Earlier, both North Carolina and Virginia have declared states of emergency.

Coastal residents from the Carolinas as far north as Cape Cod are on high alert for Earl, which returned to Category 4 strength this afternoon, packing maximum sustained winds of 135 mph. Earl had been downgraded to Category 3. Officials said they expect “fluctuations” in the storm’s force in the coming days.

No matter the label, Earl is expected to pack a wallop. The National Hurricane Center warned that Earl could send water rising 3 to 5 feet along coastal areas.

With Earl tracking northwest, North Carolina Gov. Beverly Perdue declared a state of emergency today, and officials have ordered mandatory evacuations in parts of the state. The storm could hit the North Carolina coastline by late Thursday.

The storm, 400 miles wide, is still forecast to skirt the eastern coastline, but state officials worry it could change its mind.

Video credit: ABC News

NASA Satellite Captures Hurricane Earl on September 1, 2010 [HD Video]:

Video credit: NASA/GSFC/GOES/NOAA

Image credit: NOAA’s National Weather Service National Hurricane Center

The infrared satellite shows the “textbook structure of a major hurricane“:

Image credit: Weather.com

Here’s an astronaut’s eye view of Hurricane Earl from Space via NASA (taken August 31, 2010):

Image credit: NASA/JSC Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth

NASA Satellite Captures Hurricane Earl on September 1, 2010:

Image credit: NASA/GSFC/GOES/NOAA

On the Net:

1. 2010 Hurricane Season Tracking Map

When it comes to politics, science, and social issues (e.g., the U.S. Constitution, evolution, and healthcare reform), it’s impossible to argue with people that blatantly espouse contradictions, maintain hypocritical double standards, and are content to wallow in their own willful ignorance. First, consider the issues of constitutional rights, poverty, race, and the views maintained by some Republicans and the Tea Party via the New York Times:

In the Tea Party’s talk of states’ rights, critics say they hear an echo of slavery, Jim Crow and George Wallace. Tea Party activists call that ridiculous: they do not want to take the country back to the discrimination of the past, they say, they just want the states to be able to block the federal mandate on health insurance.

Still, the government programs that many Tea Party supporters call unconstitutional are the ones that have helped many black people emerge from poverty and discrimination. It is not just that Rand Paul, the Republican nominee for Senate in Kentucky, said that he disagreed on principle with the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that required business owners to serve blacks. It is that many Tea Party activists believe that laws establishing a minimum wage or the federal safety net are an improper expansion of federal power.

Critics rightly note that Dr. King spoke over and over of the need for this country to acknowledge its “debt to the poor,” calling for an “economic bill of rights” that would “guarantee a job to all people who want to work and are able to work.” In Mr. Beck’s taxonomy, this would make him a Marxist.

Also, some Republicans and Tea Party members blatantly cherry-pick the portions of the U.S. Constitution that reflects their world view. However, despite the intent of the framers of the U.S. Constitution or even the plain language of some portions within the Constitution, there’s a lot in the Constitution that some Republicans and Tea Party members would like to change. Via the Associated Press:

Republican Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia won his seat in Congress campaigning as a strict defender of the Constitution. He carries a copy in his pocket and is particularly fond of invoking the Second Amendment right to bear arms.

But it turns out there are parts of the document he doesn’t care for — lots of them. He wants to get rid of the language about birthright citizenship, federal income taxes and direct election of senators, among others. He would add plenty of stuff, including explicitly authorizing castration as punishment for child rapists.

This hot-and-cold take on the Constitution is surprisingly common within the GOP, particularly among those like Broun who portray themselves as strict Constitutionalists and who frequently accuse Democrats of twisting the document to serve political aims.

.       .       .

Sessions, who routinely accuses Democrats of trying to subvert the Constitution and calls for respecting the document’s “plain language,” is taking a different approach with the 14th Amendment. “I’m not sure exactly what the drafters of the amendment had in mind,” he said, “but I doubt it was that somebody could fly in from Brazil and have a child and fly back home with that child, and that child is forever an American citizen.”

Other widely supported Republican amendments would prohibit government ownership of private companies, bar same-sex marriage, require a two-thirds vote in Congress to raise taxes, and — an old favorite — prohibit desecration of the American flag.

.       .       .

