Google CEO Eric Schmidt's Eco Forum Talk

Somebody just sent me a link to this YouTube video capturing Eric Schmidt's talk at the Eco Forum about how companies (and even private citizens) can help reduce the environmental degradation going on today. Schmidt does not lay the responsibility for humanity's survival on the earth in the hands of politicians; he places it squarely on the shoulders of private firms and individuals, who, he says, are much more easily able to effect environmental change than any American politician/administration. That changes the whole context of the global warming debate, as it puts the onus of action back on people and companies, rather than letting us wait for our slow-moving governments to do the things we should be doing.
Schmidt continues in the speech by talking about an idea that I think is exactly on the mark: ultimately, it will not be sweeping innovations or governmental mandates that will increase our chances of survival on the earth. Rather, it will be the continuing drive towards efficient production/consumption that will lead to a more sustainable tenure on earth for humanity. We have to learn how to produce and consume the things we need (and want) in ways that allow for the upcoming generations of humanity to be able to produce and consume those things as well. Schmidt explains how he hopes to make Google more efficient, talking about the solar and wind power projects already in place around Google campuses, and provides suggestions for how the US, as a whole, can shift towards reduced resource consumption and improved alternative energy production (here, he sometimes leans on government help).
Overall, it's a really good talk from somebody who is in a position to do something about the global warming problem and actually seems to be doing his bit. It also reassures me, despite the Chrome privacy snafus, etc., that Google still has its head in the right place...

[via YouTube]

Obama Science Policy

I just read through a questionnaire that Senator Obama finally responded to (Senator McCain still hasn't done so) regarding science/technology/space/environment/education policies in his administration. Being a fairly liberal person, I am pretty happy with what Senator Obama put down; feel free to read it if you want. They also have synopses of other things he has said about the above issues.

[via SEA]

Google + Conservation

People already use Google extensively in almost every aspect of their lives. So, apparently, a German non-profit decided to create a site that uses Google's search engine but diverts all search-based ad revenues to Nature Conservancy donations. Interesting, eh?
The "search engine" frontend for Forestle is located at, you guessed it, http://www.forestle.org

[via Ars Technica]

McCain's Real Alternative Energy Policy

I know everyone who's been watching the Olympics in the US has seen the McCain ads about how he's really strongly in favor of alternative energy and energy independence. Here is the truth:

"It was only five days earlier, on July 30, that the Senate was voting for the eighth time in the past year on a broad, vitally important bill — S. 3335 — that would have extended the investment tax credits for installing solar energy and the production tax credits for building wind turbines and other energy-efficiency systems. ...

"Senator McCain did not show up for the crucial vote on July 30, and the renewable energy bill was defeated for the eighth time. In fact, John McCain has a perfect record on this renewable energy legislation. He has missed all eight votes over the last year — which effectively counts as a no vote each time. Once, he was even in the Senate and wouldn’t leave his office to vote.

I guess all those wind-turbine commercials on TV are supposed to replace the votes he should have been casting in favor of renewable energy investment tax credits.

[via NYT]

Obama okay with offshore oil-drilling

Earlier today, Barack Obama shifted his view on offshore oil drilling in the United States during a speech he gave to Michigan voters. Just to recap, previously, Senator Obama was strictly against drilling in the Gulf of Mexico for any reason, even to make things easier for Americans (which, in the long term, and probably even the short term, it won't do). His view has changed somewhat:

He said he might be willing to accept some exploration of limited offshore drilling as part of a more comprehensive energy bill that would include things he favors, like renewable fuels and batteries for electric-powered cars.

(By the way, the above quote is the most equivocal statement I've read in a long time in the New York Times ["might be willing", "some exploration", "more comprehensive"...]) It's sadly clear why he is doing this - to garner up some votes that McCain seemed to be taking away from him. But, if he really was going to be an "Ideas President" and the "Candidate for Change," he really would not succumb to such distractions. I understand that he wants limited exploration of offshore drilling, packaged within a larger push towards oil independence based on alternative energy investments and hybrid automobile incentives. But that still does not explain why anyone with generally smart economic advisors (some of them being UChicago professors) would suggest even limited offshore drilling when everyone (including Obama himself) says that there is no long-term benefit to drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Just a few days ago, he did the right thing, saying "I'm in favor of solving problems. What I don't want to do is say something because it sounds good politically." Why did he change his mind so suddenly?

[via NYT]

[2008-08-05] Update: I thought about this a little more last night... Somehow, I feel that what Obama did here was take the easier way out. If you will recall, his popularity (at least with me, I guess) skyrocketed when, instead of simply distancing himself from Rev. Wright, Senator Obama gave a speech on race relations that was so elegant in content and delivery that it has since become known as the Race Speech. He didn't take the simple way out there; rather, using his intelligence and eloquence, Obama explained to us his viewpoint and stance. Admittedly, he ultimately did back away from Rev. Wright (leaving Wright's church), but he did it with a measure of class that is unseen in current politicians. This time around, I can't say I feel he took any high road. He saw he was on the unpopular side of an issue. Despite knowing and admitting earlier to knowing that the right side of the issue was the unpopular side, he changed his view so that he was no longer on the right/unpopular side. Maybe I have McCain to blame for this particular situation (who, by the way, has proven many times over that he is worse for the environment and long-term human survival on the earth than Obama by several magnitudes). But, somehow, I feel the blame falls not just on McCain. This time around, Obama failed to raise the level of debate and Americans (and probably the world) will suffer as a consequence.