Thanks to Brad Plumer at Vox, I noticed a valuable debate between energy advisors to the presidential campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump: The event, hosted by the University of Richmond School of Law, featured Trevor Houser, an energy and environment analyst at the Rhodium Group who's been working with the Clinton campaign, and Representative Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, an early Trump supporter from a state awash in fossil fuels.
UPDATE, 6:40 p.m. - Several new voices added below.] This post is a quick ode to the value of monitoring, an unheralded and faltering enterprise in the United States (and elsewhere). It is also a cautionary note about more such flooding on the way, even as the United States - like some other countries - continues to encourage development in areas known to be inundated on occasion.
Pushing the frontiers of science on tough questions is hard enough. But doing so when the effort requires research teams to face deadly hazards at the ends of the Earth takes things to another level.
As I watched TV reports showing wind-driven waters sloshing over the floodwalls in several spots around New Orleans today, from a hurricane whose highest surge missed the city, and as I read John Schwartz's sobering report from the Army Corps of Engineers war room, I couldn't help returning to a question that has dogged me since I wrote about the swamping of that storied city in 2005 by Hurricane Katrina - which, like Gustav, was not even close to a worst-case storm.
Scientific analysis pointing to a human role in warming the climate through burning fossil fuels goes back to 1896, with Svante Arrhenius's remarkable paper, " On the Influence of Carbonic Acid [Carbon Dioxide] in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground."
With three presidential debates and one for vice president behind us, David Leonhardt posted a helpful tally of debate questions - decrying the lack of a single question on one of the key issues facing humanity in this century and beyond: human-driven climate change.
By Andrew C. RevkinOctober 2016 My reporting career has taken me from smoldering, fresh-cut roadsides in the Amazon rain forest to the thinning sea ice around the North Pole, from the White House and Vatican to Nairobi's vast, still-unlit slums. Throughout most of it, I thought I was writing about environmental and social problems and solutions.
Geoengineering is in the wind more and more these days, particularly the use of sun-blocking aerosols as a cheap, temporary counterweight to greenhouse-gas-driven global warming. In pondering the plausibility or desirability of such a tool, it might be useful to start with a thought experiment: 1) Suppose humans are not heating the climate and oceans through the buildup of heat-trapping carbon dioxide.
Tracking recent headlines, you might think the world is finally on a path toward controlling global warming. On Saturday, diplomats announced a new international agreement aimed at phasing out a family of climate-warming compounds called hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs.
John Mashey, a self-described " ancient UNIX person" who worked at Bell Labs from 1973 to 1983, posted some thoughts about how the labs shaped R and D efforts and investment to raise the odds of breakthroughs that could improve society. They had a coding system - including R2, D2 - that Mr. Mashey describes below.
Muck Rack makes it simple to find people, tweets, or articles that mention any name, keyword, company, hashtag etc. We've compiled this guide to help you make the most of your search.
Selecting a term
Start searching tweets, articles from media outlets, articles mentioned in tweets, journalists'
names, titles and bios with some suggested searches:
Companies or Topics (e.g. iPhone, Microsoft)
Phrases (e.g. "cloud computing") — use quotes to keep the terms together
Twitter handles (e.g. @username) — returns those who have mentioned or replied to
Names (e.g. "David Pogue")
Hashtags (e.g. #sxsw, #london2012)
Bio details (e.g. vegan, Olympics, father)
Muck Rack's Advanced Search allows for many boolean operators.
Find results that mention multiple specified terms, use AND or
+. For example, ensure each result contains both Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg by
searching Obama AND Romney or Obama + Romney.
Use the operators OR or , to broaden your search when you'd like either of
multiple terms to appear in results. (This is the default behavior of our search when no operators
are used.) For example, search for democrat OR republican to find results that refer to
Democrats and/or Republicans.
Use NOT or - to subtract results from your search. For
example, searching Disney will yield results about the Walt Disney Company as well as Walt Disney
World Resort. To exclude mentions of Disney World, search for Disney -World or Disney
When using one of these operators with a phrase, enclose it in quotation marks. For example, you can
find results about smartphones excluding Apple's iPhone 4S by searching smartphone -"iPhone
Use parentheses to separate multiple
boolean phrases. For example, to find journalists talking about having fun in Disney World or
Disneyland, search for ("disney world" OR disneyland) AND fun.
An asterisk can be used to search for any variation of a root word truncated by the asterisk. For example, searching for admin* will return results for administrator, administration, administer, administered, etc.
A near operator is an AND operator where you can control the distance between the words. You can vary the distance the near operation uses by adding a forward slash and number (between 0-99) such as strawberries NEAR/10 "whipped cream", which means the strawberries must exist within 10 words of "whipped cream".