Holding up the 2nd Amendment as sacrosanct, for example, while dismissing other parts of the Constitution is “cherry picking,” said Kende, director of Drake University’s Constitutional Law Center.

Virginia Sloan, an attorney who directs the nonpartisan Constitution Project, agreed.

“There are a lot of people who obviously don’t like income taxes. That’s a political position,” she said of criticism of the 16th Amendment, which authorized the modern federal income tax more than a century ago. “But it’s in the Constitution … and I don’t think you can go around saying something is unconstitutional just because you don’t like it.”

Sloan said that while some proposals to alter the Constitution have merit, most are little more than posturing by politicians trying to connect with voters.

“People are responding to the politics of the day, and that’s not what the framers intended,” she said. “They intended exactly the opposite — that the Constitution not be used as a political tool.”

The good news, Sloan and Kende said, is that such proposals rarely go anywhere.

[Bruce] Cherry joined a small group of East Bay businesses that have taken advantage of the California Solar Initiative program, which provides rebates for installing photovoltaic systems.

“It is good for the environment,” said Cherry, who has one of the four businesses in town harnessing solar power. “It just made sense (to install) in the long run.”

Since the program began in 2007, 155 businesses in Alameda and Contra Costa counties have applied for state funds to help offset the cost of solar-panel systems.

The 542 solar panels on the top of Cherry’s two Dublin Boulevard buildings generate 50 kilowatts of power. He anticipates that year round it will produce enough to supply the tire store with 85 percent of its energy needs.

The system’s peak performing months are March through November because of the abundance of sunshine.

Since March, Cherry’s utility bill dropped from an average $1,500 a month to just $29 — the monthly connection fee he pays to PG&E to be connected to its power grid.

And Cherry, a San Ramon resident, could end up receiving a check from the utility company at the end of his first year in the program. The energy that Cherry doesn’t use goes to the grid, helping to power surrounding businesses. At the end of each year, the utility tallies up how much energy each solar customer produced and used — and pays them for the excess.

See more animal camouflage here on The Conservation Report.

Peter Drew, an artist, is using guerrilla stencilling to illustrate the benefits of biking to work. According to a post on Quickrelease.tv, “It’s by artist Peter Drew of Adelaide. I’m interviewing him for the next iteration of the Bike to Work Book. I love his work. It’s guerrilla stencilling.”

Apparently, thorough its ability to clone, the trembling aspen—at 80,000 years of age and weighing 6,000 tons—is thought to be the oldest and heaviest organism on the planet. More via the BBC:

In the new study, Dr Ally and her team studied populations of trembling aspen to investigate the effects of cloning on tree fertility.

The aspen is particularly renowned for its ability to clone itself. Clones sprout from the roots and each is considered part of the same parent tree.

The single largest aspen clone – named Pando meaning “I spread” – is believed to be 80,000 years old and weighs 6,000 tonnes, which if confirmed would make it the world’s oldest and heaviest organism.

.       .       .

Dr Ally’s team found that genetic mutations gradually build up with each subsequent generation of clone, resulting in a decline in fertility. This means that the aspen cannot clone itself indefinitely, but eventually must reproduce sexually or die.

Since they’re clones, scientists are concerned that these magnificent trees are susceptible to diebacks that may be triggered by climate change, disease, drought, pests, invasive species, or predation by herbivores. Via the New York Times:

The aspen dieback is particularly baffling in that it seems to be occurring just in some Western states and is not affecting any neighboring trees, many of which already suffer from a plague of mountain pine beetles that has been devastating the West.

Since word of the aspen dieback began spreading last fall, Dr. Shepperd’s office began receiving reports of similar losses throughout the West — not just Colorado, where the problem is most predominant, but also in Utah, Idaho, Nevada, Montana, Arizona and southern Wyoming.

.       .       .

The die-off is particularly worrisome because of the special nature of the aspen. The tree reproduces through vegetative regeneration. Genetically identical suckers sprout from the root of one tree and become clones. If the root of an aspen dies, it is unlikely to reproduce.

.       .       .

