Blame Bush for the Weather, Unless It's Good

Three weeks ago Chronicle columnist Mark Morford dispassionately assessed the Bush Administration's stance on global warming:

Five minutes of research on Google reveals more data about calamitous shifts in climate than you can possibly absorb over your morning coffee without suffering a mad desire to strangle BushCo for shunning the Kyoto Treaty like a goddamn child shuns humanitarian broccoli.

And it took just thirty seconds of research on Google to find out that Bush Administration policies are responsible for Hurricane Katrina:

Well, the science is clear. This month, a study published in the journal Nature by a renowned MIT climatologist linked the increasing prevalence of destructive hurricanes to human-induced global warming.

Now we are all learning what it’s like to reap the whirlwind of fossil fuel dependence which [Mississippi Governor Haley] Barbour and his cronies have encouraged. Our destructive addiction has given us a catastrophic war in the Middle East and--now--Katrina is giving our nation a glimpse of the climate chaos we are bequeathing our children.

We Californians, even some Republicans like our Governor, are more enlightened about global warming because we have more at stake, or likely we're just smarter than those guys in Washington:

"California needs to take action because it is particularly vulnerable to global warming," said Alan Lloyd, secretary of the state's Environmental Protection Agency. He cited a study published in June by the National Academy of Sciences that predicted global warming will have dire effects on the state. The study, carried out by 19 scientists at universities and research institutions, found that by 2070, the Sierra snowpack is likely to be reduced by 29 to 89 percent, causing a reduction in the state's water supply by as much as 30 percent, having a severe impact on the state's farms and ski areas and worsening urban smog.

Agriculture, recreation, air quality---all harmed by the short-sighted policies of the Administration. So, what do we make of this (on the front page of Saturday's Chronicle)?

If California suddenly went dry, and no rain or snow fell for two straight years, the state would still have enough water to go around thanks to this year's wet winter, meteorologists and water experts said Friday.

The recent cold snap that blanketed the Sierra with snow, and even powdered Bay Area hills, is expected to leave the state flush with water for the foreseeable future.

The Sierra Nevada snowpack, which, to hydrologists, is a better holding tank than the biggest man-made reservoirs, has more water in it than even last year.

"We're in fat city, and I mean fat city!" exclaimed Mike Pechner, staff meteorologist for KCBS Radio. "This is a superb water year." "This will probably be some of the greatest spring skiing conditions in memory," Pechner said. "There is already a deep snowpack and prospects for more snow in the first part of April."

The extra snow means that, come spring, the rivers and streams will be flowing hard, great for fish and other wildlife.

I'm looking forward to reading about how George Bush is responsible for this, too. © 2006 Stephen Yuen