it Todd Stern’s Worst Nightmare: Pledges by individual countries to limit their greenhouse gas emissions are multiplying like tribbles, reports The New York Times — and UN climate czar Yvo deBoer is now putting pressure on the Obama administration to release its own proposal.
4. Call it a Gearhead’s Worst Nightmare: Star driver Jeff Gordon has joined with the EPA to warn the public that auto painting causes air pollution and degrades human health, reports Ecopolitology.
5. Call it Ungreen Companies’ Worst Nightmare: GoodGuide releases an iPhone app that scans product barcodes and gives you ratings on the product’s healthy, environmental, and social impacts. (62,000 products in the database so far, says CNET’s Health Tech.)

1. There’ll be no more energy-sucking televisions in the state where TV was born, now that California has passed the nation’s first law requiring TV energy efficiency standards.
2. Sometimes, incentives just don’t work. The Responsible Travel company has canceled its carbon offsets program, saying it helps travelers appease their guilt over flying but doesn’t actually help reduce emissions — and may even encourage more traveling.
3. Climate change plays favorites apparently. A new report from the U.N. Population Fund says women suffer disproportionately from the impacts of climate change – but they also might be in the best position to mitigate it as well.
4. A rare giraffe species was on the brink of extinction in 1996, with just 50 animals left in Niger. But regulations against poaching and other conservation efforts have made a huge difference – 13 years later there are now 200 animals.
5. Wondering which major companies are going green? Check out this list of 5 big corporate names that are trying out new, more sustainable practices, from The Daily Green. 

1. What’s more important than reaching a global agreement in Copenhagen?  Scientific American thinks a U.S.-China deal on energy and climate could be just as big.
2. America’s oil capital is trying to green up its image, says Green Inc.  The city of Houston, home to densely packed highways and headquarters of a number of oil companies, plans to roll out an effort to convert 10 city Priuses (Prii?) into plug-in hybrids, and install vehicle charging stations around the metropolitan area.
3. Coca-Cola, the most recognized consumer brand on the planet, will soon start distributing plastic bottles made with up to 30% plant-based material, reports Triple Pundit.  I’m feeling a little less terrible about my Diet Coke addiction today.
4. At this point, the U.S. climate bill could probably use some divine intervention.  Maybe the Scientists and Evangelicals Initiative, a partnership between evangelical leaders and environmental scientists, can convince the Senate to get moving on climate legislation, says the Guardian’s Environment Blog.
5. If that doesn’t work, maybe this new study will change a few minds– the findings indicate that a “robust” climate bill could boost the U.S. economy by about $111 billion by 2020 and could create nearly two million jobs, according to GreenBiz.

1. The Daily Green asks, Is everything you know about being green wrong? Here’s the scoop: it’s not about what car you drive or whether you eat meat, but the stuff you buy.
2. Marine sponges are getting a better image, no thanks to that Sponge Bob Square Pants guy. A new study shows that sponges gulp huge quantities of ocean carbon and transform it into food for corals, making them integral to the survival of reefs in these warming times.
3. Is an apple that won’t rot for 4 months somehow better for the planet than traditional apples? The Australian scientists behind the new RS103-130 think so. Only in Oz.
4. On the other side of the equator, the Dutch have cooked up their own crazy scheme: a driving tax designed to cut traffic and transportation emissions. The tax would be imposed on a per-mile basis, although steeper fees apply to driving during rush hour and driving a big car.
5. Rising seas, warmer temperatures, increased rainfall… now here’s a new effect of climate change: more wind. Scientists have observed increased wind over Lake Superior as a result of changing water and air temperatures caused by less winter ice.

What will a successful global climate change agreement look like? That question is only more important to ask in the wake of this weekend’s agreement by President Obama to a plan that will ask world leaders to reach a political agreement at this December’s UN climate talks in Copenhagen, ahead of a more binding agreement some time in 2010.

From a purely scientific perspective, the solution to climate change is straightforward. Burning fossil fuels and clearing forests over the last century have sharply increased the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, leading to climate change. So, burn less fossil fuel and protect more forests in order to cap and eventually reduce greenhouse gas concentrations to a safer level.