“We’ve seen in southern Utah, over a period of 12 years, where we have very healthy-looking clones with dark green leaves go to sites where there aren’t any trees left at all,” Mr. Bartos said, adding that in other cases researchers had observed an even quicker rate of decline. “To me, 12 years is fairly rapid when we’re talking about trees that have been on site for 100 to 125 years.” Nevertheless, the scientists who met in Utah to look for a solution came away somewhat hopeful, said John Guyon, a forest pathologist for the Intermountain Regional Office of the Forest Service.

Mr. Guyon said he thought that grazing elk and cattle might be eating away the regenerating aspen. And because the trees thrive after disruptions like avalanches and fires, the lack of such disturbances may be contributing to the dieback.

Aggressive national policies in Europe are rapidly replacing nonrenewable energy sources with renewable resources as the source of electricity for their electricity grids. The new energy sources translate into national security gains and into meeting environmental and sustainable goals. Via The New York Times (emphasis added):

Today, Lisbon’s trendy bars, Porto’s factories and the Algarve’s glamorous resorts are powered substantially by clean energy. Nearly 45 percent of the electricity in Portugal’s grid will come from renewable sources this year, up from 17 percent just five years ago.

Land-based wind power — this year deemed “potentially competitive” with fossil fuels by the International Energy Agency in Paris — has expanded sevenfold in that time. And Portugal expects in 2011 to become the first country to inaugurate a national network of charging stations for electric cars.

.       .       .

Still, aggressive national policies to accelerate renewable energy use are succeeding in Portugal and some other countries, according to a recent report by IHS Emerging Energy Research of Cambridge, Mass., a leading energy consulting firm. By 2025, the report projected, Ireland, Denmark and Britain will also get 40 percent or more of their electricity from renewable sources; if power from large-scale hydroelectric dams, an older type of renewable energy, is included, countries like Canada and Brazil join the list.
The United States, which last year generated less than 5 percent of its power from newer forms of renewable energy, will lag behind at 16 percent (or just over 20 percent, including hydroelectric power), according to IHS.

To force Portugal’s energy transition, Mr. Sócrates’s government restructured and privatized former state energy utilities to create a grid better suited to renewable power sources. To lure private companies into Portugal’s new market, the government gave them contracts locking in a stable price for 15 years — a subsidy that varied by technology and was initially high but decreased with each new contract round.
Compared with the United States, European countries have powerful incentives to pursue renewable energy. Many, like Portugal, have little fossil fuel of their own, and the European Union’s emissions trading system discourages fossil fuel use by requiring industry to essentially pay for excessive carbon dioxide emissions.

Portugal was well poised to be a guinea pig because it has large untapped resources of wind and river power, the two most cost-effective renewable sources. Government officials say the energy transformation required no increase in taxes or public debt, precisely because the new sources of electricity, which require no fuel and produce no emissions, replaced electricity previously produced by buying and burning imported natural gas, coal and oil. By 2014 the renewable energy program will allow Portugal to fully close at least two conventional power plants and reduce the operation of others.

The potential higher cost of renewable energy was discussed in the previous article. However, undoubtedly, improved technology and grid modernization will bring down the cost of renewable energy. Also, personally, I’m willing to pay higher energy costs if higher costs reflect the elimination of fossil-fuel subsidies, efforts to modernize the grid, and efforts to introduce more renewable energy into the energy mix.  I view this investment as a prudent investment or an investment into a more secure or sustainable future.

Tougher regulations that aim to clean up our environment,  taxes on nonrenewable energy sources, and policies that reduce or eliminate fossil-fuel subsidies are examples of policies that can make renewables more competitive with cheaper fossil fuels. It’s important to note that the price at the pump or your electricity bill doesn’t reflect the actual price paid for energy derived from fossil-fuel sources, since negative externalities aren’t immediately considered. Via MLive.com:

In an earlier entry, I discussed how increased reliance on renewable energy can have the effect of reducing reliance on coal-fired energy production that in turn reduces the amount of mercury released from coal-fired power plants. But, tougher regulations concerning mercury may have the effect of creating a disincentive to use coal as a fuel source for power plants, thus creating a greater demand for alternative energy. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is working on just these types of regulations.

.       .       .

EPA has already begun to collect the data in order to support its anticipated Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) for utilities. The most likely technology used to reduce mercury emissions is flue gas desulfurization, known commonly as “scrubbers.” EPA has estimated that the cost for scrubbers range from $116 million for large EGU boilers to $7.1 million for small scrubbers on industrial boilers. In all, controlling mercury emissions will not come cheaply.

No later than November 16, 2011, large electric utilities that use coal-fired boilers to generate steam for electricity will need to make hard choices about how to do business. Adding to this tougher operating climate for electric utilities is EPA’s new “Transport Rule”, which regulates sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from some states’ electric utilities. While the anticipated CAMR is not designed to directly affect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, if utilities reduce their reliance on coal to generate electricity, choosing instead to use natural gas (which emits less than half the GHG emissions of coal-fired plants) or increase their reliance on alternative energy, GHG emissions will be reduced.

What’s more, fossil fuels are subsidized ten time more than renewables. Via guardian.co.uk:

Despite repeated pledges to phase out fossil fuel subsidies and criticism from some quarters that government support for renewable energy technologies is too generous, global subsidies provided to renewable energy and biofuels are dwarfed by those enjoyed by the fossil fuel industry.

That is the conclusion of a major report released late last week by analyst Bloomberg New Energy Finance, which analyses subsidies and incentive schemes offered globally to developers of renewable energy and biofuel technologies and projects.

The report concludes that in 2009 governments provided subsidies worth between $43bn (£27bn) and $46bn to renewable energy and biofuel industries, including support provided through feed-in tariffs, renewable energy credits, tax credits, cash grants and other direct subsidies.

In contrast, estimates from the International Energy Agency (IEA) released in June showed that $557bn was spent by governments during 2008 to subsidise the fossil fuel industry.

More via Autoblog Green:

Earlier today, we covered the words of some auto industry insiders at the recent Automotive Research’s Management Briefing Seminar in Traverse City, MI, who said the didn’t like that the Obama Administration was “picking winners” by funneling funds on plug-in vehicles. Well, okay, they’re entitled to their opinion. But, if the industry doesn’t want governments to push one particular energy type over another, maybe auto industry execs should seriously reconsider their support of fossil-fueled engines.

The reason? The Guardian recently reported that Bloomberg New Energy Finance has issued a report that found government subsidies for fossil fuels around the world just plain blow out renewable energy subsidies ten-to-one. Yes, for every dollar the auto execs don’t want spent on plug-in vehicles, there are more than ten bucks given to keep the gas and oil companies in the crude black. The report found that governments spent somewere between $43 and $46 billion on renewable energy and biofuel industries in 2009. By comparison, governments gave $557 billion to the fossil fuel industry in 2008.

–
The author or licensor of these images does not endorse my work or me and their images are protected under an attribution license.

Nature & the environment:

1. Storm chasers capture this jaw-dropping monstrous storm on video:
2. Here’s another menacing stormfront captured on video:
3. Hawaii’s carnivorous caterpillars:
4. “Piwi the Kiwi is hitting the treadmill not to lose weight but to restore his leg strength after breaking his legs in two separate accidents.”
5. Russia’s on fire, and this video shows an attempt to escape from a village, which was left to burn. However, the driver soon discovers, as he drives into the inferno, that the road is on fire. It’s an intense video:
6. Nuclear bomb detonations from 1945 – 1998:

   More at The New Yorker

7. EPA Senior Policy Analyst Hugh Kaufman explains why the dispersants are deadly and how these dispersants were used to mitigate oil spill estimates, save BP billions, but at the cost of human and ecosystem health:

Politics:

1. Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks points out the hypocrisy and selective arguments espoused by anti-gay marriage groups:
2. Bill O’Reilly vs. Laura Ingraham on childhood obesity:
3. David Letterman and Rachel Maddow on Breitbart and Fox News:
4. Sarah Palin confronts Alaska protester with “Worst Governor Ever” sign and claims she understands the U.S. Constitution:

   More at Think Progress

5. The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing Americans that deregulation, small government, and tax cuts work. On “Meet The Press” with David Gregory, John Boehner refuses to pay for tax cuts:
6. Dee Snider, frontman of the heavy metal band Twisted Sister, takes on Al and Tipper Gore:
7. Eric Cantor (R-VA-7th District) can’t name anything he would do to reduce spending:

Health:

1. In this video, Jamie Oliver gives an update on his food revolution. He points out that fruit juices can have just as much sugar as sodas:
2. President Obama explains Healthcare.gov: