HANSEN, James

===this seems short? lost?

punkd by shillenberger?

=<p style="orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; widows: 2; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">10/10 vid <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_NClASd4fQ">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_NClASd4fQ</a><p style="font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=<p style="font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">new
HANSEN PIVOTAL WATERSHED, CENSOR SUNUNI B41:<a href="https://www.npr.org/transcripts/710992579">https://www.npr.org/transcripts/710992579</a>apr 2019<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">This is FRESH AIR. I'm Terry Gross. As we deal with more extreme weather around the world and hear more dire reports about the future impact of climate change, you have to wonder, why didn't we succeed in taking preventive measures sooner, before things had progressed? That's one of the key questions my guest Nathaniel Rich tries to answer in his new book, "Losing Earth: A Recent History." It's an expanded version of his report that the New York Times magazine devoted an entire issue to last August.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">He focuses on the period from 1979 to '89, a period he describes as a time before the fossil fuel industry funded scientists to create doubt about the science of climate change and before the Republican Party adopted climate denialism as a central tenet. He focuses on the scientists, activists and political leaders who pushed for measures to limit carbon emissions and the political and corporate leaders who blocked them. We're also going to talk about where we are now with a president who doubts the science and a growing movement of young people insisting on action reversing the path we're on.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Nathaniel Rich, welcome to FRESH AIR. How much worse has the climate change problem gotten since your book ends in 1989?<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">NATHANIEL RICH: More carbon dioxide has been emitted into the atmosphere since the final page of the book basically, since the end of 1989, than in the history of civilization preceding it. So it's gotten a lot worse. Obviously, the political situation's gotten a lot worse as well. It's become a starkly partisan issue. I don't have to tell anyone that. And it seems like we are much further from a solution than we were 30 years ago.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: You write that, now, a long-term disaster is the best-case scenario. Would you explain that?<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">RICH: Yeah. Well, a certain amount of warming is baked in. And that's, you know, referring to some of the projections about 1 1/2 or 2 degrees Celsius warming above historical means, and there's all kinds of horrific scenarios that come with that. Of course, that's not nearly as bad as, you know, 3 degrees or 4 degrees or 5 degrees warming. But even when we talk about it in those terms, in sort of half degrees or full degrees warming, it's almost euphemistic because there's there's such dramatic differences even between, you know, 2 degrees and 2.1 degrees, 2.1 degrees and 2.2 degrees.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">And I think one of the lies, sort of convenient dishonesties we have about the issue, one of the more benign ones, I guess, is that we think of it almost, like, in Hollywood terms, like, either we're going to win this thing, or we're going to suffer a crushing defeat. But of course, there's a huge range of outcomes in between. And at this point - yeah - where we're at, ranging from the not very good to the apocalyptic, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to better our situation as much as possible.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: Is there a moment when you think we came really close to seriously cutting back on the carbon emissions that are responsible for climate change during the period that you write about, '79 to '89?<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">RICH: Absolutely. From from '79 to '89, there are a series of efforts, escalating efforts, to first bring the issue to the attention of the powers that be, people at the highest levels of the federal government, and then to bring it to the public to generate public concern. And finally, in the middle of the decade, a solution materializes, which is a global treaty to reduce emissions that would be binding. And it's modeled after the ozone treaty that's then in process.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">And by the end of the decade, we've reached the point of high-level diplomatic meetings to negotiate this binding global treaty. And we get to the precipice of an agreement on the framework of this treaty. And at the very last second, the U.S. pulls out, the story I tell in the book.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">And so I think that, at least on paper, that's the closest we've come. I think you could have a reasonable, you know, debate about whether or not, if the U.S. did sign the treaty, they would have lived up - we would've lived up to the terms of it, whether other countries would have lived up to the terms of it even if it was binding. And that's a more, you know, complicated conversation to have. I think, at the very least, we'd be a lot further ahead than we are now. That seems indisputable.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: So what year did the U.S. pull out of this treaty? Who is the president, and why did we pull out?<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">RICH: So it's 1989. President is George H.W. Bush. And the previous summer, James Hansen, a NASA scientist who had become essentially the face of climate science, gave testimony before Congress in which he said, global warming is here. It's no longer a theory. We're seeing evidence of warming in global temperatures. It was the hottest summer in American history at the time.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">And the story became a - it became a major public national story and to the point that even George Bush on the campaign stump gave speeches about it, was making promises that, as president, he would solve the problem then called the greenhouse effect as well. And he said, you know, those who think we can't solve the greenhouse effect haven't heard about the White House effect. And when I'm in the White House, you know, we'll solve it. And he gets to the White House.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">James Baker, who's the new secretary of state, in his first major speech at the State Department, he invites the IPCC, the international organization under the auspices of the United Nations that's drafting - begins drafting a treaty. They have one of their first meetings at the State Department. And he endorses this program. And over the course of the year, you get to a meeting in Noordwijk in the Netherlands, a kind of coastal town on the North Sea.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">That's the first high-level diplomatic meeting of - it's of environmental ministers from all over the world. Sixty-five countries or so come there. And there's a general sense that everyone's going to sign essentially a letter of intent that they will pursue a binding treaty to reduce global emissions. And at that meeting, the U.S. pulls out.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">And the reason, at least the narrow political reason for that, is that over the course of that year, there had been a huge fight within the administration between William Riley, the head of Bush's EPA, and John Sununu, his chief of staff. And Sununu was highly skeptical of the science and suspicious of the motives of this treaty. And he was ultimately more powerful and won the argument, essentially, and was able to force the U.S. delegation to not accept anything that was binding. And at that point, the treaty became watered down.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: Do you think that some of these treaties are almost like masquerades where countries show up, and they look really great - like, we're going to do it - we're going to sign it - and then, at the last minute, you pull out? Like, it's almost like a game of chicken. Like, nobody really wants to do it, but everybody's waiting for somebody else to pull out - that no one really has the political will to make the sacrifices that need to be made.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">RICH: Yeah. That's John Sununu's argument, basically. I spoke to him at length for the book. And he said, listen - I mean, he's totally unapologetic about his role in this. And I said, you know, do you claim responsibility for thwarting (laughter) any chance of a solution on this? And he said, I - essentially, he said, I wish I could. But in fact, I felt that we were the only honest brokers at the table and that the other countries weren't serious - that even though it was, you know, a quote, "binding agreement," essentially, what - you know, what's the country going to do if someone doesn't hit their targets? Are they going to bomb them? You know, are they going to have economic sanctions? I mean, of course not.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">And in fact, the leader of the delegation, Allan Bromley, who was Bush's science adviser and was kind of Sununu's man in Noordwijk - he wrote a memoir in which he essentially said the same thing, that he said that - in conversations with other delegates, other environmental ministers - at Noordwijk, he asked them, you know, how are you going to hit these targets? Do you have plans, you know, to reduce emissions by 20 percent or whatever by a certain year? And they would say - a couple of them told him, well, no, but it's just a piece of paper. And, you know, no one's going to send us to jail.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">And so I think, yes, it's - I think you have to take seriously that kind of cynical view.And I think you can't really take seriously Sununu's scientific opinions on this matter. But I think you can take seriously his skepticism about the power of these treaties.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: Let me reintroduce you here. If you're just joining us, my guest is Nathaniel Rich. He's the author of the new book, "Losing Earth: A Recent History." We're going to take a short break here, and then we'll talk some more about climate change and why we haven't made more progress than we have. We'll be right back. This is FRESH AIR.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: This is FRESH AIR. Let's get back to my interview with Nathaniel Rich, author of the new book "Losing Earth: A Recent History." It's about climate change and why we failed to solve the problem when we had the chance. The book focuses on 1979 to '89, looking at the scientists, politicians and the oil industry, the people who were leading the efforts to change and the people who were blocking them.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">You said in an interview that you spent an enormous amount of time researching the oil industry and their efforts in blocking the efforts to curb carbon emissions. And you also said that it actually plays a very little part in your book. (Laughter) You didn't use much of your research. So why is that?<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">RICH: The industry has been following this issue for a long time. You know, there are studies from Exxon or even Humble Oil - the predecessor to Exxon - going back into the mid-1950s. And even then, those studies were not about whether or not this was happening. It was really - the question was, how much of the added CO2 in the atmosphere was because of Exxon, basically, because of the fossil fuel industry? And they continued to monitor this over the decades. There were, you know, occasional sort of CO2 working groups, study groups. This was going on, also, at the American Petroleum Institute - the big trade group for the oil and gas industry - and at some of the other companies.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">And those efforts continued through the '80s. But it was never - during that decade - obviously, things have changed quite dramatically - but during that decade, it was never a high priority. And I spoke with a lot of people who worked in the industry during that time and people at the highest levels of API. And they really weren't concerned about it, in part because there was no serious efforts in D.C. to pass, you know, laws or policies to reduce emissions.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">And it wasn't really until Hansen - James Hansen, the NASA scientist - spoke before Congress in '88 and generated a huge - sort of huge national headlines that they started to worry. And the story of how they began to mobilize this multidecadal effort to sow propaganda, disinformation, to buy off politicians and scientists and, ultimately, to convert an entire political party to denialism is - the seeds of that you see emerging in the weeks and months after the Hansen hearing. But before that, it was really on the back burner.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: So let's talk about how the oil industry's lobbying efforts changed at the end of the '80s, where your book ends. You write about how the American Petroleum Institute started funding a lobbying group. They formed the lobbying organization the Global Climate Coalition. And what did this lobbying group do to mobilize public opinion to be skeptical of climate science?<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">RICH: Yeah, it's sort of a remarkable turn of events in that after Hansen's hearing, there are these high-level conversations at the American Petroleum Institute and at Exxon about, essentially, what do we do about this? It seems clear that regulation is coming. You know, George Bush is talking about it, and so on.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">And they essentially reached the same conclusions. They - Exxon and API - they say, we need to be an active participant in any kind of policy discussion. We need to burnish our credentials as, you know, scientific experts on the subject, so we have credibility in it. We need to make sure that the science - that the policy doesn't extend beyond what the science says. Emphasize uncertainty where it exists. That would become, you know, crucial later on. And then, perhaps most important, don't accept any policy that will hurt the bottom line. That's the beginning of it.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">And then, as almost an afterthought at the time, API, through its press office, which is coordinating the press for this industry group Global Climate Coalition, starts to reach out to a couple of scientists who are friendly with the industry who have expressed some doubt about either the ozone or CO2. And they start encouraging them to speak to the press. Sometimes that encouragement takes the form of payouts. The head of the API program told me they gave $2,000 to a scientist whenever he wrote an op-ed for a national publication. And that is almost an afterthought at the time. It's pretty low on the totem pole of what they're doing. They're also meeting with congressmen and so on.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">But it pays enormous dividends because all of a sudden, national news publications start quoting these scientists - and it's really a handful of people, four or five people - over and over again. And an issue that to this point has been a story about, you know, fear of what's going to happen, all of a sudden has two sides. And of course, that's like catnip, (laughter), for journalists. And all of a sudden, you have a number of pieces that start to appear that say maybe there's not scientific consensus about this problem.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: Right. But generating controversy around climate change, where, it sounds like before, it wasn't - there weren't people denying it. There were people saying - based on your research, there were people saying, well, we don't really know for sure how bad things are going to be. Do we really want to risk the economy over science that's not kind of nailed down yet? We don't know what the consequences will be or when they'll be, exactly, so let's kind of keep the status quo as long as we can.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">So it goes from that to, like, the whole notion of climate change is controversial. There's two sides. So is that, like, one of the innovations of the late '80s, making it, like, controversial with two sides and one of the sides saying this science really might not be true at all?<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">RICH: Yeah. Exactly. And it starts almost tentatively. It starts with saying, well, it's not as certain as we think, as people say, as James Hansen says it is. There's problems with the climate models, the computer models that, you know, Hansen uses. And then it goes into, we really don't know what, you know, the regional effects will be. And it grows and grows. It's almost like they're encouraged by their success, and they become more and more brazen. And then ultimately, you get, after a number of years, into the '90s, you get into this bizarro universe where, all of a sudden, they're questioning the basic fundamental science itself. And of course, that science goes back not to just 1979 but to the late 19th century about, you know, what's the effect of pumping a bunch of CO2 into the atmosphere and what warming will that cause?<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">And so it's - we've entered this weird funhouse realm where now, if you jump ahead to the present day, you have a political party, the only major political party in the world, that endorses a position that's essentially to the right, even, of what the industry now says in their public statements. You know, Exxon publicly today doesn't deny climate change, but you have a party that does. And so it's - I think it's something that future historians will spend a lot of time piecing out, is how this sort of little lie grew into a big lie and overwhelmed our politics.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: Do you think it's fair to say that the fossil fuel industry invented the idea of climate denial?<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">RICH: Yeah. I think that's fair to say.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: OK. This is interesting. You say that the industry, the fossil fuel industry, saw an upside to the warming trends of climate change. What was the upside for them?<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">RICH: Well, there are a few. I mean, drilling in the Arctic is one of them, which you see starting to happen now.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: Drilling in the Arctic because of the permafrost melting?<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">RICH: Yeah because - yeah, the ice melting (laughter). And so that opens up shipping passages, and you can get to more oil. And of course, they were studying that back in the '80s, as well, you know, licking their chops (laughter). And but also, one of the early findings from API was that in a warmer world, you'd need more energy. Essentially, more air conditioning. And that would, you know, further industry profits.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: My guest is Nathaniel Rich, author of the new book "Losing Earth: A Recent History." We'll talk more about climate change, and what stood in the way of taking action to stop or slow it and how young activists today are redefining the issue ...<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: This is FRESH AIR. I'm Terry Gross. Let's get back to my interview with Nathaniel Rich, author of the new book "Losing Earth: A Recent History." It's about climate change and why we didn't take action sooner to stop or at least slow it. Rich examines the period from 1979 to 1989, a period he describes as a time before the fossil fuel industry funded scientists to create doubt about the science of climate change and before the Republican Party adopted climate denialism as a central tenet. He focuses on the scientists, activists and political leaders who pushed for measures to limit carbon emissions and the political and corporate leaders who blocked them.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">So we were just talking about the oil industry's role in obstructing movement forward on stopping climate change. Politicians played a strong role in this, too. One of the centerpieces of your book is the NASA scientist James Hansen testifying before Congress about carbon emissions, climate change and what we're in store for if we don't move forward. And his testimony - you can say it was suppressed. You could say it was censored. I don't know what word you want to use. But the H.W. Bush administration tried to stop him from saying what he planned on saying. Tell us who tried to do it and how.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">RICH: Yeah, this is something that had not been known. And one of the things I most wanted to figure out was that after Hansen testifies in 1988 - of course, and he's been testifying all decade - but in '88 he gets this huge amount of attention - and in 1989, he's due to go back. And this is right as negotiations are really getting started on a global treaty. And John Sununu is fighting this.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">And his testimony comes back not only with deletions but also with absurd, new language, essentially to the effect that no regulatory policy should be introduced if it at all forces the U.S. to suffer economically - of course, nothing a scientist would say in any context. And he's outraged, understandably. And he takes this testimony to Al Gore, who's then a senator and leading the hearing. And Gore calls The New York Times. And they run a huge story about it. And it becomes a major scandal. And in fact, it generates more support for climate policy than Hansen could have done by himself.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">And it had been unknown, you know, who was responsible for that? At the time, the White House claimed it was some bureaucrat five levels down from the top. I asked John Sununu if he knew anything about it. And he said, yeah, I did (laughter). I was responsible for it - that he told Richard Darman, the head of the OMB at the time, to censor it. He didn't think that Hansen's claims had merit. And he tried to stop it.<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: How much of a scientist was John Sununu?<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">RICH: He considered himself a scientist. He considered himself...<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GROSS: On what grounds? (Laughter).<p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 1.17647em; padding: 0px 15px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.70588; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 680px; position: static; float: none; width: auto;">RICH: ...An old engineer. I mean, on fairly legitimate grounds. He got a Ph.D. in - I believe in fluid [mechanical] engineering. And he had taught. And he even taught a - he taught at MIT. He even taught a class about science and public policy. And so he still - he fashioned himself, you know, an expert and smarter than any of the scientists whose work he was reviewing. And he - because he had done some computer modeling, although of a very different sort, as a Ph.D. student, he felt that that gave him the authority to say that Hansen's computer modeling about climate - extremely sophisticated computer programs that he was running - were inaccurate and bad. And that was sort of the foundation of his argument of why, you know, this climate science stuff was made up.<p style="font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=<p style="font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">new<p style="font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2475/nasa-climate-modeling-suggests-venus-may-have-been-habitable/">https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2475/nasa-climate-modeling-suggests-venus-may-have-been-habitable/</a>Venus may have had a shallow liquid-water ocean and habitable surface temperatures for up to 2 billion years of its early history, according to computer modeling of the planet’s ancient climate by scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York.The findings, published this week in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, were obtained with a model similar to the type used to predict future climate change on Earth.“Many of the same tools we use to model climate change on Earth can be adapted to study climates on other planets, both past and present,” said Michael Way, a researcher at GISS and the paper’s lead author. “These results show ancient Venus may have been a very different place than it is today.”Venus today is a hellish world. It has a crushing carbon dioxide atmosphere 90 times as thick as Earth’s. There is almost no water vapor. Temperatures reach 864 degrees Fahrenheit (462 degrees Celsius) at its surface.Scientists long have theorized that Venus formed out of ingredients similar to Earth’s, but followed a different evolutionary path. Measurements by NASA’s Pioneer mission to Venus in the 1980s first suggested Venus originally may have had an ocean. However, Venus is closer to the sun than Earth and receives far more sunlight. As a result, the planet’s early ocean evaporated, water-vapor molecules were broken apart by ultraviolet radiation, and hydrogen escaped to space. With no water left on the surface, carbon dioxide built up in the atmosphere, leading to a so-called runaway greenhouse effect that created present conditions....<p style="font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">https://yyy.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/jun/25/30-years-later-deniers-are-still-lying-about-hansens-amazing-global-warming-predictionguk many lnx
30 years later, deniers are still lying about Hansen’s amazing global warming predictionKoch paychecks seem to be strong motivators to lie
Dana Nuccitelli
Mon 25 Jun 2018 06.00 EDT Last modified on Wed 27 Jun 2018  In this May 9, 1989 file photo, Dr. James Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, testifies before a Senate Transportation subcommittee on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., a year after his history-making testimony telling the world that global warming was here and would get worse.]
Thirty years ago, James Hansen testified to Congress about the dangers of human-caused climate change. In his testimony, Hansen showed the results of his 1988 study using a climate model to project future global warming under three possible scenarios, ranging from ‘business as usual’ heavy pollution in his Scenario A to ‘draconian emissions cuts’ in Scenario C, with a moderate Scenario B in between.
Changes in the human effects that influence Earth’s global energy imbalance (a.k.a. ‘anthropogenic radiative forcings’) have in reality been closest to Hansen’s Scenario B, but about 20–30% weaker thanks to the success of the Montreal Protocol in phasing out chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). Hansen’s climate model projected that under Scenario B, global surface air temperatures would warm about 0.84°C between 1988 and 2017. But with a global energy imbalance 20–30% lower, it would have predicted a global surface warming closer to 0.6–0.7°C by this year.
The actual 1988–2017 temperature increase was about 0.6°C. Hansen’s 1988 global climate model was almost spot-on.
 Scenario B from Hansen’s 1988 paper, with the trend reduced by 27% to reflect the actual radiative forcing from 1984 to 2017, compared to global surface temperature data from Cowtan & Way.]
In the WSJ, deniers again lie about HansenThe incredible accuracy of Hansen’s climate model predictions debunks a number of climate denier myths. It shows that climate models are accurate and reliable, that global warming is proceeding as climate scientists predicted, and thus that we should probably start listening to them and take action to address the existential threat it poses.
Hansen’s predictions have thus become a target of climate denier misinformation. It began way back in 1998, when the Cato Institute’s Patrick Michaels – who has admitted that something like 40% of his salary comes from the fossil fuel industry – arguably committed perjury in testimony to Congress. Invited by Republicans to testify as the Kyoto Protocol climate agreement was in the works, Michaels was asked to evaluate how Hansen’s predictions were faring 10 years later. 
In his presentation, Michaels deleted Hansen’s Scenarios B and C – the ones closest to reality – and only showed Scenario A to make it seem as though Hansen had drastically over-predicted global warming. Deleting inconvenient data in order to fool his audience became a habit for Patrick Michaels, who quickly earned a reputation of dishonesty in the climate science world, but has nevertheless remained a favorite of oil industry and conservative media.
Last week in the Wall Street Journal, Michaels was joined by Ryan Maue in an op-ed that again grossly distorted Hansen’s 1988 paper. Maue is a young scientist with a contrarian streak who’s published some serious research on hurricanes, but since joining the Cato Institute last year, seems to have sold off his remaining credibility to the fossil fuel industry.
In their WSJ opinion piece, Michaels and Maue claimed:
Global surface temperature has not increased significantly since 2000, discounting the larger-than-usual El Niño of 2015-16. Assessed by Mr. Hansen’s model, surface temperatures are behaving as if we had capped 18 years ago the carbon-dioxide emissions responsible for the enhanced greenhouse effect.
They provided no evidence to support this claim (evidence and facts seem not to be allowed on the WSJ Opinion page), and it takes just 30 seconds to fact check. In reality, global surface temperatures have increased by about 0.35°C since 2000 – precisely in line with Hansen’s 1988 model projections, as shown above. And it’s unscientific to simply “discount” the El Niño of 2015-16, because between the years 1999 and 2014, seven were cooled by La Niña events while just four experienced an El Niño warming. Yet despite the preponderance of La Niña events, global surface temperatures still warmed 0.15°C during that time. There’s simply not an ounce of truth to Michaels’ and Maue’s central WSJ claim.
Andrew Dessler(@AndrewDessler)Dumbest sentence in WSJ oped: "Global surface temperature has not increased significantly since 2000, discounting the larger-than-usual El Niño of 2015-16." Translation: "Temperature has not increased if you omit the data showing it has increased."
June 22, 2018It’s also worth noting that Hansen’s 1988 paper accurately predicted the geographic pattern of global warming, with the Arctic region warming fastest and more warming over land masses than the oceans. And climate deniers in the 1980s like Richard Lindzen were predicting “that the likelihood over the next century of greenhouse warming reaching magnitudes comparable to natural variability seems small.” If anyone deserves criticism for inaccurate climate predictions, it’s deniers like Lindzen who thought there wouldn’t be any significant warming, when in reality we’ve seen the dramatic global warming that James Hansen predicted.
Michaels’ and Maue’s misinformation didn’t stop there:And it isn’t just Mr. Hansen who got it wrong. Models devised by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have, on average, predicted about twice as much warming as has been observed since global satellite temperature monitoring began 40 years ago.
Once again, this unsupported assertion is completely wrong. I evaluated the IPCC’s global warming projections in my book, and showed in detail that theirs have been among the most accurate predictions. The climate model temperature projections in the 1990, 1995, 2001, and 2007 IPCC reports were all remarkably accurate; the IPCC predicted global warming almost exactly right.
Why lie? To keep cashing Koch paychecksWe don’t even have to guess at the motivation behind Michaels’ and Maue’s misinformation; they give it away toward the end of their opinion piece, asking:Why should people world-wide pay drastic costs to cut emissions when the global temperature is acting as if those cuts have already been made?Michaels and Maue don’t want us to cut carbon pollution, and it’s easy to understand why. They work for the Cato Institute, which was co-founded by and is heavily controlled by the Koch brothers, who have donated more than $30 million to Cato. As Michaels admitted, they’re basically fossil fuel industry employees.
But the answers to their question are simple. As climate scientists have predicted for decades, global temperatures are rising dangerously rapidly. Moreover, research has shown that the economic benefits of cutting carbon pollution far outweigh the costs.
Michaels and Maue want us to bet the future of all life on Earth. They want us to put all our chips on black – a bet that burning billions of barrels of oil and billions of tons of coal every year won’t cause dangerous climate change. They want us to make that bet even though their arguments are based on unsupported lies, whilst they cash paychecks from the Koch brothers.
We would have to be incredible suckers to take their bet.<p style="font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">==

