[Well, at least one of O's cabinet members is not soft spoken]
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-warming4-2009feb04,0,7454963.story
February 4, 2009 The Los Angeles Times
California farms, vineyards in peril from warming, U.S. energy secretary warns
'We're looking at a scenario where there's no more agriculture in
California,' Steven Chu says.
By Jim Tankersley
Reporting from Washington -- California's farms and vineyards could
vanish by the end of the century, and its major cities could be in
jeopardy, if Americans do not act to slow the advance of global
warming, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu said Tuesday.
In his first interview since taking office last month, the
Nobel-prize-winning physicist offered some of the starkest comments
yet on how seriously President Obama's cabinet views the threat of
climate change, along with a detailed assessment of the
administration's plans to combat it.
Chu warned of water shortages plaguing the West and Upper Midwest
and particularly dire consequences for California, his home state,
the nation's leading agricultural producer.
In a worst case, Chu said, up to 90% of the Sierra snowpack could
disappear, all but eliminating a natural storage system for water
vital to agriculture.
"I don't think the American public has gripped in its gut what could
happen," he said. "We're looking at a scenario where there's no more
agriculture in California." And, he added, "I don't actually see how
they can keep their cities going" either.
A pair of recent studies raise similar warnings. One, published in
January in the journal Science, raised the specter of worldwide crop
shortages as temperatures rise. Another, penned by UC Berkeley
researchers last year, estimated California has about $2.5 trillion
in real estate assets -- including agriculture -- endangered by
warming.
Chu is not a climate scientist. He won his Nobel for work trapping
atoms with laser light. He taught at Stanford University and
directed the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, where he
reoriented researchers to pursue "clean energy" technologies to help
reduce the use of greenhouse-gas-emitting fossil fuels in the U.S.,
before Obama tapped him to head the Energy Department.
He stressed the threat of climate change in his Senate confirmation
hearings and in a video clip posted on Obama's transition website,
but not as bluntly, nor in as dire terms, as he did Tuesday.
In the course of a half-hour interview, Chu made clear that he sees
public education as a key part of the administration's strategy to
fight global warming -- along with billions of dollars for
alternative energy research and infrastructure, a national standard
for electricity from renewable sources and cap-and-trade legislation
to limit greenhouse gas emissions.
He said the threat of warming is keeping policymakers focused on
alternatives to fossil fuel, even though gasoline prices have fallen
over the last six months from historic highs. But he said public
awareness needs to catch up. He compared the situation to a family
buying an old house and being told by an inspector that it must pay
a hefty sum to rewire it or risk an electrical fire that could burn
everything down.
"I'm hoping that the American people will wake up," Chu said, and
pay the cost of rewiring.
Environmentalists welcomed the comments as a sharp break from the
Bush administration, which often minimized research about global
warming.
"To say the least, it's a breath of fresh air," said Bernadette Del
Chiaro, who directs the clean air and global warming program for
Environment California. "We've been worried about the impacts of
global warming for years, even decades. He's absolutely right --
California stands to lose so much in our way of life."
Global warming skeptics were not swayed. "I am hopeful Secretary Chu
will take note of the real-world data, new studies and the growing
chorus of international scientists that question his climate
claims," Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the top Republican on the
Environment and Public Works Committee, said in a statement.
"Computer model predictions of the year 2100 are simply not evidence
of a looming climate catastrophe."