The politics of that solution are much more complicated. Developed countries like the United States need to cut emissions dramatically, since their high emissions are responsible for getting us to this point. Developing countries like India and China need to take some responsibility for the future as their emissions rise and their forests continue to be cleared. For the former, that means breaking bad carbon-intensive habits. For the latter, it means establishing good low-carbon habits from the start.

A successful climate treaty will hinge on agreeing to how much developed and developing countries will reduce their respective greenhouse gas emissions, and also on agreeing how rich countries will help poor countries finance it all. At the same time, those emissions reduction commitments need to add up to enough global reductions to actually keep temperature change under 2 degrees C, the level beyond which impacts are likely to be irreversible and potentially catastrophic.

One reason countries are struggling to agree on emissions reductions going forward is that they have each had very different emission histories and so think they should have different responsibilities for containing future emissions. According to an interactive feature in the Washington Post, the United States has always been and remains a giant emitter of greenhouse gases. China’s surging coal-fired economy is now the single biggest emitter of all.

But China also has a population more than three times that of the United States, meaning that its per capita emissions are still a fraction of those from gluttonous Americans. Meanwhile, some European countries like Germany have already begun a steady but shallow decline in their total and per capita emissions. Missing from these statistics, though, are emissions from deforestation that catapult Indonesia and Brazil into the third and fourth ranks globally.

At the same time that negotiators work to agree on differential emissions commitments and the associated financing, they also need to make sure the emissions reductions add up to successfully stop climate change. According to Climate Interactive’s scoreboard, global greenhouse gas emissions need to be reduced by more than 80% by the end of the century to keep temperature change under 2 degrees C. Current pledges would reduce annual global greenhouse gas emissions by about 33%. Additional reductions being suggested could save another 33%. But more will be needed to turn the world onto a safer climate trajectory.

So what could a successful climate change agreement look like? What mix of emissions reductions would be fair for developed and developing countries, and will it be enough to stop climate change? Reductions of 25%-40% by 2020 are frequently suggested, but likely insufficient. Negotiators headed to Copenhagen have a hard job to do. But it is still possible for them to succeed.

You can explore some of these challenges and possibilities for a successful global climate change agreement using Climate Interactive’s C-Learn simulator. It lets you set emissions reduction targets for developed countries like the United States, fast-growing developing countries like China and India, and small developing countries like many in Africa. You can also set goals for reducing emissions from deforestation and sequestering emissions through reforestation. The simulator will then tell you how those targets add up in terms of overall emissions and predicted temperature change.

It may look and feel a bit complicated, but that’s how the real-world challenge is. Give it a try and see what ideas you come up with for how a successful global agreement could keep climate change under 2 degrees C. And then share your ideas here and at Planet Change.

(Image: Traffic at a stoplight in Bangkok. Credit: seasidebear/Flickr through a Creative Commons license.)

Good news about cow poop. Good news (?) about Copenhagen. Good news for those of you who’ve always dreamed of a dress made of LED lights. Happiness is the smell of a new Cool Green Morning, to paraphrase Don Draper…

1. The rehabilitation of poop continues: The Netherlands has opened its second cow-dung power plant, reports CleanTechnica — to make biogas that will heat more than 1,000 homes.
2. In case you missed it yesterday, President Obama has endorsed a plan to push an ultimate climate change agreement sometime beyond December’s UN meeting in Copenhagen, reports The New York Times. Grist’s Dave Roberts says that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
3. Charlie the Tuna muzzled? Dot Earth says last week’s meeting among fishing countries to reach an agreement on restoring depleted numbers of tuna, shark, turtles and other marine life was missing one thing — a basis in science.
4. Count on Inhabitat to render us speechless — with a dress made of 24,000 LED lights (plus “4,000 hand-applied Swarovski crystals and 40-layers of pleated silk organza crinoline.” When’s it going to hit the shelves at Target?!)
5. Always like to end on good news — this time from the Brazilian Amazon, where deforestation dropped nearly 46 percent from August 2008 to July 2009, says AP. But the “why” is a chicken and egg problem — is it because of the Brazilian government’s promotion of sustainable livelihoods in the region (coupled with enforcement of laws against deforestation), or just a drop in ag commodity prices worldwide?