<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/james-hansen-climate-lawsuit-2461920577.html">https://www.ecowatch.com/james-hansen-climate-lawsuit-2461920577.html</a>

==

==

<a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/25042016/warren-buffett-berkshire-hathaway-climate-change-renewable-energy-solar-fossil-fuels-coal-bnsf">http://insideclimatenews.org/news/25042016/warren-buffett-berkshire-hathaway-climate-change-renewable-energy-solar-fossil-fuels-coal-bnsf</a>

===OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST?

The youth petitioners first requested the state initiate greenhouse gas rulemaking procedures in June 2014. The state refused to do so in August of the same year. The youth appealed that refusal last September, and in a June 2015 decision highlighting the urgency of the climate crisis, the judge ordered the state to reconsider the youth’s petition taking into account current climate science.

Then, in July 2015, the youth plaintiffs met with Gov. Inslee to plead their case personally. Just 11 days later, Gov. Inslee ordered the Department of Ecology to institute greenhouse gas rulemaking, as the youth had requested for more than a year. In August 2015, the Department of Ecology again refused the youths’ request for a science-based rulemaking because they had initiated similar rulemaking at Gov. Inslee’s request. Because the Department of Ecology also rejected the youths’ constitutional and public trust rights, the case, resulting in this decision,<a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/11/04/demand-healthy-environment/" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear 0s;">was argued in front of Judge Hollis Hill</a> on Nov. 3, 2015.

“In this important ruling, Judge Hill has made it very clear what [the Department of] Ecology must do when promulgating the Clean Air Rule: preserve, protect and enhance air quality for present and future generations and uphold the constitutional rights of these young people,” said Western Environmental Law Center attorney Andrea Rodgers. “We will hold Ecology accountable every step of the way to make sure that Judge Hill’s powerful words are put into action. This is a huge victory for our children and for the climate movement. To Gov. Inslee, we hope you take this <a href="http://ecowatch.com/cop21/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear 0s; background: transparent;">message with you to Paris</a> and heed Judge Hill’s finding that ‘if ever there were a time to recognize through action this right to preservation of a healthful and pleasant environment, the time is now.’”

This case is one of several similar state and international cases, all supported by Our Children’s Trust, seeking the legal right to a healthy atmosphere and stable climate. Cases brought by youth to protect the atmosphere are pending before trial judges in North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Colorado, and before appellate courts in Massachusetts and Oregon.

Significantly, similar legal issues are being considered in a federal <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/08/13/youth-file-climate-lawsuit/" style="background: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear 0s;">lawsuit brought in August 2015</a> against the federal government by 21 young people from across the U.S. and Dr. James Hansen as guardian for all future generations, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. Just last week in that case, the world’s largest fossil fuel industry representatives <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/11/13/our-childrens-trust-climate-lawsuit/" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear 0s;">filed a request to intervene</a> to protect their commercial economic interests in fossil fuel exploitation and to thwart the youth’s request for protection of their fundamental constitutional rights. The proposed intervenors, the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (representing members <a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=exxon" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear 0s;">ExxonMobil</a>, BP, Shell, <a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=koch" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear 0s;">Koch</a> Industries and virtually all other major refiners and petrochemical manufacturers), the American Petroleum Institute (representing 625 oil and natural gas companies) and the National Association of Manufacturers, called the youth’s case “a direct threat to [their] businesses.”

<div>

</div>

==

fee and dividend; <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-james-hansen/the-american-party_b_3358546.html?view=print&comm_ref=false">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-james-hansen/the-american-party_b_3358546.html?view=print&comm_ref=false</a> hansen

==

grist; swiftboating : I don’t know how NASA’s James Hansen keeps up his pace of writing — or how he puts up with the steady stream of disinformation launched against him. I am not trying to create a <a href="http://fergusbrown.wordpress.com/2007/10/02/go-and-read-another-blog/" style="line-height: inherit; box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">cult of personality around him</a>, but I do feel under some obligation to give his writing as much attention as possible — as I think he has done more than any other scientist to raise awareness on climate change, and deserves our thanks, not slander.

“The latest swift-boating,” <a href="http://grist.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/distro_lawlessness_070927.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; background: transparent;">Hansen explains in a new post</a> (PDF), “is the whacko claim that I received $720,000.00 from George Soros.” Here is <a href="http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=275526219598836" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; background: transparent;">a smear from Investors Business Daily</a>, of all places — I have no idea why investors would be interested in such drivel — which migrated over to the conservative websight NewsBusters in an article titled, “<a href="http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/jake-gontesky/2007/09/26/global-warming-alarmist-james-hansen-shill-george-soros" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; line-height: inherit; background: transparent;">Is Global Warming Alarmist James Hansen a Shill for George Soros?</a>“

Hansen explains, “Here is the real deal, with the order of things, as well as I can remember without wasting even more time digging into papers and records”:

-----

omg:

To understand and protect our home planet; to explore the universe and search for life; to inspire the next generation of explorers … as only NASA can.

