Blue Marble

The second Republican primary debate is tonight. It should be fun. It's supposed to focus on foreign policy, so it could be an excellent opportunity to examine the global implications of climate change. What's more, three of the show's biggest stars have been running their mouths about global warming over the last few days.

Guess what? The things they said were dumb and wrong.

First up: The Donald. During a speech in Texas on Monday, Trump took aim at President Barack Obama's oft-repeated (and true) claim that climate change is a major threat to America's national security.

"They changed it to climate change because the word 'global warming' wasn't working," Trump said. "Then they changed it to extreme weather—you can't get hurt with extreme weather."

Next up, rising star Ben Carson, who has gained more in the polls over the last month than any other candidate and poses the biggest challenge to Trump tonight. Last week, he told the San Francisco Chronicle that "there is no overwhelming science that the things that are going on are man-caused and not naturally caused. Gimme a break."

Actually, there is a ridiculously overwhelming amount of science that shows just that. And fortunately, California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) was happy to share all that information with Carson:

.@JerryBrownGov to climate science denier @RealBenCarson: "Climate change is much bigger than partisan politics." pic.twitter.com/NpsbvlvpEl

— Gov. Brown Press Ofc (@GovPressOffice) September 10, 2015

Finally, there's Carly Fiorina, the only candidate to be promoted from the "kid's table" debate in August, to the grown-up table tonight, thanks to some good polling early in the month. In an interview with CNBC's John Harwood published today, she trotted out the good old standby line that "a single nation acting alone can make no difference at all," and that therefore the United States needs to stop "destroying peoples' livelihoods on the alter of ideology."

I guess she missed the news that the United States, rather than acting alone, has actually been really successful in convincing China and other major polluters to take action.

NASA/MODIS

California's historic drought may be even more exceptional than we thought.

In a study published yesterday, scientists made a startling discovery about the severity of California's dry spell: They estimated that the Sierra Nevada mountain range's snowpack levels this year are the lowest they've been for 500 years. That's right, since roughly the year 1500.

This is bad news for Californians: Snowfall in the mountains can account for as much as one-third of the state's water supply during a normal year.

Last spring, measurements showed that levels were at their lowest point in the 75 years they've been recorded. (That period is shown in red on the graph below.) But scientists had to get creative in order to determine how much snow had fallen over the centuries before snowpack measurements were taken. Paleoclimatologists from the University of Arizona's Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research analyzed studies that used tree rings to reconstruct historical rainfall and temperatures in California's mountains. By combining this data, they were able to estimate spring snowpack levels going back half a millennium, as represented in the graphic below. (SWE stands for "snow water equivalent," which means snowpack).

University of Arizona's Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research and Nature Climate Change

They found that while there have been many bad years for snow in the mountains, the last time the snowpack sank to this year's levels was around the year 1500.

This spring, the snowpack reached just 5 percent of average yearly levels.

According to Greg Corbin, a meteorologist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the state's water system can only store a limited amount of rain runoff, so it relies on snowpack to replenish water reserves. Until it starts snowing again, California has "a long, long way to go," to restore its water, he says.

Heads up, meat eaters: A new report has rated the antibiotic use in the meat of 25 top fast-food or "fast casual" restaurants, and the results are, well, concerning. The report by Friends of the Earth, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and four other consumer health organizations, examined antibiotic use as well as the restaurants' transparency about their meat and poultry supply chains. Chipotle and Panera were the only chains to publicly report serving a majority of meat from animals raised without routine antibiotics.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention calls antibiotic resistance one of the top five health threats facing the nation, killing an estimated 23,000 Americans each year. "When livestock producers administer antibiotics routinely to their flocks and herds, bacteria can develop resistance, thrive, and even spread to our communities, contributing to the larger problem of antibiotic resistance," the report explains. "The worsening epidemic of resistance means that antibiotics may not work when we need them most: when our kids contract a staph infection (MRSA) or our parents get a life-threatening pneumonia."

In addition to sending each company a survey, the report authors examined company websites and other publicly available information. They intend for the report to be updated annually as companies change their practices.

Here's a rundown of what researchers had to say about each restaurant (emphasis added):

• Panera and Chipotle are the only chains that publicly affirm that the majority of their meat and poultry offered is produced without routine use of antibiotics.
• Chick-fil-A and McDonald's have established policies limiting antibiotic use in their chicken with implementation timelines.
• Dunkin' Donuts has a policy covering all meats but has no reported timeline for implementation.
• While Starbucks has made positive statements supporting what it terms as 'responsible use of antibiotics to support animal health,' to our knowledge the company has failed to adopt a clear policy prohibiting routine use of antibiotics in its meat and poultry supply chains or to provide detailed public information on their purchasing practices.
• While Subway did not respond to our survey, recent news outlets report that the company's goal is to 'eliminate the use of antibiotics in products across the menu' and that Subway is 'targeting to transition to chicken raise without antibiotics important to human medicine in 2016.'...It is unclear whether this would entail the end of all routine antibiotic use in its supply chains.
• Burger King, Wendy's, Olive Garden, KFC, Chili's, Sonic, Denny's, Domino's, Starbucks, Papa John's Pizza, Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, Applebee's, Jack in the Box, Arby's, Dairy Queen, IHOP, Outback Steakhouse, and Little Ceasars either have no disclosed policy on antibiotics use in their meat and poultry, or have policies that in our estimation allow for the continued, routine use of antibiotics in the production of all meats they serve.

Update, Monday Sept. 14, 12:00pm ET: During the closing minutes of their session Friday afternoon, California legislators passed SB 350. Although stripped of the provision to reduce the state's gasoline consumption, the bill still includes new standards for renewable energy and energy efficiency. It now heads to Gov. Brown's desk; he is expected to sign it this month.

It appears I was a bit too bullish on the prospects for historic new climate legislation in California. Yesterday, Democrats in the state legislature caved to pressure from the powerful oil industry and dropped a critical piece of the bill.

SB 350, which had passed the state Senate but faced an uphill climb through the Assembly, was intended to enshrine in law a series of ambitious climate targets unveiled earlier this year by Gov. Jerry Brown (D). One of the most important was a proposal to slash the state's gasoline consumption in half by 2030. Here's a bit of background from my story last week:

SB 350 would bring the state's gasoline consumption down to about where Florida's is now, while setting new targets for clean energy and energy efficiency projects…The gas consumption target would likely require some combination of new fuel efficiency standards for cars, incentives for alternative fuels and biofuels, cooperation with local planning agencies to improve public transit and make communities less car-reliant, and a push to get people to buy more electric vehicles. (California is already home to half of the roughly 174,000 electric vehicles on the road in the United States.)

"If California can do this, it could really be the beginning of the snowball," said Tim O'Connor, director of California policy for the Environmental Defense Fund. "This is how California can really shake up the national conversation on climate."

Other parts of the bill are intact, including the goal to get half the state's power from renewable energy sources and double the efficiency of state buildings by 2030. But the gas reduction proposal faced intense opposition from the oil industry, the most powerful special interest in Sacramento. Now, that provision is up in smoke, apparently as a compromise measure to ensure passage of the other provisions, according to the New York Times:

Henry T. Perea, a moderate Democrat who was a leader of the opposition to the petroleum measure, said he would support the measure—Senate Bill 350—in this form, which he called a compromise…

The measure was the subject of an intense campaign directed by the Western States Petroleum Association, which labeled the bill "the California Gas Restriction Act of 2015" in television advertisements and mailings. The president of the organization, Catherine Reheis-Boyd, applauded the decision to drop this proposal and said that oil companies "remain committed to working with Gov. Jerry Brown and legislators on climate change and energy policy."

Mr. Brown told reporters in Sacramento that he would use his executive powers to continue to force the kinds of reductions in global emissions that have been a central goal of his governorship. "Oil has won the skirmish, but they've lost the bigger battle," he said.

Bummer!