Matthew Cordell's Blog 
Porsche Unveils Green Supercar
Matthew Cordell March 2, 2010 - 2:42 pm

Today, at the 80th Geneva Motor Show, Porsche unveiled the 918 Spyder, which gets 94 mpg and goes from 0 to 60 mph in 3.2 seconds. For comparison, versions of the 911 get 14 to 21 mpg and go from 0 to 60 in 4.2 to 5.8 seconds.
Why so fast? It's got a 3.4-liter, V8 race car engine and a shell made of "carbon-fibre reinforced plastic with a liberal sprinkling of aluminium and magnesium."
The website of BBC car show Top Gear -- one of the best shows on television, period -- practically salivates over this "surprise" and seems confident that Porsche will bring the car to production.
However, the real test for many will be whether Top Gear's lead host, Climate-skeptic and hybrid-Honda-hater Jeremy Clarkson, will warm to the 918. Please Porsche, get the 918 to Clarkson and the Stig soon.
*Photo:The Sun
The Worst Part of Waking Up
Matthew Cordell March 2, 2010 - 11:38 am
Last week, the International Coffee Organization met in Guatemala (a couple of blocks from my house) to discuss sustainability. It was taken seriously; three heads of government -- Colom, Porfirio, and Funes -- showed up. Rightly so, roughly 25 million small producers rely on the crop for their living. And the rest of us consume over 500 billion cups a year. I'm certainly drinking my fair share.
The consensus: coffee producers are getting "hammered" by climate change. According to the head of the ICO Nestor Osorio, "In the last 25 years the temperature has risen half a degree in coffee producing countries, five times more than in the 25 years before." This pushes growers higher toward cooler terroir, creating another competitor for already scarce resources on diminishing arable land. The UN Environment Program believes that an increase in 2 degrees Celsius could end coffee production in Uganda. Elsewhere, like in India, in the Coorg region, Arabica farms have seen rainfall decrease by a third.
I've talked to some coffee growers in Guatemala myself, about 3 or 4 months ago. In addition to the cooler climate, the growers complained of dealing with less predictability in the already sensitive growing season. These producers also took pride in being all organic, which further increases the vulnerability of the crop.
*Apparently Johnny Cash also once sang "The Best Part of Waking Up." If a video exists and anyone has access, I'd love to see it.
Gore Takes on "ClimateGate"
Matthew Cordell March 1, 2010 - 11:02 am
In the Saturday edition of the NY Times, Al Gore took on climate skeptics and surveyed the land for pending cap-and-trade legislation. Of course, it's no surprise that Gore has the ammunition to take down the Johnny-come-latelies.
It would be an enormous relief if the recent attacks on the science of global warming actually indicated that we do not face an unimaginable calamity requiring large-scale, preventive measures to protect human civilization as we know it....[W]hat a burden would be lifted! We would no longer have to worry that our grandchildren would one day look back on us as a criminal generation that had selfishly and blithely ignored clear warnings that their fate was in our hands. We could instead celebrate the naysayers who had doggedly persisted in proving that every major National Academy of Sciences report on climate change had simply made a huge mistake.
That's right. Gore stacks up the National Academy of Sciences, in addition to the IPCC, against Inhofe's list. And, then he corrects critics by pointing out that NASA "confirmed last month that the last 10 years were the hottest decade since modern records have been kept."
All of this is fun, but probably futile. Serious people already understand that climate change is real. The rest are unlikely to listen to Gore. His Op-Ed's real value-add could be showing the way forward. He does begin to defend cap-and-trade.
Some analysts attribute the failure to an inherent flaw in the design of the chosen solution — arguing that a cap-and-trade approach is too unwieldy and difficult to put in place. Moreover, these critics add, the financial crisis that began in 2008 shook the world’s confidence in the use of any market-based solution.
But...there is no readily apparent alternative that would be any easier politically. It is difficult to imagine a globally harmonized carbon tax or a coordinated multilateral regulatory effort. The flexibility of a global market-based policy — supplemented by regulation and revenue-neutral tax policies — is the option that has by far the best chance of success.
He ends by calling on Sens. Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman to include a strong cap on carbon emissions in legislation they will unveil this week, but not before describing in detail the social and systemic barriers to forward progress. These include:
- "[t]he globalization of the economy," which "has simultaneously heightened fears of further job losses in the industrial world and encouraged rising expectations in emerging economies," resulting in "[h]eightened opposition, in both the industrial and developing worlds, to any constraints on the use of carbon-based fuels."