</blockquote>

In Feb. 2006, the mission statement was “<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/22/science/22nasa.html">quietly altered</a>” to remove the phrase “to understand and protect our home planet.” Even a year ago, NASA scientists predicted that because of the mission statement revision, there would “be far less incentive to pursue projects to improve understanding of terrestrial problems like climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions.” Top NASA climatologist James Hansen called the deletion “<a href="http://www.columbia.edu/%7Ejeh1/worldwatch_nov2006.pdf">a shocking loss</a>,” because he had “been using the phrase since December 2005 to justify speaking out about the dangers of global warming.”

In contrast to the previous mission statement, the 2006 revision “was made at NASA headquarters <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/22/science/22nasa.html">without consulting the agency’s 19,000 employees</a> or informing them ahead of time.” Instead, it was submitted as part of the 2006 <a href="http://www.columbia.edu/%7Ejeh1/worldwatch_nov2006.pdf">Earth Science Research and Analysis budget</a>, which is a joint product of the White House’s Office of Management and Budget and the NASA Administrator, Michael Griffin. <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2007/06/04/13576/griffin-nasa-mission/">http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2007/06/04/13576/griffin-nasa-mission/</a>

===

<a href="http://grist.org/news/james-hansen-to-quit-nasa-become-full-time-climate-activist/">http://grist.org/news/james-hansen-to-quit-nasa-become-full-time-climate-activist/</a>

pooley: spr 89 Hansens's testimony to Gore comm rewritten by B2 OMB 251 (not man). gore asked if he could out omb, yes, then reporters at house so Hansen went quiet for years 252

rogers showed up at hansen talk, H sent ltr? saying don't go tobacco road

ccs basically bolting a factory on pwr plant that uses 1/4 power 266

hansen said ceos crimes against humanity and nature 271

----

see cheney:

Indeed, the campaign to sow doubts about climate change has grown

more aggressive in recent years. No longer is the administration

simply censoring scientific reports - it has moved to silence the

scientists themselves. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the

administration refused to allow a top federal scientist whose

research links increased hurricane intensity to global warming to

speak to the press. It sent out a gag order to top government polar

scientists, demanding that anyone attending international scientific

conventions agree not to speak to reporters about "climate change,

polar bears and sea ice." And it ordered a former intern from the

Bush-Cheney campaign in the NASA press office to prevent Dr. James

Hansen, the godfather of global-warming science, from talking to the

media.

</pre>

<pre>"Interference with communication of science to the public has been

greater during the current administration than at any time in my

career," Hansen testified before Congress in March, suggesting that

NASA's press office had become an "office of propaganda." This month,

when news leaked that the Pentagon plans to kill a satellite program

critical to monitoring the Earth's climate, NASA's scientists issued

a confidential memo warning that the move "places the overall climate

program in serious jeopardy."

</pre>

==

wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen

James Edward Hansen (born March 29, 1941) is an American <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjunct_professor" title="Adjunct professor" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">adjunct professor</a> in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_University" title="Columbia University" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Columbia University</a>. Hansen is best known for his research in the field of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatology" title="Climatology" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">climatology</a>, his testimony on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change" title="Climate change" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">climate change</a> to congressional committees in 1988 that helped raise broad awareness of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming" title="Global warming" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">global warming</a>, and his advocacy of action to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avoiding_dangerous_climate_change" title="Avoiding dangerous climate change" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">avoid dangerous climate change</a>. In recent years, Hansen has become an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activism" title="Activism" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">activist</a> for action to mitigate the effects of climate change, which on a few occasions has led to his arrest.

After graduate school, Hansen continued his work with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_radiative_transfer_codes" title="Atmospheric radiative transfer codes" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">radiative transfer models</a>, attempting to understand the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Venus" title="Atmosphere of Venus" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Venusian atmosphere</a>. Later he applied and refined these models to understand the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_atmosphere" title="Earth's atmosphere" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Earth's atmosphere</a>, in particular, the effects that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerosols" title="Aerosols" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">aerosols</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trace_gases" title="Trace gases" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">trace gases</a> have on Earth's climate. Hansen's development and use of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_climate_model" title="Global climate model" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">global climate models</a> has contributed to the further understanding of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_climate" title="Earth's climate" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Earth's climate</a>. In 2009 his first book, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storms_of_My_Grandchildren" title="Storms of My Grandchildren" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Storms of My Grandchildren</a>, was published.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-1" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[1]</a>

From 1981 to 2013, he was the head of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA" title="NASA" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">NASA</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goddard_Institute_for_Space_Studies" title="Goddard Institute for Space Studies" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Goddard Institute for Space Studies</a> in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City" title="New York City" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">New York City</a>, a part of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goddard_Space_Flight_Center" title="Goddard Space Flight Center" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Goddard Space Flight Center</a> in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenbelt,_Maryland" title="Greenbelt, Maryland" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Greenbelt, Maryland</a>.

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Early_life_and_education" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">1 Early life and education</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-2" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Research_and_publications" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">2 Research and publications</a>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-3" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Studies_of_Venus" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">2.1 Studies of Venus</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-4" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Global_temperature_analysis" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">2.2 Global temperature analysis</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-5" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Black_carbon_studies" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">2.3 Black carbon studies</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-6" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Anthropogenic_impact_on_climate" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">2.4 Anthropogenic impact on climate</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-7" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Climate_model_development_and_projections" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">2.5 Climate model development and projections</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-8" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Climate_forcings.2C_feedbacks.2C_and_sensitivity" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">2.6 Climate forcings, feedbacks, and sensitivity</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-9" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Analysis_of_climate_change_causation" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">3 Analysis of climate change causation</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-10" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Climate_change_activism" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">4 Climate change activism</a>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-11" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Criticism_of_coal_industry" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">4.1 Criticism of coal industry</a>

<li class="toclevel-3 tocsection-12" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Mountaintop_removal_mining" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">4.1.1 Mountaintop removal mining</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-13" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Cap_and_trade" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">4.2 Cap and trade</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-14" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Retirement_from_NASA" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">4.3 Retirement from NASA</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-15" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Keystone_Pipeline" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">4.4 Keystone Pipeline</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-16" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Proposed_solutions" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">4.5 Proposed solutions</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-17" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Honors_and_awards" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">5 Honors and awards</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-18" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Controversies" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">6 Controversies</a>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-19" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Allegations_by_Hansen_of_censorship" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">6.1 Allegations by Hansen of censorship</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-20" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Trials_for_energy_company_executives" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">6.2 Trials for energy company executives</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-21" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Arrests" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">6.3 Arrests</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-22" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Criticism" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">6.4 Criticism</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-24" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#References" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">8 References</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-25" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Further_reading" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">9 Further reading</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-26" style=" margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#External_links" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">10 External links</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

Hansen was born in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denison,_Iowa" title="Denison, Iowa" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Denison</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa" title="Iowa" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Iowa</a> to James Ivan Hansen and Gladys Ray Hansen.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-2" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[2]</a> He was trained in physics and astronomy in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_science" title="Space science" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">space science</a> program of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Van_Allen" title="James Van Allen" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">James Van Allen</a> at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Iowa" title="University of Iowa" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">University of Iowa</a>. He obtained a<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelor_of_Arts" title="Bachelor of Arts" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">B.A.</a> in Physics and Mathematics with highest distinction in 1963, an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_of_Science" title="Master of Science" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">M.S.</a> in Astronomy in 1965 and a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Philosophy" title="Doctor of Philosophy" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Ph.D.</a> in Physics, in 1967, all three degrees from the University of Iowa. He participated in the NASA graduate traineeship from 1962 to 1966 and, at the same time, between 1965 and 1966, he was a visiting student at the Institute of Astrophysics at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Kyoto" title="University of Kyoto" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">University of Kyoto</a> and in the Department of Astronomy at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Tokyo" title="University of Tokyo" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">University of Tokyo</a>. Hansen then began work at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goddard_Institute_for_Space_Studies" title="Goddard Institute for Space Studies" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Goddard Institute for Space Studies</a> in 1967.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-Tracker-3" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[3]</a>

<h2 style=" font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); line-height: 1.3; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Research and publications[</h2>

As a college student at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Iowa" title="University of Iowa" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">University of Iowa</a>, Hansen was attracted to science and the research done by James Van Allen's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_science" title="Space science" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">space science</a> program in the physics and astronomy department. A decade later, his focus shifted to planetary research that involved trying to understand the climate change on earth that will result from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropogenic" title="Anthropogenic" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">anthropogenic</a> changes of the atmospheric composition.

Hansen has stated that one of his research interests is radiative transfer in planetary atmospheres, especially the interpretation of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_sensing" title="Remote sensing" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">remote sensing</a> of the Earth's atmosphere and surface from satellites. Because of the ability of satellites to monitor the entire globe, they may be one of the most effective ways to monitor and study global change. His other interests include the development of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_circulation_model" title="Global circulation model" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">global circulation models</a> to help understand the observed climate trends, and diagnosing human impacts on climate.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-hansenbio-4" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">[4]</a>

...

"The first action that people should take is to use the democratic process. What is frustrating people, me included, is that democratic action affects elections but what we get then from political leaders is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwash" title="Greenwash" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">greenwash</a>."

