Breakthrough: Breakthrough Institute's Debate with Joe Romm

(most recent posts appear first)

Romm Tries to Shut Down Climate Bill Debate by Attacking Breakthrough (May 2009): Joe Romm's attempt to shut down serious debate about the Waxman-Markey climate bill -- and his aggressive effort to attack and discredit those attempting to illuminate the bill's weaknesses, including reputable environmental activists and reporters -- should raise questions about his role as a credible and progressive climate advocate.

The Cap & Trade We Need (April 2009): Joe Romm of claims that we oppose a price on carbon, oppose environmental regulations, and are effectively part of the fossil fuel "global warming denial machine." Unfortunately, ideological enforcers like Romm, who aim to shut down this kind of debate, leave serious advocates ill prepared to navigate the difficult choices in the upcoming debate on climate legislation.

Is Joe Romm an Energy Challenge Denier? (April 2009): Romm continues to deny a wide body of expert consensus on energy innovation, including the positions of Secretary of Energy Steven Chu and the International Energy Agency.

Steven Chu calls for $150 billion investment in "breakthrough" energy R&D (March 2009): Once again, Secretary of Energy Chu debunks Romm's views on energy technology, testifying before the U.S. Senate and calling for "breakthroughs in energy" technology, including major investments in "transformational research."

What's driving opinion on global warming? (March 2009): Michael Shellenberger responds to Romm's assertion that new climate polling data "must be due to the messaging and the media and the misinformers."

Energy Secretary Steven Chu: Honorary Breakthrough Fellow? (Feb 2009): Joe Romm consistently claims we have all the technologies we need to address climate change, attacking those calling for "breakthroughs" in energy technology as "climate delayers." In a conversation with reporters, Obama Energy Secretary and Nobel Prize Laureate Dr. Steven Chu said solving global energy and climate challenges would require Nobel-level "breakthroughs" in at least three core energy technologies

An Open Letter to Joseph Romm (Oct 2008): In response to Michael and Ted's op-ed in the LA Times, Joe Romm criticized Michael, Ted and Breakthrough on his blog. This post is an open letter from Michael Shellenberger to Joe Romm.

Despite claims, climate ranks low on public priorities (Oct 2008): Romm revealed multiple flawed assumptions in his latest attack, but one stood out above all the rest. Despite all the empirical evidence, Joseph Romm believes global warming is a high public priority. Romm and other greens will continue to peddle this false belief at their peril.

Arguing Both Sides at Climate Progress (Aug 2008): After attacking Roger Pielke for his analysis published in Nature, Joe Romm cites the same analysis as evidence in support of the idea that the IPCC scenarios have built in assumptions about aggressive reductions in carbon and energy intensities.

Why We Can Disagree to Agree (Aug 2008): In a debate at the Cato Institute, Shellenberger and Nordhaus argue that liberals and conservatives don't need to agree about the seriousness of global warming. We can all embrace investment in energy infrastructure, technology, and education for reasons that have nothing to do with climate change.

International Energy Agency Calls for Massive Clean Energy Technology Push (June 2008): In its major new Energy Technology Perspectives 2008 report, the International Energy Agency challenges Joe Romm's claims on energy technology, calling for technological breakthroughs in nearly every single one of its recommended technologies.

Breakthroughs Depend on Learning While Doing (May 2008): In response to Joe Romm's latest post in the "breakthrough technology illusion," Jesse Jenkins clarifies how many breakthroughs in clean energy price and performance require not just research but also the deployment of technologies in the real world. Breakthroughs will be achieved less in the laboratory and more by learning while doing.

Romm Calls for Breakthroughs - By Another Name (May 2008): Lindsay Meisel examines Romm's piece in Salon, discovering that his analysis relies upon major improvements ("breakthroughs") in energy technology.

Anatomy of a Smear (May 2008): To get a sense at how the enforcers of climate orthodoxy on both left and right restrict the debate over solutions, witness the way Grist's David Roberts and Joe Romm of Center for American Progress conspired with the right-wing Washington Times to slime Breakthrough Senior Fellow Roger Pielke, Jr.

The Wisdom of Investment in a World of Mounting Wedges (April 2008): In response to Romm's flawed wedge analysis, Ted Nordhaus writes about why it's a risky bet to count on current technology and currently proposed policies to meet the climate challenge.

Solar Energy Not Quite Ready For Prime Time (April 2008): In response to Romm's claim that solar technology doesn't require federal investment, Ted Nordhaus says Romm is being overoptimistic about the current state of solar power. "It's a great time to expand R&D, not contract it."

The Debate Gets Civil (April 2008):
Joe Romm finally apologizes for attacking Breakthrough as "delayers," and we move towards more productive debate.

What is Joe Romm Complaining About? (April 2008):
Roger Pielke, Jr. ponders ad hominem attacks from someone who seems to share many of his views on energy policy. In complementary posts, Pielke takes Romm to task for focusing heavily on semantics rather than substance, fuzzy math, and incorrect analysis.

The Emerging Climate Fault Line (April 2008): Joe Romm has launched a set of hysterical attacks against Pielke et al, calling their analysis "a pointless and misleading if not outright dangerous commentary" and paints the scientists as "standard delayers" and "climate destroyers."

Romm versus Expert Consensus on Energy Technology (April 2008): Michael Shellenberger contrasts Romm's position -- that we don't need technology breakthroughs to stabilize emissions -- with that of energy experts.

Adaptation and Public Investment: The Expert View (April 2008): Michael Shellenberger writes a letter to Joe Romm attempting to understand his opinion on climate adaptation and public investment in clean energy technology.

The Green Politics of Personal Destruction: Deconstructing Joe Romm (April 2008): Ted Nordhaus examines the misinformation campaign Romm and others launched against Breakthrough and Roger Pielke, Jr. immediately after the publication of the Nature piece.

Misinformation Campaign (April 2008): Unable to respond with a well-reasoned defense of their policy agenda, a few angry environmentalists are leading a misinformation campaign.

Joe Romm's Challenge (April 2008): Roger Pielke, Jr. responds to Joe Romm's challenge to back up the Nature piece claim to "shatter the notion that we have all the technology we need to deal with climate change."

Hansen's Holocaust Comparison: Or, Why Moralizing on Global Warming Won't Work (Nov 2007): Michael Shellenberger responds to Joe Romm's approving quotation of James Hansen comparing coal-fired power plants to "death trains."

Post a comment