Peter Kalmus, the man speaking to the Greens, and what he really should be talking about

First of all, I have to "love" how the Green Party says its annual convention is going to be virtual this year because the world is still recovering from COVID. Worldometers says that's a lie, whether for the world as a whole or the US. And, if you really believe that shit, have fun as People's CDC and fellow travelers squaring off with the general antivaxxer types in the party, or the "libertarian Green" oxymorons.

Update, Aug. 7: There was a minor surge, end of July and start of August, yes, but the US never (AFAIK, having just gotten back from vacation, broke 100 deaths a day, and certainly not for more than 2 days straight. That is STILL *just* 36,500 a year, no worse than an average "just the flu" six-month season less than a full year.

Admit it's for budget reasons.

Or better, as Greens, say it's for climate reasons, to reduce fossil fuel emissions from jets and cars to travel. But, make sure to push Zoom attendees to be buying renewable electricity. (And, try to figure out why you didn't try Zoom or something similar, in at least odd-numbered years, pre-COVID, on that account.)

Peter Kalmus? Intense on the subject, per Pro Publica. Contra his hope not to be one, he's a doomer. And, why was he raising backyard chickens? Buy free-range commercial chickens, or semi-commercial larger lot backyarders from somebody else. And, eat less of them. He should know the carbon math about meat, even poultry.

Speaking of, per EPA, 7 percent of the 28 percent of the transportation sector's GHG emissions come from commercial aircraft. Kalmus could trim various portions of the pie chart, or get others to do so by, in the transportation sector, pushing for:

• Tighter fuel standards for SUVs;
• For both cars and trucks/SUVs, getting rid of the flex fuel loophole;
• Getting rid of E15 gas;
• Improving mass transit by not only getting funds for hybrid drive buses, but putting MORE but SMALLER buses on the street to run more frequent routes, thereby making mass transit more attractive.

Focus on that, and you'd probably get rid of half as much GHG as from getting rid of air travel entirely. Blindly attacking air travel, as Kalmus also does, along with the author, in a Counterpunch piece (commercial, not executive business and other private jets) has long struck me as a form of virtue signaling, mixed with medieval monastic hair shirts or flagellations.

Also, contra David Yearsley at that link? Johann Jakob Froberger and others 200 years ago left carbon footprints as part of their actual footprints. Horses don't fart or belch as much as cows, but they do. And, 200 years ago, not all their manure was recycled in gardens and fields; there's plenty a story about a late 19th century New York or London's problems with horse shit.

Back to the second main idea, though, on other ways to cut GHGs as good or better than addressing air travel.

On power? New federal legislation that says Fannie / Freddie will not buy up mortgages in states that don't promote rooftop solar on new homes. Game-changer right there.

For US aid for the developing world, with new advances in DC power allowing for longer distribution? Helping places like sub-Saharan African countries build more local DC power plants to distribute wind and solar. HUGE. (Update: Per this Wired piece, Just Energy Transition Partnerships are helping in some degree, but there's little in the way of hard numbers, especially on how much fiscal help is behind these things, and how much of that is loans vs grants and similar.)

Update, Aug. 19: Last night on Twitter, per "gay barista Paul" and others responding, Kalmus said he was "surprised" Biden hadn't declared a climate emergency. Unless that tweet was 110 percent rhetorical, it says a lot more about Kalmus than about Climatemonger Joe.