</div>

<div>James Hansen (March 2009)<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-Adam-54" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[54]</a></div>

</div>

Hansen noted that in determining responsibility for climate change, the effect of greenhouse gas emissions on climate is determined not by current emissions, but by accumulated emissions over the lifetime of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. By this measure, the U.K. is still the largest single cause of climate change, followed by the U.S. and Germany, even though its current emissions are surpassed by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peoples_Republic_of_China" title="Peoples Republic of China" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Peoples Republic of China</a>.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-hansen-testimony-55" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[55]</a>

On public policy, Hansen is critical of what he sees as efforts to mislead the public on the issue of climate change. He points specifically to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competitive_Enterprise_Institute" title="Competitive Enterprise Institute" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Competitive Enterprise Institute</a>'s commercials with the tagline "carbon dioxide—they call it pollution, we call it life",<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-56" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">[56]</a> and politicians who accept money from fossil-fuel interests and then describe global warming as "a great hoax."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-57" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">[57]</a> He also says that changes needed to reduce global warming do not require hardship or reduction in the quality of life, but will also produce benefits such as cleaner air and water, and growth of high-tech industries.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-58" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">[58]</a> He was a critic of both the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Administration" title="Clinton Administration" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Clinton</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush_Administration" title="George W. Bush Administration" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">George W. Bush Administrations</a>' stances on climate change.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-59" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[59]</a> Addressing the potential effects of climate change, Hansen has stated in an interview in January, 2009, "We cannot now afford to put off change any longer. We have to get on a new path within this new administration. We have only four years left for Obama to set an example to the rest of the world. America must take the lead."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-60" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[60]</a>

<h2 style=" font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); line-height: 1.3; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Climate change activism[</h2>

<h3 style=" margin: 0.3em 0px 0px; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0px; border-bottom-style: none; line-height: 1.6; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Criticism of coal industry<span class="mw-editsection" style=" -webkit-user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; display: inline-block; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: -webkit-isolate;">[</h3>

Hansen has been particularly critical of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_industry" title="Coal industry" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">coal industry</a>, stating that coal contributes the largest percentage of anthropogenic carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-columbia.edu-61" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[61]</a> He acknowledges that a molecule of carbon dioxide emitted from burning coal has the same effect as a molecule emitted from burning oil. The difference is where the fuel originally resides. He says that most oil comes from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia" title="Russia" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Russia</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia" title="Saudi Arabia" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Saudi Arabia</a>, and that no matter how fuel-efficient automobiles become, the oil will eventually be burned and the CO

2 emitted. In a 2007 testimony before the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_Utilities_Board" title="Iowa Utilities Board" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Iowa Utilities Board</a>, he stated that the United States has a large <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal#World_coal_reserves" title="Coal" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">reservoir of coal</a>, which makes it a resource that can be controlled through action by U.S. politicians, unlike oil which is controlled by other countries.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-columbia.edu-61" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[61]</a> He has called for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_phase_out" title="Coal phase out" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">phasing out coal power</a> completely by the year 2030.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-62" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[62]</a>

During his testimony before the Iowa Utilities Board in 2007, Hansen likened coal trains to "death trains" and asserted that these would be "no less gruesome than if they were boxcars headed to crematoria, loaded with uncountable irreplaceable species."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-NYTBlog-63" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[63]</a> In response, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Mining_Association" title="National Mining Association" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">National Mining Association</a> stated that his comparison "trivialized the suffering of millions" and "undermined his credibility."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-64" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[64]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-65" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[65]</a> Citing the reactions of "several people" and "three of his scientific colleagues" as his primary motivation, Hansen stated that he certainly did not mean to trivialize suffering by the families who lost relatives in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust" title="Holocaust" class="mw-redirect" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">Holocaust</a> and then apologized, saying he regretted that his words caused pain to some readers.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-66" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[66]</a>

<h4 style=" margin: 0.3em 0px 0px; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0px; border-bottom-style: none; line-height: 22.4px; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Mountaintop removal mining<span class="mw-editsection" style=" -webkit-user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; display: inline-block; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: -webkit-isolate;">[</h4>

</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NASA_Scientist_James_Hansen_Arrested.jpg" class="internal" title="Enlarge" style="text-decoration: none; display: block; text-indent: 15px; white-space: nowrap; overflow: hidden; width: 15px; height: 11px; user-select: none; background: url(" data:image="data:image" png="png" base64="base64" ivborw0kggoaaaansuheugaaaa8aaaalcaaaaacfliiaaaaaanrstlma="iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAA8AAAALCAAAAACFLIiAAAAAAnRSTlMA" uriruaaaacykthrad="uRIrUAAAACYktHRAD" h4="h4" mvwaaaalwsflzaaak8aaacvabqqw0maaaaad0su1fb9ueahirefdlpysaaabpsurbvajxy="MvwAAAAlwSFlzAAAK8AAACvABQqw0mAAAAAd0SU1FB9UEAhIREfdlPYsAAABPSURBVAjXY" j="j" vxdwjahir26zagxze8h8a="vXDwjAHIr26ZAgXZe8H8a" hoicw="hoIcw" nevdvl9="nevdVL9" dupvzqyzfpuezu8bmzlxgkexnd8hau6hqv="DuPvzQYZFPUezu8BMZLXgkExnD8HAu6hqv" n="n" hzvjd4duudaklchd3fj6apaaaaaelftksuqmcc="HZVjD4DuUDAKlChD3fj6aPAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC" no-repeat="no-repeat" xmlns:data="data">James Hansen arrested at a demonstration outside the</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House" title="White House" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">White House</a>, August 29, 2011</div>

</div>

On June 23, 2009, James Hansen, along with 30 other <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protester" title="Protester" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">protesters</a> including actress <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Hannah" title="Daryl Hannah" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Daryl Hannah</a>, was arrested on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misdemeanor" title="Misdemeanor" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">misdemeanor</a> charges of obstructing police and impeding traffic, during a protest against <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountaintop_removal_mining" title="Mountaintop removal mining" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">mountaintop removal mining</a> in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raleigh_County,_West_Virginia" title="Raleigh County, West Virginia" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Raleigh County, West Virginia</a>.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-67" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[67]</a> The protesters intended to enter the property of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massey_Energy_Company" title="Massey Energy Company" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Massey Energy Company</a>, but were blocked by a crowd of several hundred coal miners and supporters.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-68" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[68]</a> Hansen said that mountaintop removal for coal mining "[provides] only a small fraction of our energy" and "should be abolished."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-NYT.E-69" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[69]</a>Hansen called on President <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama" title="Barack Obama" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Barack Obama</a> to abolish mountaintop coal mining.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-70" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[70]</a>

Hansen and about 100 other people were arrested in September 2010 in front of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House" title="White House" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">White House</a> in Washington, DC. The group was seeking a ban on mountaintop removal or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_mining" title="Surface mining" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">surface mining</a>.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-71" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[71]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-72" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[72]</a>

In 2009 Hansen spoke out against <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cap_and_trade" title="Cap and trade" class="mw-redirect" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">cap and trade</a>, advocating instead what he believes would be a progressive <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax" title="Carbon tax" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">carbon tax</a> at source carbon as oil, gas or coal, with a 100% dividend returned to citizens in equal shares, as proposed by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Climate_Lobby" title="Citizens Climate Lobby" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Citizens Climate Lobby</a>. He has made many appearances and talks supporting the work of CCL.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-James_Hansen_2009-73" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[73]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-74" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[74]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-75" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[75]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-TellTruth-76" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[76]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-77" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[77]</a>

Hansen retired from NASA in April 2013, saying he planned to take a more active role in the political and legal efforts to limit <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gases" title="Greenhouse gases" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">greenhouse gases</a>.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-78" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[78]</a> The same month, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Center_for_Science_Education" title="National Center for Science Education" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">National Center for Science Education</a>, an organization noted for defending the teaching of evolution in United States science classrooms, named Hansen as an advisor to support the extension of its area of concern into the teaching of climate change.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-79" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[79]</a>

In a CBC interview aired in April 2013, as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Oliver(politician)" title="Joe Oliver (politician)" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">Joe Oliver (politician)</a> lobbied in Washington, DC for approval of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline#Keystone_XL" title="Keystone Pipeline" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Keystone pipeline extension</a> intended to carry more <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_crude_oil" title="Synthetic crude oil" class="mw-redirect" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">synthetic crude oil</a> from Canada's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athabasca_Oil_Sands" title="Athabasca Oil Sands" class="mw-redirect" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Athabasca Oil Sands</a> to the Gulf of Mexico,<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-mongabay2011-80" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[80]</a> Hansen forcefully argued against the use of these unconventional fossil fuels. According to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_panel_on_climate_change" title="Intergovernmental panel on climate change" class="mw-redirect" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">Intergovernmental panel on climate change</a> IPCC and other energy organizations "there is more than twice as much carbon in the tar sands oil" than in conventional oil. Hansen argued that coal, tar sands, and tar shale should not be used as energy sources because of their carbon emissions and claimed that the completion of the Keystone pipeline would increase the extraction of oil from oil sands. He explained that the effects of climate change may not be apparent until the far future: "It's not the case where you emit something and you see the effect. We see the beginnings of the effect but the large impacts are going to be in future decades and that science is crystal clear ... Effects come slowly because of the inertia of the climate system. It takes decades, even centuries to get the full response. But we know the last time the world was 2 degrees warmer, sea level was 6 meters or 20 feet higher."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-neanderthal27april2013-81" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[81]</a> Hansen urged President Obama to reject the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline#Keystone_XL" title="Keystone Pipeline" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">Keystone pipeline extension</a> intended to carry more <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_crude_oil" title="Synthetic crude oil" class="mw-redirect" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">synthetic crude oil</a> from Canada's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athabasca_Oil_Sands" title="Athabasca Oil Sands" class="mw-redirect" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">Athabasca Oil Sands</a> to the Gulf of Mexico.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-mongabay2011-80" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[80]</a> On February 13, 2013, Hansen was again arrested at the White House, along with Daryl Hannah and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F.Kennedy,_Jr." title="Robert F. Kennedy, Jr." style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.</a>, during a further protest against the proposed Keystone pipeline extension.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-dhxl-82" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[82]</a>

