In a sure sign that climate change is no longer a left vs. right issue, the WSJ has launched an environmental blog called Environmental Capital to cover the global economic impact and response to warming and energy issues.

While I disagree with virtually every editorial position the Journal takes on climate change (a few days ago one editorial referred to those of us working on climate issues as ‘warmists’!), they have, paradoxically, had some of best coverage of energy, sustainability and carbon emissions. The blog is yet another example of how this situation has major implications for businesses large and small- it is the classic opportunity shrouded in a crisis.

When we moved over to WordPress a few months ago we arbitrarily chose a template, thinking we’d quickly move to something better. Today we finally changed, fixing some of the usability issues inherent in the last one. One of the great things about WordPress is the flexibility it offers- tons of plug-ins that make it easy to customize a template design and add functionality.

One thing I get asked is where the name came from. Burner Trouble was the title of an unpublished novel I wrote that imagined a group of people living in a post-warming climate on the fringes of a flooded city.  ‘Burner trouble’ was their slang for what happened as in ‘we had burner trouble and things got hot’.

The book was an exercise in imagining what that life might be like. The reality soon overwhelmed the fictional version as a subject of interest to me- hence this blog.

I’ve been looking at the hot button issues for blogs like this one for the coming year- not predictions but rather the stories that are unfolding right now, at the beginning of the year. When I started this blog a few years ago there was some debate about warming but the effects and proposed solutions were not totally clear. Now we’re seeing direct effects almost daily around the globe and starting to understand that dealing with this disaster is a global economic challenge rather than a political one. This hodgepodge of stories supports this contention:

• Switchgrass ethanol study shows that this source returns 540% of the energy required to grow and refine it. Corn returns something like 50%. Corn ethanol is not viable.
• The introduction of the $2500 Nano car in India and other emerging economies is going to have a profoundly negative effect of energy prices and generate enormous new emissions as the number of cars on the planet explodes.
• We’re using 2.9 million barrels of oil per day more than 6 years ago, globally. If you think oil at $100 is a story, think about oil at $200. When demand goes up and supply goes down, prices skyrocket.
• Automotive technology is poised for an explosion of innovation this year with the Tesla electric sports car, fuel cells, new biological hydrogen extraction techniques, highly efficient hybrids and plug-in hybrids and more. What does this tell us? That the conspiracy theories of the past that said oil and car companies were killing and/or stifling innovation were true- this stuff didn’t just appear out of thin air.
• Greenland Ice Sheet Scares the Crap Out of Climate Scientists. We’ll be watching the ice globally this year, especially in Grenland where the volume of water held in stasis by the ice sheet is equivalent to the entire Gulf of Mexico (!). Estimates for ocean rise by 2050 due to rapidly accelerating melting and calving of the ice sheet range from 2-6 meters. Goodbye virtually every coastal city worldwide including our nation’s capitol (anyone remember the flooded national Mall last year, New York’s subway floods and the ongoing national shame of Katrina?)
• The weather. It’s impossible to describe how big this story is. Here in Rochester, NY, the famously chilly winter upstate area was 70 degrees earlier this week, breaking all records. Killer tornados in the midwest in January, winter storms with CAT 4 winds (140 mph+) in the Pacific Northwest. Droughts in the southwest and southeast with no reserve water supplies. That’s just this week, folks.
• Water, water, nowhere. Only 1 in 500 Chinese have free access to potable drinking water. In much of the world it is worse. Yes, they have to buy drinking water and it’s not cheap. Repercussions of water issues cross all geographic and economic boundaries.
• Carbon costs. We’re going to have to start measuring the carbon costs of virtually all of our activities and products if we’re going to startle people into awareness of how their own actions are worsening the problem of climate change. I’m not buying organic milk that is shipped across the country when I can get local milk for half the price, dollars and carbon-wise. Look at what you buy and how far it came to get to you. And don’t forget the packaging.
• Freegan culture and the Chinese product backlash. Because of the Chinese toy scandals a lot of parents who don’t have time to worry about environmental issues are questioning the provenance of the products they buy and the immediate response is ‘I’m not buying Chinese’. A secondary response is the rise of freegan culture that says ‘I’m not buying things I don’t need and when I do need something I’m going to look for used or free stuff’. You don’t have to dumpster dive, there’s a huge thrift shop culture out there. Do you really need a new blender when your neighborhood Goodwill probably has ten perfectly good ones for a buck or two?
• Home and automotive energy costs crush economy by limiting disposable income. We’re paying five times as much as ten years ago for heat/AC and gas, yet incomes have not risen much. When you take $300-400 more out of a typical family’s monthly budget because of energy costs that money does not flow into the economy.

These stories are just the ones at the top of my awareness today. There are dozens more, so many in fact, that it is daunting to even write a quirky blog about climate change- it is overwhelming in the reach and impact it already has. Nevertheless I’ll be at it again in 2008.

Imagine a plan that charges polluters and puts that money into our pockets. Peter Barnes of Working Assets did:

“The simplest and fairest way to protect the poor and middle class is to give equal rebates to everyone. The money would come from either a carbon tax, or an auction of carbon emission permits…. Just as every Alaska resident receives an equal dividend from revenue from state oil leases, so every American would get an equal dividend from carbon permit auctions. The dividends would be wired monthly into people’s bank accounts, much like Social Security payments. They’d help families pay their monthly bills.

There are several nice features of such a plan. One is that it’s automatic — as energy prices rise, so do dividends. Another is that how you fare depends on what you do. The more energy you use, the more you pay. Since everyone gets the same amount back, you gain if you conserve and lose if you guzzle. This is fair to everyone, whether rich or poor. And it takes politicians off the hook for rising energy prices. If voters complain, politicians can truthfully say, “The market sets prices, and you determine by your own energy use whether you gain or lose. If you conserve, you come out ahead.”

The NYTimes DotEarth blog has an interview detailing this provocative approach to carbon caps.

Sign me up.