Another Example of “The Nature Effect”

Posted by on

Andy Revkin, on his blog and in the newspaper, has another case study of the distorting effect of Nature and suchlike A-list scientific publications.

Let’s say our study suggests climate change is driving some rare and charismatic toad to extinction. We’re in Nature! Journalists will write about us in the New York Times etc. The story has legs.

Let’s say we think it’s something else, not climate, that’s responsible. Our paper is not in Nature, because it’s too pedestrian.

To the extent that Nature and Science go for the sexy story line in their choice of papers, and in addition to the extent that journalists (myself included) allow Nature and Science to set our agenda, the public is fundamentally misled.

Yet Another Thing the IPCC Gets Wrong

Posted by on

A new paper by Maximilian Auffhammera and Richard T. Carson suggests that China’s greenhouse gas emissions are rising much more quickly than presumed in the IPCC’s emissions scenarios. A reminder that

  • The IPCC’s “mistakes” don’t all break in one direction. The common rhetorical conception has the IPCC’s errors uniformly overstating the effects of greenhouse emissions and climate change, but this one has rather the opposite effect.
  • Economists are good for something, despite what some might say.

(h/t Tim Haab)

Water in the Desert: Fish Edition

Posted by on


Water in the Desert

Originally uploaded by heinemanfleck.

Took the family (Mom, Dad and Lissa) to the Rio Grande Nature Center to see the new fish channel they dug for the Rio Grande silvery minnow. I went out Monday for the newspaper as they let the first water in, and wanted to go back to see it with water now flowing the full length.

It’s lovely, but I say so with reservations. It’s funded by money intended to help protect the minnow, which is an endangered species. The problem with this approach is that the minnow’s endangerment is an indicator of broader problems, but rather than address those broader problems (or simply accept them as unsolvable, another option available to the political and policy process), we’re devoting enormous resources in a very fish-specific way. That said, the folks involved in the fish rescue effort are terrific, motivated, interesting people, and their projects are exciting.

In this case, it involves bringing water back into the riverside woods, something that hasn’t happened for decades. Back in the day, flood stage would bring water through the trees all the time. Now, we have to dig a ditch for it.

But that’s all highbrow intellect and complex environmental ethics. Bottom line – water in the bosque, a cool thing, if you’re in Albuquerque you’ve got to go see it.

View Larger Map

Concrete and Water

Posted by on

Devil's Gate before the damConcrete is increasingly sounding old school. The idea makes sense: build a concrete channel through your city, to get the water as quickly as possible from the mountains to the sea, minimizing the mischief it can do in the interim. But such engineering efficiency comes with a cost, as the folks in Pasadena, Calif., (where I first wrote about water a couple of decades ago) are finding out (story from the Pasadena Weekly):

Restoring water courses to a more natural state, said Kwan, will allow more water to percolate into the ground rather than flow into the Los Angeles River and spill into the Pacific Ocean.

(h/t aquafornia, Wikipedia picture of the old Devil’s Gate area in Pasadena’s Arroyo Seco prior to all the concrete)

The Water-Energy Nexus

Posted by on

The water-energy interface is a problem area. Energy production requires water. Water production requires energy. We don’t have enough of either, which is the makings of a serious problem.

There’s a nice summary of the issue in the March 20 Nature, by Mike Hightower and Suzanne Pierce from Sandia Labs. Nature makes you pay, but the Sandia folks have written a more detailed analysis, which you can find here for free.

I’ll have more in tomorrow’s newspaper, to which I’ll link as soon as it’s up.

Drought in Israel

Posted by on

A story out of Jerusalem about drought in Israel reminds that the place labels change, but the themes remain:

Israel’s water problem stems from population growth and an improvement in quality of life that brings a greater desire to water lawns and gardens, Schor said. This winter was the fourth that Israel got less than average rain, with only about 50-60 percent of the average in most areas, he said.

Critics of government policy note that agriculture uses a large proportion of Israel’s water, receiving heavily subsidized water rates. Since Israel in any event does not grow much of the food it needs, they say, irrigation for farming should be drastically curtailed.

The Winters Wild Card

Posted by on

The U.S. Supreme Court’s “Winters” decision a century ago essentially says native Americans are entitled to the water they need. But “need” here is a pretty squishy thing, and we’re still sort out its implications. Matt Jenkins has a terrific piece in the latest High Country News about the Navajo piece of this puzzle – incredibly insightful in the areas I know a lot about, but also incredibly informative in areas I was not familiar with. Jenkins’ discussions of the differences within the Navajo community about how aggressive to be, and how much water to go after, are fascinating.

Michael Campana has a nice summary, with commentary.