Feeling unlucky this Friday the 13th? Fortify yourself with the latest in green news — recycled diapers, undersea gliders, a historic comeback and a new way to shut up those global warming skeptics close to you (speaking of superstitious…)

1. So you’re at a family gathering, arguing with Uncle Climate Denier over the reality of climate change — what’s your trump card? How about the huge increase in the ratio of record high temps to record low temps across the United States in the last six decades? Andrew Revkin at Dot Earth says the findings are accepted by scientists across the political spectrum. (I bet Uncle Climate Denier remembers those frozen winter mornings just fine…)
2. Also from Dot Earth — two U.S. senators have proposed giving a prize to anybody with a way to extract CO2 from the atmosphere and sequester it permanently. (Isn’t that called “a forest”? Just asking…)
3. Martha Stewart, eat your heart out — two UK companies are building a plant to recycle diapers into, among other things, wallpaper — and the plant will run on the organic matter in the diapers themselves. Eeewww… (Hat tip: Triple Pundit.)
4. Cool Green Science Alert! A new undersea glider (huh?) is tracking the rare beaked whale off the coast of Hawaii…using only a listening device. (It’s the best way, because the whales are shy and live far off shore. Hat tip: Wired Science.)
5. Score one for the good guys — the brown pelican, once on the endangered species list because DDT weakened its eggs, has been declared “fully recovered” by the U.S. Department of the Interior, reports the LA Times. (Hat tip: Yale Environment 360.)

(Image: Brown pelicans off Morro Bay, California. Credit: mikebaird/Flickr through a Creative Commons license.)

What am I trying to illustrate in the above photo (a picture of cattle and elephant dung)? That conservation planning is a pile of poop?

No. But this mixture of excrement does show why such planning needs to incorporate extreme events like drought or flooding – especially for the impacts of those events on local people.

In the place where I took this photo — Mt Kenya – livestock herders have moved into protected areas. Why? Because of a protracted and devastating drought — one Kenya is (hopefully) at the end of. The drought has caused the displacement of huge numbers of people and the estimated deaths of half the livestock.

In times this tough, local herders have been forced to graze their animals in protected areas around the country – areas normally set aside for nature and tourism. I can’t blame them — but in a country that relies on tourism so heavily (it’s the second largest sector of the economy), this development is big and troubling news.

Obviously, conservationists should be planning for such extreme events. They will occur; we just don’t know when. We do often include in our plans responses to long-term environmental events (e.g., blow-downs, hurricanes, etc) and critical threats (such as habitat fragmentation and large-scale agriculture). We are even slowly coming to grips with consequences of climate change. But how often do we consider the effects of extreme events on local people, especially the poor, in the areas in which we work?

Probably not nearly enough.

Why should conservationists do this kind of planning? Because quite often the people living in and around the areas we are interested in protecting rely on their immediate surroundings for sustenance. And how extreme events effect these people will likely tell us how they will in turn use those local resources (in many cases, such as around Mt. Kenya, for their survival). By planning for these events and the ramifications on both nature and people, the effects can be at least reduced or muted.

To that end, many Conservancy projects have indirect benefits to people; but not many plan for direct ones. One example of direct benefits to people is grassbanking – the setting aside of land that can be used for grazing livestock in the event of an extreme drought. It’s simple and effective, and something the Conservancy has done in areas such as Montana, and in Kenya, with our partners at the Northern Rangelands Trust (http://northernrangelands.wildlifedirect.org/) where the grassbanks are being put to good use right now – helping both wildlife and people get through the current drought. And this grassbanking in Kenya has helped reduce pressure on protected areas and keep many more people off of Mt Kenya.

We will get droughts, or floods, or extremes of some sort or another — and people, especially those in poorer areas and countries, will turn to nature to help them through those tough times. We should make sure that nature is resilient enough not only to endure these extreme events, but also the pressures that will be brought to bear by local people — especially when those people’s very survival is at stake.

(Image courtesy Timothy Boucher/TNC.)

In August, we blogged here on the extraordinary cross-country bike journey of Nathan Winters (AKA, “Follow Nathan”) to raise money for The Nature Conservancy and raise awareness for climate change and sustainable agriculture. At that point, Nathan had just crossed the Wisconsin-Minnesota border, halfway through his journey from Maine to Washington State — a trek tracked by thousands through Nathan’s website and his multiple daily tweets.