At the end of 2008, Hansen stated five priorities that he felt then President-elect Obama should adopt "for solving the climate and energy problems, while stimulating the economy". The five priorities were: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficient_energy_use" title="Efficient energy use" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">efficient energy use</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy" title="Renewable energy" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">renewable energy</a>, a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid" title="Smart grid" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">smart grid</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor" title="Generation IV reactor" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">generation IV nuclear reactors</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_capture_and_storage" title="Carbon capture and storage" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">carbon capture and storage</a>. Regarding nuclear, he expressed opposition to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_Mountain_nuclear_waste_repository" title="Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository</a>, stating that the $25 Billion (US) surplus held in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Waste_Policy_Act" title="Nuclear Waste Policy Act" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Nuclear Waste Fund</a> "should be used to develop <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_Fast_Reactor" title="Integral Fast Reactor" class="mw-redirect" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">fast reactors</a> that consume nuclear waste, and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor" title="Liquid fluoride thorium reactor" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">thorium reactors</a> to prevent the creation of new long-lived nuclear waste."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-TellTruth-76" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[76]</a>

In 2009 Hansen wrote an open letter to President <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama" title="Barack Obama" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">Barack Obama</a> where he advocated a "Moratorium and phase-out of coal plants that do not capture and store CO2".<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-James_Hansen_2009-73" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[73]</a> In his first book Storms of My Grandchildren, similarly, Hansen discusses his Declaration of Stewardship, the first principle of which requires "a moratorium on coal-fired power plants that do not capture and sequester carbon dioxide".<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-83" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[83]</a>

In March 2013, James Hansen co-authored a paper in Environmental Science & Technology, entitled "Prevented mortality and greenhouse gas emissions from historical and projected nuclear power". The paper examined mortality levels per unit of electrical power produced from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels" title="Fossil fuels" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">fossil fuels</a> (coal and natural gas) as well as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power" title="Nuclear power" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">nuclear power</a>. It estimated that an average of 1.8 million lives were saved worldwide, between 1971 and 2009, through the use of nuclear power instead of fossil fuels. Hansen also concluded that the emission of some 64 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent were avoided by nuclear power use between 1971 and 2009. Looking to the future, between 2010 and 2050, it was estimated that nuclear could additionally avoid up to 80 to 240 billion tonnes.

In a published rebuttal to Hansen's analysis, eight energy and climate scholars said that "nuclear power reactors are less effective at displacing greenhouse gas emissions than <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficient_energy_use" title="Efficient energy use" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">energy efficiency</a> initiatives and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy" title="Renewable energy" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">renewable energy</a> technologies". They went on to argue "that (a) its near-term potential is significantly limited compared to energy efficiency and renewable energy; (b) it displaces emissions and saves lives only at high cost and at the enhanced risk of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_proliferation" title="Nuclear weapons proliferation" class="mw-redirect" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">nuclear weapons proliferation</a>; (c) it is unsuitable for expanding access to modern energy services in developing countries; and (d) Hansen's estimates of cancer risks from exposure to radiation are flawed".<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-84" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[84]</a>

In 2013, with other leading experts, Hansen was co-author of an open letter to policy makers, which stated that "continued opposition to nuclear power threatens humanity's ability to avoid dangerous climate change."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-85" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[85]</a>SHILLENBERGER?]

Hansen was elected to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Academy_of_Sciences" title="United States National Academy of Sciences" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">National Academy of Sciences</a> in 1996 for his "development of pioneering radiative transfer models and studies of planetary atmospheres; development of simplified and three-dimensional global climate models; explication of climate forcing mechanisms; analysis of current climate trends from observational data; and projections of anthropogenic impacts on the global climate system."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-86" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[86]</a> In 2001, he received the 7th Annual <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Award" title="Heinz Award" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Heinz Award</a> in the Environment (endowed with US$250,000) for his research on global warming,<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-87" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[87]</a> and was listed as one of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Magazine" title="Time Magazine" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Time Magazine</a>'s <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_100" title="Time 100" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">100 Most Influential People</a> in 2006. Also in 2006, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Association_for_the_Advancement_of_Science" title="American Association for the Advancement of Science" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">American Association for the Advancement of Science</a> (AAAS) selected James Hansen to receive its <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Award_for_Scientific_Freedom_and_Responsibility" title="Award for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Award for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility</a> "for his courageous and steadfast advocacy in support of scientists' responsibilities to communicate their scientific opinions and findings openly and honestly on matters of public importance."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-88" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[88]</a>

In 2007, Hansen shared the US $1-million <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_David_Prize" title="Dan David Prize" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Dan David Prize</a> for "achievements having an outstanding scientific, technological, cultural or social impact on our world". In 2008, he received the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNC_Bank" title="PNC Bank" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">PNC Bank</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Wealth_Award_of_Distinguished_Service" title="Common Wealth Award of Distinguished Service" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Common Wealth Award of Distinguished Service</a> for his "outstanding achievements" in science. At the end of 2008, Hansen was named by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=EarthSky_Communications&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="EarthSky Communications (page does not exist)" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">EarthSky Communications</a> and a panel of 600 scientist-advisors as the Scientist Communicator of the Year, citing him as an "outspoken authority on climate change" who had "best communicated with the public about vital science issues or concepts during 2008."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-rossby-89" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[89]</a>

In 2009, Hansen was awarded the 2009 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl-Gustaf_Rossby_Research_Medal" title="Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal</a>,<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-rossby-89" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[89]</a> the highest honor bestowed by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Meteorological_Society" title="American Meteorological Society" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">American Meteorological Society</a>, for his "outstanding contributions to climate modeling, understanding climate change forcings and sensitivity, and for clear communication of climate science in the public arena."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-90" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[90]</a>

Hansen won the 2010 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Prize" title="Sophie Prize" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Sophie Prize</a>, set up in 1997 by Norwegian <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jostein_Gaarder" title="Jostein Gaarder" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Jostein Gaarder</a>, the author of the 1991 best-selling novel and teenagers' guide to philosophy <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie%27s_World" title="Sophie's World" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Sophie's World</a>,<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-91" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[91]</a> for his " key role for the development of our understanding of human-induced climate change."

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Policy" title="Foreign Policy" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Foreign Policy</a> named Hansen one of its 2012 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP_Top_100_Global_Thinkers" title="FP Top 100 Global Thinkers" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">FP Top 100 Global Thinkers</a> "for sounding the alarm on climate change, early and often".<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-92" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[92]</a>

In December 2012, Hansen received the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_Club_of_California" title="Commonwealth Club of California" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Commonwealth Club of California</a>’s annual <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_H._Schneider" title="Stephen H. Schneider" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Stephen H. Schneider</a> Award for Outstanding Climate Science Communications at a ceremony in San Francisco<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-93" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[93]</a>

On November 7, 2013 Hansen received the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Priestley" title="Joseph Priestley" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Joseph Priestley</a> Award at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickinson_College" title="Dickinson College" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Dickinson College</a> in Carlisle, Pennsylvania "...for his work advancing our understanding of climate change, including the early application of numerical models to better understand observed climate trends and to project humans' impact on climate, and for his leadership in promoting public understanding of climate and linking the knowledge to action on climate policy." He delivered a lecture, entitled, "White House Arrest and the Climate Crisis," later that same day at Anita Tuvin Schlechter Auditorium on the college's campus.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-94" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[94]</a>

In 2007, Hansen has stated that in 2005 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA" title="NASA" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">NASA</a> administrators had attempted to influence his public statements about the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_of_recent_climate_change" title="Attribution of recent climate change" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">causes of climate change</a>.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-95" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[95]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-96" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[96]</a> Hansen said that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_public_relations_staff" title="NASA public relations staff" class="mw-redirect" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">NASA public relations staff</a> were ordered to review his public statements and interviews after a December 2005 lecture at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Geophysical_Union" title="American Geophysical Union" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">American Geophysical Union</a> in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco,_California" title="San Francisco, California" class="mw-redirect" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">San Francisco</a>. NASA responded that its policies are similar to those of any other federal agency in requiring employees to coordinate all statements with the public affairs office without exception.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-ABC1-97" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[97]</a> Two years after Hansen and other agency employees described a pattern of distortion and suppression of climate science by political <a href="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/appointee" class="extiw" title="wikt:appointee" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">appointees</a>, the agency’s inspector general found that the NASA Office of Public Affairs had mischaracterized the science of climate change intended for the public.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-98" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[98]</a>

In June 2006, Hansen appeared on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/60_Minutes" title="60 Minutes" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">60 Minutes</a> stating that the George W. Bush White House had edited climate-related press releases reported by federal agencies to make global warming seem less threatening.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-cbs-99" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[99]</a> He also stated that he was unable to speak freely without the backlash of other government officials, and that he had not experienced that level of restrictions on communicating with the public during his career.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-cbs-99" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[99]</a>

<h3 style=" margin: 0.3em 0px 0px; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0px; border-bottom-style: none; line-height: 1.6; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Trials for energy company executives<span class="mw-editsection" style=" -webkit-user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; display: inline-block; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: -webkit-isolate;">[</h3>

In 2008 interviews with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABC_News" title="ABC News" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">ABC News</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian" title="The Guardian" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">The Guardian</a>, and in a separate op-ed, Hansen has called for putting <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel" title="Fossil fuel" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">fossil fuel</a> company executives, including the CEOs of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil" title="ExxonMobil" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">ExxonMobil</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peabody_Coal" title="Peabody Coal" class="mw-redirect" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Peabody Coal</a>, on trial for "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_crimes" title="High crimes" class="mw-redirect" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">high crimes</a> against humanity and nature", on the grounds that these and other fossil-fuel companies had actively spread doubt and misinformation about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming" title="Global warming" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">global warming</a>, in the same way that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco" title="Tobacco" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">tobacco</a> companies tried to hide the link between smoking and cancer.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-abc20ylater-100" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[100]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-guardtrial-101" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[101]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-ww20ylater-102" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[102]</a>

<h3 style=" margin: 0.3em 0px 0px; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0px; border-bottom-style: none; line-height: 1.6; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Arrests<span class="mw-editsection" style=" -webkit-user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; display: inline-block; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: -webkit-isolate;">[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_Hansen&action=edit&section=21&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Arrests" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">edit</a>]</h3>

Hansen and 1251 other activists were arrested in August and September 2011, at another demonstration in front of the White House. Hansen urged President Obama to reject the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline#Keystone_XL" title="Keystone Pipeline" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Keystone pipeline extension</a> intended to carry more <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_crude_oil" title="Synthetic crude oil" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">synthetic crude oil</a> from Canada's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athabasca_Oil_Sands" title="Athabasca Oil Sands" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Athabasca Oil Sands</a> to the Gulf of Mexico.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-mongabay2011-80" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[80]</a> On February 13, 2013, Hansen was again arrested at the White House, along with Daryl Hannah and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F.Kennedy,Jr." title="Robert F. Kennedy, Jr." style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.</a>, during a further protest against the proposed Keystone pipeline extension.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-dhxl-82" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[82]</a>

In January 2009, Andrew Freedman wrote in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Post" title="Washington Post" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">Washington Post</a>, that the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Meteorological_Society" title="American Meteorological Society" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">American Meteorological Society</a> had erred in giving Hansen its <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl-Gustaf_Rossby_Research_Medal" title="Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal</a>: "His body of work is not at issue... Rather, the problem arises due to the AMS' recognition of Hansen's public communication work on climate change."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-AMS-103" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[103]</a> Former AMS member <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_D%27Aleo" title="Joseph D'Aleo" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Joseph D'Aleo</a>, a skeptic of human-caused climate change, also criticized the award.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-AMS-103" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[103]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-104" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[104]</a>

Also in 2009, physicist <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_Dyson" title="Freeman Dyson" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Freeman Dyson</a> criticised Hansen's climate-change activism. "The person who is really responsible for this overestimate of global warming is Jim Hansen. He consistently exaggerates all the dangers... Hansen has turned his science into ideology."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-DNYT-105" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[105]</a> Hansen responded that if Dyson "is going to wander into something with major consequences for humanity and other life on the planet, then he should first do his homework".<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-DNYT-105" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[105]</a> Dyson stated in an interview that the argument with Hansen was exaggerated by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times" title="New York Times" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">New York Times</a>, stating that he and Hansen are "friends, but we don't agree on everything."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-106" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[106]</a>

After Hansen's arrest in 2009 in West Virginia, New York Times columnist <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Revkin" title="Andrew Revkin" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Andrew Revkin</a> wrote: "Dr. Hansen has pushed far beyond the boundaries of the conventional role of scientists, particularly government scientists, in the environmental policy debate."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-NYT.E-69" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[69]</a> In 2009, Hansen advocated the participation of citizens at a March 2 protest at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Power_Plant" title="Capitol Power Plant" style="background: none; text-decoration: none;">Capitol Power Plant</a> in Washington, D.C. Hansen stated, "We need to send a message to Congress and the president that we want them to take the actions that are needed to preserve climate for young people and future generations and all life on the planet".<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-107" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[107]</a>

In June 2009, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Yorker" title="The New Yorker" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">New Yorker</a> journalist <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Kolbert" title="Elizabeth Kolbert" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Elizabeth Kolbert</a> wrote that Hansen is "increasingly isolated among climate activists."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-EKNY-108" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[108]</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eileen_Claussen" title="Eileen Claussen" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Eileen Claussen</a>, president of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pew_Center_on_Global_Climate_Change" title="Pew Center on Global Climate Change" class="mw-redirect" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Pew Center on Global Climate Change</a>, said that "I view Jim Hansen as heroic as a scientist.... But I wish he would stick to what he really knows. Because I don't think he has a realistic idea of what is politically possible..."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-EKNY-108" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[108]</a>

In July 2009, New York Times climate columnist Christa Marshall asked if Hansen still matters in the ongoing climate debate, noting that he "has irked many longtime supporters with his scathing attacks against President Obama's plan for a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cap-and-trade" title="Cap-and-trade" class="mw-redirect" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">cap-and-trade</a> system."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-CMa-109" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">[109]</a> "The right wing loves what he's doing," said <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Romm" title="Joseph Romm" class="mw-redirect" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Joseph Romm</a>, a senior fellow at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_American_Progress" title="Center for American Progress" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Center for American Progress</a>, a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_tank" title="Think tank" style="background-image: none; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">think tank</a>.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-CMa-109" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[109]</a> Hansen said that he had to speak out, since few others could explain the links between politics and the climate models. "You just have to say what you think is right," he said.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#cite_note-CMa-109" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[109]</a>

===

MON JAN 14, 2008 AT 06:01 PM PST <a id="titleHref" href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/01/14/436446/-Blast-from-the-Past-8211-James-Hansen-1988" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1; text-decoration: none;">Blast from the Past – James Hansen, 1988</a>

<span style=" text-align: left; margin: 8px 4px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; display: block; text-indent: -9999px; overflow: hidden; float: left; height: 15px; width: 15px; background-image: url(http://images.dailykos.com/i/main/by.gif); background-color: transparent; background-position: 0px 0px; background-repeat: no-repeat;">by<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/user/Meteor%20Blades" style="text-align: left; margin: 4px 4px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; float: left;">Meteor Blades</a><a class="type-user do-hotlist do-updateContent size-tiny off altTooltip ajaxON" alt="Follow this author" href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/01/14/436446/-Blast-from-the-Past-8211-James-Hansen-1988#?friend_id=6&is_stream=1" style="text-align: left; margin: 4px 4px 0px 0px; padding: 0px 4px 0px 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; display: inline-block; text-indent: -9999px; overflow: hidden; height: 10px; width: 9px; float: left; background-image: url(" http="http" images.dailykos.com="images.dailykos.com" i="i" main="main" icon-favorite-10.gif="icon-favorite-10.gif" background-color="background-color" transparent="transparent" background-position="background-position" px="px" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat">Follow</a><span class="for" style=" text-align: left; margin: 8px 4px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; display: block; text-indent: -9999px; overflow: hidden; float: left; height: 15px; width: 25px; background-image: url(http://images.dailykos.com/i/main/for.gif); background-color: transparent; background-position: 0px 0px; background-repeat: no-repeat;">for<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/blog/main" style="text-align: left; margin: 4px 4px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; float: left;">Daily Kos</a>

</li><li style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; display: inline-block; max-height: 21px; max-width: 180px; background: none;">

</li>

</ul>

</div>

In the hot summer of 1988 - while Americans prepared to decide whether Vice President George H.W. Bush or the "Atari Democrat" – Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis – would replace Ronald Reagan in the Oval Office, James Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, testified at a congressional hearing that he was convinced the earth’s atmosphere was warming up, that the warming was caused by human activity, and that severe shocks would result. A three-scenario graph accompanying his testimony sent a clarion warning.

The smears and propaganda began almost immediately from contrarians such as Patrick Michaels and a snake-oil salesman named S. Fred Singer. Eventually, it became known that both men (and others) were part of a well-financed campaign on the part of fossil-fuel companies to persuade Americans (and politicians) that global warming was a hoax and that Hansen and other scientists sounding the alarm were fools or worse.

<img src="/6f02bdf2-565e-5eed-96b9-6cbe267a7fcd.gif"/>The hearings in June 1988 weren’t the first time Hansen had said trouble was brewing. Nor were they the first time other scientists had publicly spoken of the potential crises warming might cause. But 1988 demarcated two periods. Before then, the science of climate change was tentative and the political opposition was mostly directly toward keeping data from being gathered in the first place, much less analyzed. Afterward, with the science ever more sure and cohesive, a cabal of petro-industrialists paid aggressive liars to attack the science and, sometimes, the scientists. Chief among those in the crosshairs were Hansen and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the research organization set up in that same watershed year by the World Health Organization and the United Nations Environment Program.

With the express purpose of casting "doubt on the theory of global warming," front groups with misleading names such as the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Global_Climate_Coalition" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;">Global Climate Coalition</a>, the Global Climate Information Project, and the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cooler_Heads_Coalition" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;">Cooler Heads Project</a> (as well as the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the National Consumer Coalition) spread fabrications while their corporate sponsors paid tens of millions of dollars for public relations campaigns, advertising, and contributions to Democratic and Republican politicians.

These slick propagandists were immensely successful. In the ‘90s, President Bill Clinton – under assault by retrograde ideologues over a wide range of issues – chose to invest only a smidgen of his political capital to deal with a crisis many in the chattering classes still claimed was bogus. Throughout the ‘00s, the propagandists’ comrades-in-avarice have directly controlled the federal machinery, censoring, distorting, threatening and dragging their feet. The professional deniers’ favorite targets, from the IPCC to Hansen to Al Gore, have been repeatedly vindicated. Global warming has become the worst nightmare of the deniers and delayers: a household phrase.

Yet their two-decade-long assault on science and sound policy continues its negative impacts. Key world leaders, even including Mister Bush, say they understand that global warming is a crisis. But their acknowledgement hasn't been transformed into a passionate commitment for what matters: bold action.

Scientific interest in climate change goes back nearly two centuries, but the politics of global warming are only 50 years old.

In 1957, the National Academy of Sciences published its first general report on climatology in which it was noted: "In consuming our fossil fuels at a prodigious rate, our civilization is conducting a grandiose scientific experiment." That metaphor was the invention of Roger Revelle, the Harvard geochemist and oceanographer whose lectures 10 years later would have a lasting impact on a young undergrad named Al Gore.

</div>

At the same time NAS was channeling Revelle, Edward Teller, father of the hydrogen bomb and an avid advocate for building hundreds of nuclear power plants, warned at the December 1957 meeting of the American Chemical Society that increasing CO2 might someday melt the polar icecaps and flood the world’s coastal regions.

Teller’s remarks and Revelle’s testimony to a congressional committee sparked a Washington Sunday Star article by Phil Yeager and John Stark in January 1958: "Mystery of the Warming World." It was published on page 26 and included the prediction that CO2 warming of the climate might generate "a type of control regulation, law, interstate compact, and international agreement which could scarcely help clashing with some of our cherished notions of free enterprise. Industry, which might blossom in some directions ... would be hamstrung in others. ... Further, in view of the global nature of the problem, ordinary international agreements might prove inadequate for effective regulation." International controls backed up by penalties, the prescient pair wrote, would be "sure to foster great heat and controversy."

Meanwhile, in what would set the standard for later propaganda campaigns, Shell Oil rejected the idea that "our furnaces and motor car engines will have any large effect on the CO2 balance."

Over the next 20 years, climate science slowly took off as data was gathered by new agencies such as the National Center for Atmospheric Research and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, satellite measurements became routine, and computer modeling became more sophisticated.

While much of the public first bumped up against the possibility of abrupt climate shift from the 2004 science fiction film The Day After Tomorrow, scientists meeting at a workshop at MIT in 1970 and an international conference in Stockholm in 1971 revealed to each other that evidence from ice cores and the ancient seabed hinted the atmospheric changes many of them had been speculating would come about gradually might actually happen in a single human life span, or a single generation. At the time, based on limited measurements available to them, the probable change they saw was another ice age.

Although the new findings came at what seemed a propitious moment – a mass movement was focusing attention on all things environmental – progress on the political front dragged. Congress didn’t hold its first hearings exclusively devoted to climate change until 1976. That same year, a Harvard postdoctoral researcher asked Jim Hansen’s help in calculating the greenhouse effect of humanmade gases in the earth's atmosphere.

In 1977, the National Academy of Sciences published and widely publicized the work of a panel of experts, "Energy and Climate." Chaired by Revelle, the panel said there was a possibility that average temperatures might climb a dangerous 6° Celsius by 2050. They urged more spending on research.

On the heels of that report, Congress passed the National Climate Act in late 1978 to set up the National Climate Program Office as part of NOAA. A meager budget, a weak mandate and a kind of we-did-our-part attitude from Congress hampered the office from the beginning. Frustrated and worried, geophysicist Wallace Broecker at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory wrote a letter on April 7, 1980, to Massachusetts Senator Paul Tsongas.

As physicist-historian Spencer Weart <a href="http://www.aip.org/history/climate/Govt.htm#M_22_" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;">writes</a>:

Declaring that "the CO2 problem is the single most important and the single most complex environmental issue facing the world," and that "the clock is ticking away," Broecker insisted that a better research program was needed. "Otherwise, another decade will slip by, and we will find that we can do little better than repeat the rather wishy-washy image we now have as to what our planet will be like ..."

</blockquote>

Bad timing. Into the Oval Office strode Ronald Reagan. Opposed to government regulation in general and hostile to eco-concerns in particular, the new president appointed anti-environmentalists to key posts and began chopping funding for everything from conservation outreach to renewable energy R&D to CO2 studies. A price was to be paid for those going against the grain. Hansen, who by 1981 had been focusing on the subject intensively for four years and was the new chief at Goddard, published with seven colleagues a piece in Science which said:

"The combined warming of carbon dioxide and trace gases should exceed natural temperature variability in the 1980s and cause the mean global temperature to rise above the maximum of the late 1930s."

</blockquote>

Next thing you know, The New York Times had put a story on the front page, and the Department of Energy had withdrawn funding it had promised Hansen, compelling him to lay off five Goddard staffers. It was the first round of something Hansen has become all-too-familiar with over nearly three decades: ignore the message, behead the messenger.

All research into the greenhouse effect might have been lost had it not been for Al Gore, by then a three-term Congressman from Tennessee. His hearings in 1981 got some short-lived press attention. As a new Senator, he pushed for new hearings in 1984 that included the testimony of climate scientist Carl Sagan, who, with other scientists, had been looking into "nuclear winter."

Further hearings took place in 1987. Congress passed four bills in which "global warming" was specifically mentioned, including the "Global Climate Protection Act" that required a plan for placing a ceiling on greenhouse gases. Among the issues being studied by early 1988 was a "carbon tax" levied on emissions of CO2.

With record temperatures and massive drought that summer, the public was primed to hear what Hansen had to say. From the scientists’ point of view, it appeared that, finally, they were going to be seriously listened to.

On June 23, Hansen sat before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. He later recalled for <a href="http://audubonmagazine.org/global.html" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;">Audubon</a>’s Robert H. Boyle that he had testified:

"First, that the world was getting warmer on decadal time scales, which I said could be stated with 99 percent confidence. Second, that with a high degree of confidence I believed there was a causal relationship with an increased greenhouse effect. And third, that in our climate model there was a tendency for an increase in the frequency and the severity of heat waves and droughts with global warming." Besieged by the media afterward, he said, "It's time to stop waffling so much and say that the greenhouse effect is here and affecting our climate now."

</blockquote>

<img src="/93c79172-24f7-5848-a49b-a56f2fd372a0.jpg"/>Accompanying Hansen’s testimony was this graph of three potential scenarios, part of a <a href="http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/1988/Hansen_etal.html" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;">paper</a> he and his colleagues published soon afterward. Given the uncertainties over the prospects for government regulation and about volcanic eruptions that can mask the effects of greenhouse emissions, the presentation of a spectrum of possibilities was precisely the behavior that should be expected of good scientists. After introducing the three scenarios, Hansen focused on Scenario B, the one he thought most likely. As can be seen, it matches what has actually occurred.

Flak burst around Hansen immediately. Soon, the new Bush Administration was complaining about him to NASA. Some respected scientists challenged the conclusions of his analysis. Hansen refused to shut up. In 1995, the IPCC vindicated him in its Second Assessment Report, which declared "the balance of evidence suggests that there is a discernible human influence on global climate."

Typical of the barrage of malicious distortion from the various industry-funded "coalitions" initiated after Hansen’s 1988 testimony is that of the CATO Institute’s Patrick Michaels. In <a href="http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-pm072998.html" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">testimony</a> to the House Committee on Small Business on July 29, 1998, Michaels intentionally – call that dishonestly – omitted the B and C scenarios so he could say that Hansen had been off by 400%, and, therefore, everyone was right to be skeptical of the entirety of global warming predictions. Michaels’ claim-by-omission would ultimately wind up in Michael Crichton’s novel,State of Fear, which the scientists at RealClimate <a href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=74" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">thoroughly debunked.</a>

Enter the second Bush administration. One of the first of its many anti-environmental moves was to suppress the <a href="http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/nacc/default.htm" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;">U.S. National Assessment of the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change.</a> The multi-volume assessment, mandated by the Global Change Research Act of 1990, had taken a decade of study and been published just two months before Mister Bush had taken the oath of office. It had immediately come under attack from the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the American Enterprise Institute. The assessment was not merely shelved like so many other government reports. The White House barred government scientists from using its contents or even referring to it. Future government reports relating to global warming got the administration’s special treatment. For instance, oil industry lobbyist Philip Cooney was made chief of staff at the White House Council on Environmental Quality. Here’s some of his handiwork.

He resigned from the CEQ when his editing efforts were revealed in 2005 and was immediately hired by ExxonMobil.

While industry shills and right-wing ideologues could count on sockpuppets like Sean Hannity and other conduits for global warming denial, to their fury and that of the administration, Hansen continued to refuse to shut up. After a lecture in December 2005 in which he called for immediate cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, Goddard’s public affairs staff was <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/science/earth/29climate.html?_r=1&oref=slogin" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;">ordered</a> "to review his coming lectures, papers, postings on the Goddard Web site and requests for interviews from journalists." Officials have repeatedly claimed ever since that they weren’t trying to gag him. Hansen merely points skeptics toward Mark Bowen’s book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Censoring-Science-Political-ofGlobal-Warming/dp/0525950141/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197569487&sr=1-3" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;">Censoring Science: Inside the Political Attack on Dr. James Hansen and the Truth of Global Warming</a>.

Last month, Hansen <a href="http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/12/nasas-james-han.html" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;">delivered</a> yet another <a href="http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/12/31/14256/031" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;">sure-to-be-disputed</a> heads-up. For years, many scientists thought that stabilizing atmospheric carbon to a level of 550 parts per million (vs. the pre-industrial level of 275 ppm) would stave off a global warming disaster. More recently, however, the view has been that 450 ppm is the so-called "tipping point" for when "fast-feedback" effects will lead to runaway warming. But at the San Francisco meeting of the American Geophysical Union in December, Hansen told gathered scientists that he thinks the tipping point may be 350 ppm.

We’re already at 383 ppm.

In the January 5, 2008, issue of New Scientist, in a review of Mark Bowen’s book, Chris Mooney writes of Hansen: "Here's a guy who really just wanted to get back to the hobbit hole of his research, but who was forced by the political situation in which he found himself - and the failures of others to step up and do the job - to march off and confront the dragon."

Hard not to call him a hero for having done so.

This essay couldn’t have been written without extensive cribbing from the analysis and bibliography of Dr. Spencer Weart at his extraordinary Web site <a href="http://www.aip.org/history/climate/index.html" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold;">The Discovery of Global Warming</a>: A hypertext history of how scientists came to (partly) understand what people are doing to cause climate change. Weart is director of the Center for History of Physics of the American Institute of Physics in College Park, Maryland.

</div>

<h4 style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.1; font-weight: normal; text-transform: uppercase; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">ORIGINALLY POSTED TO <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/blog/main/" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4; text-decoration: none;">DAILY KOS</a> ON MON JAN 14, 2008 AT 06:01 PM PST.</h4>

==