- the rise of "market fundamentalism that encouraged opponents of regulatory constraints to mount an aggressive effort to shift the internal boundary between the democracy sphere and the market sphere"
- "the replacement of newspapers and magazines by television as the dominant medium of communication," conferring "powerful advantages on wealthy advocates of unrestrained markets and weakened advocates of legal and regulatory reforms"
Of course, he's brilliant, but, in the end, what's the point? Yes, climate change is real, and, yes, he's done well illuminating the barriers, but it's clear that the process is badly stuck. The old strategies aren't working. That includes "hoping" that new climate legislation won't drop cap-and-trade, as it is expected to. With all the respect in the world, what we don't need right now are lengthy essays showing the lay of the land.
What's needed is a game-changing political strategy or a brawler willing to play hard. I think Gore probably has both within him. And he's obviously well-positioned to lead. He's the clear standard-bearer on this issue. I hope this is just the opening salvo in his new push that will include more frequent, harder-hitting, and shorter jabs against those standing in his way.
Inhofe Explains Climate "Hoax"
Matthew Cordell February 26, 2010 - 1:09 pm
Grist's Amanda Little talked to Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla) after the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee's Feb. 23 hearing about his views on climate change, which he believes to be a hoax perpetrated by the UN and the IPCC. The interview is an amazing insight into how his mind works.
In a nut shell, Inhofe believes that the UN and IPCC are perpetuating a hoax on the world and that climate change doesn't exist. Who else is in on it? As Little wisely points out, energy companies, "top executives in all industries," the Pentagon, evangelical leaders, NASA, NOAA, and governments around the world, who are, according to Inhofe, "tied to the IPCC."
Why would they possibly do that? Grant money. A grand global hoax perpetrated by thousands of scientists (and supported by countless others) because they want to tap into some elusive hoard of grant money sitting somewhere. By forming a consensus, aren't they all competing for the same grant money now? Those who perpetuate this argument should be prepared to look in the mirror. Isn't the best way to make a name for yourself these days (as a scientist or a senator) to be a dissenter?
Inhofe has become a self-proclaimed champion of "dissenting" scientists, whose views he published in an EPW "minority report." The Center for Inquiry did a pretty thorough take down of Inhofe's report, which included findings that over 80 percent of these "scientists" (almost 10 percent weren't) had "no peer-reviewed publication record related to climate science." In other words, almost all of Inhofe's crew aren't climate scientists.
I wish I could just copy and paste the entire interview, but I can't. You should read it.
Tune in to American Idol Now!
Matthew Cordell February 24, 2010 - 8:13 pm
At 8pm EST, Season 8 winner Kris Allen will perform "Let it Be" and present footage of his trip to Haiti with the UN Foundation.
Kris traveled with UN Foundation CEO Kathy Calvin to Haiti to raise funds and awareness last week. This episode is part of the show's Idol Gives Back series, intended to do exactly what the title suggests. Viewers will be able to donate online or by texting during the show.
For a primer on the UN's work in Haiti, check out our coverage. Mark also posted some clips from the trip.
*Photo: American Idol
"My Camera is My Gun"
Matthew Cordell February 24, 2010 - 10:42 am
Last night, on Frontline, Afghan journalist Najibullah Quraishi gave us a peek at the inner workings of insurgents operating in northern Afghanistan. At the invitation of insurgent Commander Mirwais, Quraishi spent 10 days embedded a the cell as they attempted to disrupt one of the key supply routes to Kabul through Kunduz and Baghlan.
Needless to say, it's a must see. This kind of access is rare. Quraishi keeps the camera rolling when he's not supposed to -- not that the insurgents' public relations apparatus is highly functioning -- and we get a pretty solid view of what this group's all about.
For the most part, it's really not that impressive. The insurgents, identified by Quraishi as mainly Hizb-e Islami but with some Taliban and foreign elements, use weapons buried since the Russian invasion and donated by villagers, along with IEDs made from old Russian shells, filled by hand and tamped with sticks. When they arrived at the highway, they weren't really sure how to hide; their intelligence network continually failed; and their knowledge about the IED cell-phone trigger was rudimentary, at best. When the mission was bust, and even before, the default was to point the finger: "You're sitting there on cotton cushions, and we're in the fields."
When they head to the mountains, they're asked to mediate disputes, and, interestingly, they jail and propose beheading for a man known to be involved in the drug trade.
There's also very little discussion of Islam, though one gentleman's job is to "make sure everyone prays five times a day." With a smile on his face, he slaps those who make mistakes while trying to memorize the Koran. The true bogeyman, however, is "foreign forces in Afghanistan," which jibes with the suggestion by Hizb-e Islami's leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar that he would be willing to reconcile with the Karzai government if foreign forces were to leave.
*Photo: Frontline
Bloom Box Wave of the Future?
Matthew Cordell February 23, 2010 - 3:18 pm
On Sunday 60 Minutes introduced the world to the "Bloom Box," a "power-plant-in-a-box" that gets buried in your backyard, off the grid. That's right, your own personal, clean power system.
As game-changing as it sounds, Bloom Energy is not the only crew working on such a box. In fact, some are working on a nuclear box -- small, sealed reactor in a concrete block with a heat tube -- that could provide cheap, long-lasting energy for communities in the developing world...if it weren't for the whole security thing.
However, what makes Bloom's box so interesting is the reverse reaction, in which the waste CO2 is put back through the system, producing more fuel. In other words, in theory, less greenhouse gas waste, more power. All of these systems (including those from Panasonic, Ceres, and ClearEdge) are a beacon of hope in the fight against climate change, but Bloom could be a cut above. Though, according to Wired, "transforming carbon dioxide into fuels isn’t easy and neither is conserving that energy from the first reaction to run the second one."
Why should we believe that Bloom has the goods? The genius behind this project is K.R. Sridhar, a rocket scientist who had originally built a similar system to create oxygen for the planned manned mission to Mars. That's right, a la Total Recall. When the mission got scrapped, Sridhar turned to this project, and he could be soon delivering it to your backyard.
Rousseff to Run for Brazilian Presidency
Matthew Cordell February 22, 2010 - 9:02 pm
Dilma Rousseff, Brazilian President Lula de Silva's chief of staff, was nominated today to represent the Worker's Party in the upcoming presidential election. She is known as the "iron lady." Lula is term-limited.
Rousseff's candidacy continues the rise of women in Latin American politics. If elected, Latin America will have more female heads of government than Europe. Her victory would be significant both in quantity and quality. Brazil has the largest economy in the region.
However, despite Lula's popularity, Rousseff's victory is far from certain. She trails conservative governor Jose Serra by over 5 points, though she has gained ground since November. We'll be following the campaign here on UN Dispatch.
Palin Takes the Easy Road on Climate Change
Matthew Cordell February 22, 2010 - 8:11 pm
Today Sarah Palin became a "follower" on her own Facebook account. Sadly she decided to lock herself in step with the group of opportunists trying to derail needed action on climate change. That's more going steady than going rogue.
Let me repeat. These people are "opportunists." Some climate scientists have screwed up, but what they have truly damaged are the political prospects of those of us that understand the need for urgent action not the underlying science supporting climate change. With a modicum of thought, those who continue to hold up those missteps as proof that climate change doesn't exist would realize that they only speak to the periphery of climate reports not the bedrock truth that humankind is changing the planet and that there will be irrevocable consequences. I'll leave it to you to decide whether they actually put in that effort or not.
Palin's post is a prime example of such an attempted diversion. She writes, "The IPCC’s supposedly definitive report proving the theory is riddled with serious errors," while bulldozing over the fact that those errors don't speak at all to the core of climate science. In reality it's a perverse sort of ad hominem attack on the IPCC and the 620 scientists who authored the 4th assessment report. The argument goes: they've made these errors, therefore everything they've said must be an error. But, in reality, none of these mistakes undercuts at all the scientific consensus that greenhouse gases have raised and will continue to raise global temperatures, a belief held by nearly all climate scientists.
She then tries to back herself up by suggesting that the former head of the IPCC, Greenpeace UK, and the Natural Environment Research Council are in her corner. They clearly are not. They have attacked the IPCC because they believe, rightfully so, that these petty errors can be used by opportunists to distract from the central and unwavering truths of climate science. Alan Thorpe says as much in the article to which Palin links:
We open ourselves up to trouble if we start getting into hearsay and grey literature. We have enough research that has been peer-reviewed to provide evidence for climate change, so it is concerning that the IPCC has strayed from that.
All in all, Palin's strategy is to belittle a serious matter so that she might take a political hack at President Obama and push for a "true free market approach to energy independence" that fails to take into account the clear negative externalities of reliance on fossil fuels. Now that "isn't based on sound economics." And her statement that "America has the proven reserves needed to meet our energy challenges" is just obviously wrong. Ironic that Palin makes a glaring over-reach in a post blasting the IPCC for the doing the same.
The truth is that it is inconvenient for Palin and those she follows to accept the truth and far too convenient for them to try to score political points by attacking those who have the guts, the foresight, and the selflessness to accept that which is unpleasant. That is the real tragedy of these mistakes; it's made it easier to take the easy road -- as Palin has done here.








DISPATCH TWEETS











SVU Brings Attention to Rape as Weapon of War
Matthew Cordell March 17, 2010 - 2:43 pm
Comment ( 1 )
It's almost always painful to watch when TV shows try to stretch to make a statement, and SVU is only the second best Law & Order on NBC, but rape as a weapon of war gets such weak attention and I'm interested enough in John Prendergast's involvement that I'm willing to tune in to NBC tonight (Wednesday, March 17, 10pm ET).
The plot:
SVU's Benson penned a post on Huffington today with Prendergast explaining the broader issue:
The punchline of the piece is a call to urge industries not to use these minerals. We'll jump on that bandwagon too.