We’re now thrilled to report that Nathan completed his ride (a ride, BTW, that he began with absolutely no bike touring experience) last month — tired, of course, but glowing with the knowledge of having done a great and extraordinary thing. He was gracious enough to respond to a few questions about the trip and what’s next for him:

*****

Cool Green Science: How many days and how many miles did you end up riding, and where did you finish up?

Nathan Winters: I was on the road for a wonderful and thrilling 145 days over a course of 4,300 miles. The journey ended in beautiful Bellingham, Washington on October 2.

Cool Green Science: Describe the finish and what happened.

Nathan: On the outside it was fairly calm. Essentially I celebrated alone as I dipped my tire in the Bellingham harbor. On the inside, I was a huge dance party. I had so many different ranges of emotions that I was going through. The overwhelming support of my followers online was also very touching.

Cool Green Science: What was more difficult about the ride than you expected? What was less difficult?

Nathan: Hands down the wind. Before I had left, I had many people warn me that going east to west was a big mistake. And while this decision certainly made things a bit more difficult… I wouldn’t change it for the world. As for less difficult, in my honest opinion I thought it would be a bit more challenging to climb the Continental Divide. Don’t get me wrong — this was no easy task. But I think that my mental preparation had a way of alleviating the strain. There would be hills in Ithaca that would prove to be more difficult. My guess: It all boiled down to mental preparation.

Cool Green Science: What were the best experiences of the ride?

Nathan: I really enjoyed getting know people in their communities. So many times we travel by plane or car and we never actually take the time to understand what is happening in a particular area. Communities such as Ithaca and Ann Arbor were geared passionately towards environmental stewardship and sustainable living practices. My theory is that the combination of academia and honest community members creates a lubricant to maintain such a vibrant community-wide effort.

I also came to understand and witness countless people doing great things in their communities all over America. Despite all of the negative talk you see and hear in the mainstream news outlets, America is still the kind of place where you can ask a complete stranger for help and you will find an answer. With or without the swine flu and an economic recession. America is still a place we can all be proud of.

Cool Green Science: Did you come to understand any conservation issues better through your journey?

Nathan: One situation that dealt with conservation issues in depth was in the Adirondacks. It is a very complex and unique situation over there.  Specifically, I found a great struggle between public and private land. Currently, there is a great tension over the possible development of a ski resort in Tupper Lake which could be a huge lift on the local economy — however, there would be catastrophic environmental drawbacks. The struggle between the conservation groups, local people, economy and politics was so evident that you could feel the tension without hearing any words.

Cool Green Science: What was the strangest thing that happened on the ride?

Nathan: You will have to read my upcoming book! I will say that I had a plethora of “strange encounters.” That is what happens when you ride a bike from Maine to Washington.

Cool Green Science: How do you feel now that it’s over?

Nathan: The fact that I accomplished my goal, lived out my dream and gave back to a wonderful organization was and still is an amazing feeling. I feel fantastic. I am in a physical and mental adjustment period. But again… I feel fantastic.

Cool Green Science: What’s next for you?

Nathan: I am currently living in rural Vermont where I am adventurously reliving my journey through a book I am writing. I am currently deep into this endeavor and I will be working hard to get my work published. I am also looking for part-time work with a environmental difference-maker to keep me going.

(Images courtesy Nathan Winters.)

1. The Daily Green weighs in on the “real vs. artificial” Christmas tree debate. Is it really that time of the year already?
2. There’s a green building boom underway in post-Katrina New Orleans, reports Bright Green Blog.  Within the next few years, the city will welcome LEED-certified schools, community centers and homes, as well as America’s first LEED platinum certified apartment building, which will be reserved for low-income residents.
3. Do we all need to become vegetarians to battle climate change? According to this Science Channel post, it would probably help, but it doesn’t sound like we’ll be collectively giving up our steaks and cheeseburgers anytime soon.
4. Want a job in 10 years? (I know I do!)  Then we all better get on board with climate legislation right now, says The Daily Green.
5. The U.K. wastes about $20 billion worth of food every year, reports Treehugger.  As if the price tag wasn’t scary enough, that wasted food also equals 22 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions.