No comment.
This year so far coolest for at least 5 years: WMO
Showing posts with label Global Warming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Global Warming. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Friday, August 1, 2008
Carbon Sequestration and Wildfire
More evidence that we don't know enough to know what we don't know when it comes to how to combat "global warming."
Wildfires May Improve Forests' Ability to Sequester Carbon
When saving trees means less carbon storage
By Keren Blankfeld Schultz
Wildfires wreaked havoc across southern California last year, resulting in billions of dollars in irreparable damage. Not surprisingly, land managers and agencies this season have mobilized fire crews and equipment to stop the flames before they spread. In the meantime, however, researchers studying the amount of carbon that forests and vegetation harbor have stumbled on a finding that presents an added quandary to fire management: suppressing fires means that less carbon is stored in trees.
The team, led by Michael L. Goulden of the University of California, Irvine, compared the...(complete article here).
Wildfires May Improve Forests' Ability to Sequester Carbon
When saving trees means less carbon storage
By Keren Blankfeld Schultz
Wildfires wreaked havoc across southern California last year, resulting in billions of dollars in irreparable damage. Not surprisingly, land managers and agencies this season have mobilized fire crews and equipment to stop the flames before they spread. In the meantime, however, researchers studying the amount of carbon that forests and vegetation harbor have stumbled on a finding that presents an added quandary to fire management: suppressing fires means that less carbon is stored in trees.
The team, led by Michael L. Goulden of the University of California, Irvine, compared the...(complete article here).
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Brush, Water, Grass and Carbon Sequestration
The article below is one that opens a lot of issues for me. Juniper, mesquite and other woody brush referred to in the article are invasive species overrunning grassland. One of the reasons the grassland has been overrun is fire suppression practices.
The article discusses the concept that allowing the brush to remain is a method for sequestering carbon in an effort to combat "global warming." The natural order would be to allow fire to periodically remove large portions of the brush and sculpt a mixed prairie grassland with patches of brush interspersed with large open areas of grassland and occasional oak trees. Of course fire would release carbon into the atmosphere. It seems that failure to burn brush in California has created an extreme fire hazard.
I keep getting the feeling that we don't know enough to know what we don't know....
Research Could Change Perception of Woody Species Use of Water in Edwards Plateau
July 30, 2008
Writer(s): Blair Fannin, 979-845-2259,b-fannin@tamu.edu
Contact(s): Dr. Jim Heilman, 979-845-7169, j-heilman@tamu.edu
COLLEGE STATION – New research suggests that juniper, mesquite and other woody brush that have overrun grasslands on the Edwards Plateau of west-central Texas aren’t the water hogs that they were thought to be.
Further, bulldozing this brush may not be wise, because it would remove plants that take in lots of carbon from the atmosphere, making them a potential ally in efforts to counter global warming.
These are the findings of Dr. Jim Heilman, a Texas AgriLife Research scientist and professor of environmental physics in the Department of Soil and Crop Sciences at Texas A&M University.
“People have this idea that trees are suction pumps, that if you have all of this landscape and big trees, much more water is used,” he said. “Not true. What drives water use is...(complete article here).
The article discusses the concept that allowing the brush to remain is a method for sequestering carbon in an effort to combat "global warming." The natural order would be to allow fire to periodically remove large portions of the brush and sculpt a mixed prairie grassland with patches of brush interspersed with large open areas of grassland and occasional oak trees. Of course fire would release carbon into the atmosphere. It seems that failure to burn brush in California has created an extreme fire hazard.
I keep getting the feeling that we don't know enough to know what we don't know....
Research Could Change Perception of Woody Species Use of Water in Edwards Plateau
July 30, 2008
Writer(s): Blair Fannin, 979-845-2259,b-fannin@tamu.edu
Contact(s): Dr. Jim Heilman, 979-845-7169, j-heilman@tamu.edu
COLLEGE STATION – New research suggests that juniper, mesquite and other woody brush that have overrun grasslands on the Edwards Plateau of west-central Texas aren’t the water hogs that they were thought to be.
Further, bulldozing this brush may not be wise, because it would remove plants that take in lots of carbon from the atmosphere, making them a potential ally in efforts to counter global warming.
These are the findings of Dr. Jim Heilman, a Texas AgriLife Research scientist and professor of environmental physics in the Department of Soil and Crop Sciences at Texas A&M University.
“People have this idea that trees are suction pumps, that if you have all of this landscape and big trees, much more water is used,” he said. “Not true. What drives water use is...(complete article here).
Land Accretion May Offset Losses in Bangladesh
Perhaps the globe is warming, perhaps it is not. If it is warming, by how much? If it is warming, what will be the impact? The dire claims of catastrophic human impact from global warming are based in incomplete knowledge. The more that we learn, the more that we realise we don't know what we think we know. The article below seems to emphasize that fact.
Bangladesh gaining land, not losing: scientists
DHAKA (AFP) - New data shows that Bangladesh's landmass is increasing, contradicting forecasts that the South Asian nation will be under the waves by the end of the century, experts say.
Scientists from the Dhaka-based Center for Environment and Geographic Information Services (CEGIS) have studied 32 years of satellite images and say Bangladesh's landmass has increased by 20 square kilometres (eight square miles) annually.
Maminul Haque Sarker, head of the department at the government-owned centre that looks at boundary changes, told...(complete article here).
Bangladesh gaining land, not losing: scientists
DHAKA (AFP) - New data shows that Bangladesh's landmass is increasing, contradicting forecasts that the South Asian nation will be under the waves by the end of the century, experts say.
Scientists from the Dhaka-based Center for Environment and Geographic Information Services (CEGIS) have studied 32 years of satellite images and say Bangladesh's landmass has increased by 20 square kilometres (eight square miles) annually.
Maminul Haque Sarker, head of the department at the government-owned centre that looks at boundary changes, told...(complete article here).
Friday, June 27, 2008
Ozone Being Eaten by the Ocean
Greenhouses gases being gobbled by the earth?
Destruction of greenhouse gases over tropical Atlantic
26 June 2008
Large amounts of ozone - around 50% more than predicted by the world's state-of-the-art climate models - are being destroyed in the lower atmosphere over the tropical Atlantic Ocean.
Published today in the scientific journal Nature, this startling discovery was...(complete article here).
Destruction of greenhouse gases over tropical Atlantic
26 June 2008
Large amounts of ozone - around 50% more than predicted by the world's state-of-the-art climate models - are being destroyed in the lower atmosphere over the tropical Atlantic Ocean.
Published today in the scientific journal Nature, this startling discovery was...(complete article here).
Friday, May 16, 2008
Species Loss
This topic has headlined numerous publications and news services since the release of the report. Many of them are blaming "global warming" for the loss of biodiversity. The globe just hasn't warmed that much. (see this graph) Human activity certainly is a contributing factor to species decline. Loss of habitat, wars and other conflict, hunger, pollution, exploitation of some species (such as fish), and other similar activities contribute to the decline. Sometimes there is a cascading effect with species. If a key species is decimated it may cause other species that are dependent on that species to also decline. There are also species that are filling many of those niches. Two animals that have made tremendous comebacks in my area are coyotes and jackrabbits. For many years during the 1980's and 1990's, jackrabbits became extremely scarce. They were wiped out by disease and by habitat loss. The advent of the Conservation Reserve Program caused their numbers to explode and today they are a nuisance. The coyote population, although abundant during the 1980's and 1990's, declined severely during the early 2000's due to disease. They are very adaptable animals and habitat changes don't generally pose a serious problem for them. Today they have come back and population levels are growing. I just wish they did a better job of controlling the rabbitts. My point is that although human activity is a contributor, there are naturally occurring cycles of disease that periodically decimate populations. Blaming "global warming" is just an attempt to play on the media hype. Since 1880 we have seen an approximately 0.6 degree Fahrenheit rise in the average global temperature. I don't think that is enough to have been the problem. Especially given that the rise is likely part of a cyclical temperature pattern that appears to be entering a cooling phase of the cycle.
An epidemic of extinctions: Decimation of life on earth
Species are dying out at a rate not seen since the demise of the dinosaurs, according to a report published today – and human behaviour is to blame.
Emily Dugan counts the cost
The world's species are declining at a rate "unprecedented since the extinction of the dinosaurs", a census of the animal kingdom has revealed. The Living Planet Index out today shows the devastating impact of humanity as biodiversity has plummeted by almost a third in the 35 years to 2005.
The report, produced by WWF, the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) and the Global Footprint Network, says...(complete article here).
An epidemic of extinctions: Decimation of life on earth
Species are dying out at a rate not seen since the demise of the dinosaurs, according to a report published today – and human behaviour is to blame.
Emily Dugan counts the cost
The world's species are declining at a rate "unprecedented since the extinction of the dinosaurs", a census of the animal kingdom has revealed. The Living Planet Index out today shows the devastating impact of humanity as biodiversity has plummeted by almost a third in the 35 years to 2005.
The report, produced by WWF, the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) and the Global Footprint Network, says...(complete article here).
Friday, May 2, 2008
Texas RRC Chairman on Global Warming
Texas Railroad Commission Chairman, Michael Williams, weighs in on Global Warming in the article below. It is a very interesting perspective....check out his blog here.
Global Warming Part I
May 2, 2008
Climate change is always happening. The earth’s temperature over time gets warmer, then cooler, and then warmer again. Now we’re likely in a warming trend which is a far cry from accepting that human activity is primarily responsible for such catastrophic future consequences as rising sea levels, food shortages, malaria and hurricanes.
That explains why there were several hundred Texas lawyers, bankers and other big company execs huddled together making plans for...(complete article here).
Global Warming Part I
May 2, 2008
Climate change is always happening. The earth’s temperature over time gets warmer, then cooler, and then warmer again. Now we’re likely in a warming trend which is a far cry from accepting that human activity is primarily responsible for such catastrophic future consequences as rising sea levels, food shortages, malaria and hurricanes.
That explains why there were several hundred Texas lawyers, bankers and other big company execs huddled together making plans for...(complete article here).
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Melting Snowpack in the Rockies
Decreasing snowpack seems to me more of a function of drought conditions than Global Warming.
Climate change drying up Western Rockies
By Amanda Beck
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - By 2040, climate change will have melted the glaciers of Glacier National Park in Montana and the spring snowpack in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado, scientists said on Tuesday.
"People talk about a tipping point, but we've been there and done that," said Tim Barnett, a researcher at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in California and speaker at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union.
About 15,000 researchers have...(complete article here).
If the snowpack reduction is a result of Global Warming, where did all of the water go? It must enter the hydrologic cycle and will fall again as rain or snow. Will there be an increase in rainfall in areas that have historically been dry? Is the excessive rainfall that we saw in Texas this past summer a result of that melted snowpack? Is it just going to raise the ocean level? If temperatures increase globally, more water will evaporate from the ocean to fall again as rain. Maybe we need to be building reservoirs to catch that rainfall.
Will increased rainfall in the Plains re-charge the Ogalalla Acquifer through basins such as playa lakes? Perhaps we should focus on playa revitalization.
We are planning to spend billions of dollars to prevent climate change -- which many say is already occurring. Would it be better to spend those dollars preparing for the eventuality of that change? I'm not referring to emergency preparedness -- such as for flooding, hurricanes, etc. I'm referring to things like planning infrastructure for shifting agricultural practices, moving population centers, etc. Water will be -- and is already -- critical. It may be a situation of "water, water everywhere but not a drop to drink" -- or to irrigate crops.
Climate change drying up Western Rockies
By Amanda Beck
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - By 2040, climate change will have melted the glaciers of Glacier National Park in Montana and the spring snowpack in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado, scientists said on Tuesday.
"People talk about a tipping point, but we've been there and done that," said Tim Barnett, a researcher at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in California and speaker at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union.
About 15,000 researchers have...(complete article here).
If the snowpack reduction is a result of Global Warming, where did all of the water go? It must enter the hydrologic cycle and will fall again as rain or snow. Will there be an increase in rainfall in areas that have historically been dry? Is the excessive rainfall that we saw in Texas this past summer a result of that melted snowpack? Is it just going to raise the ocean level? If temperatures increase globally, more water will evaporate from the ocean to fall again as rain. Maybe we need to be building reservoirs to catch that rainfall.
Will increased rainfall in the Plains re-charge the Ogalalla Acquifer through basins such as playa lakes? Perhaps we should focus on playa revitalization.
We are planning to spend billions of dollars to prevent climate change -- which many say is already occurring. Would it be better to spend those dollars preparing for the eventuality of that change? I'm not referring to emergency preparedness -- such as for flooding, hurricanes, etc. I'm referring to things like planning infrastructure for shifting agricultural practices, moving population centers, etc. Water will be -- and is already -- critical. It may be a situation of "water, water everywhere but not a drop to drink" -- or to irrigate crops.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
City Rank and Projected Cost Exposure to Global Warming
A lot can happen in 63 years which is the timespan of this projection.
Warming risks listed by population, costs
Report: 150 million could be affected by 2070 at cost of $35 trillion
PARIS - The number of people threatened by coastal flooding due to climate change could more than triple by 2070 and the financial impact could balloon to $35 trillion, according to a report released Tuesday by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
The Paris-based OECD, an international non-governmental organization that collects and studies economic statistics and social data, called for quick action on coastal defenses for cities at risk, saying it can take 30 years to build defenses for vulnerable cities.
"Climate change is already happening, and concerted action is...(complete article here).
Maybe the preparation for flooding will be an economic stimulus. Many of the cities projected to endure the greatest impact are being overwhelmed by the poor leaving the countryside for a "better" opportunity in the city. I suppose they can be put to work building levees.
Warming risks listed by population, costs
Report: 150 million could be affected by 2070 at cost of $35 trillion
PARIS - The number of people threatened by coastal flooding due to climate change could more than triple by 2070 and the financial impact could balloon to $35 trillion, according to a report released Tuesday by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
The Paris-based OECD, an international non-governmental organization that collects and studies economic statistics and social data, called for quick action on coastal defenses for cities at risk, saying it can take 30 years to build defenses for vulnerable cities.
"Climate change is already happening, and concerted action is...(complete article here).
Maybe the preparation for flooding will be an economic stimulus. Many of the cities projected to endure the greatest impact are being overwhelmed by the poor leaving the countryside for a "better" opportunity in the city. I suppose they can be put to work building levees.
Saturday, December 1, 2007
U.S. Greenhouse Gases Declining
Improvement is a good thing.
U.S. marks greenhouse gas decline
For the first time since 2001, carbon emissions were less than the year before, the Bush administration reports.
By James Gerstenzang,
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
November 29, 2007
WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration reported a small drop in greenhouse gas emissions for the United States last year, the first decline since 2001, but the emissions still represented a sizable increase over the last decade and a half.The gases, including carbon dioxide, are widely blamed for global warming.
The Energy Information Administration said that in 2006 the United States released 1.5% fewer tons than in 2005. The increase over 1990, which is used as a base year in international deliberations on long-range targets for gas reductions, was 15.1%.
The White House drew attention to the decline on...(complete article here).
What is remarkable is that the economy grew at a rate of 3.9% during the 3rd Quarter of 2007 and has grown at an annual rate of 2.8% average since 2001 according to the White House. The growth rate for 2006 was 6.1% in current dollars or 2.9% in 2000 dollars.
We reduced "greenhouse" emissions by 1.5% while the economy grew at a very healthy 6.1%. That is very positive. I wonder if the greenhouse gases emitted in China which haunt our west coast are considered in this.
U.S. marks greenhouse gas decline
For the first time since 2001, carbon emissions were less than the year before, the Bush administration reports.
By James Gerstenzang,
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
November 29, 2007
WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration reported a small drop in greenhouse gas emissions for the United States last year, the first decline since 2001, but the emissions still represented a sizable increase over the last decade and a half.The gases, including carbon dioxide, are widely blamed for global warming.
The Energy Information Administration said that in 2006 the United States released 1.5% fewer tons than in 2005. The increase over 1990, which is used as a base year in international deliberations on long-range targets for gas reductions, was 15.1%.
The White House drew attention to the decline on...(complete article here).
What is remarkable is that the economy grew at a rate of 3.9% during the 3rd Quarter of 2007 and has grown at an annual rate of 2.8% average since 2001 according to the White House. The growth rate for 2006 was 6.1% in current dollars or 2.9% in 2000 dollars.
We reduced "greenhouse" emissions by 1.5% while the economy grew at a very healthy 6.1%. That is very positive. I wonder if the greenhouse gases emitted in China which haunt our west coast are considered in this.
Eliminate Tariffs on Climate-Friendly Technology
This proposal seems to be sensible.
U.S. and EU propose trade plan to counter climate change
By Doug Palmer
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States and European Union launched a proposal in world trade talks on Friday aimed at countering global climate change by removing barriers to trade to climate-friendly technologies.
"WTO (World Trade Organization) members have an unprecedented opportunity to address in a concrete and meaningful way the global environmental challenge of climate change," Trade Representative Susan Schwab said in a statement.
"By eliminating tariff and...(complete article here).
I'll bet nuclear technology isn't included.
U.S. and EU propose trade plan to counter climate change
By Doug Palmer
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States and European Union launched a proposal in world trade talks on Friday aimed at countering global climate change by removing barriers to trade to climate-friendly technologies.
"WTO (World Trade Organization) members have an unprecedented opportunity to address in a concrete and meaningful way the global environmental challenge of climate change," Trade Representative Susan Schwab said in a statement.
"By eliminating tariff and...(complete article here).
I'll bet nuclear technology isn't included.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
The Sun and Global Warming
This is an article that I found to be fascinating regarding the debate on whether the sun is the primary cause of global warming. It is fairly lengthy but easily readable.
Sun and global warming: A cosmic connection?
By Richard Black
Environment correspondent, BBC News website
In February 2007, depending on what newspaper you read, you might have seen an article detailing a "controversial new theory" of global warming.
The idea was that variations in cosmic rays penetrating the Earth's atmosphere would change the amount of cloud cover, in turn changing our planet's reflectivity, and so the temperature at its surface.
This, it was said, could be the reason why temperatures have been seen to be varying so much over the Earth's history, and why they are rising now.
The theory was detailed in a book, The Chilling Stars, written by Danish scientist Henrik Svensmark and British science writer Nigel Calder, which appeared on the shelves a week after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had published its landmark report concluding it was more than 90% likely that...(complete article here).
I think the conclusion here is that there are many theories concerning climate change floating around. Ultimately, we don't know with certainty what is causing the current warming trend. All we have today are theories and models.
Sun and global warming: A cosmic connection?
By Richard Black
Environment correspondent, BBC News website
In February 2007, depending on what newspaper you read, you might have seen an article detailing a "controversial new theory" of global warming.
The idea was that variations in cosmic rays penetrating the Earth's atmosphere would change the amount of cloud cover, in turn changing our planet's reflectivity, and so the temperature at its surface.
This, it was said, could be the reason why temperatures have been seen to be varying so much over the Earth's history, and why they are rising now.
The theory was detailed in a book, The Chilling Stars, written by Danish scientist Henrik Svensmark and British science writer Nigel Calder, which appeared on the shelves a week after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had published its landmark report concluding it was more than 90% likely that...(complete article here).
I think the conclusion here is that there are many theories concerning climate change floating around. Ultimately, we don't know with certainty what is causing the current warming trend. All we have today are theories and models.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Credit Where Credit Is Due
Not everything that is claimed to be caused by "Global Warming" is caused by it.
NASA Sees Arctic Ocean Circulation Do an About-Face
November 13, 2007
PASADENA, Calif. – A team of NASA and university scientists has detected an ongoing reversal in Arctic Ocean circulation triggered by atmospheric circulation changes that vary on decade-long time scales. The results suggest not all the large changes seen in Arctic climate in recent years are a result of long-term trends associated with global warming.
The team, led by James Morison of the University of Washington's Polar Science Center Applied Physics Laboratory, Seattle, used data from an Earth-observing satellite and from deep-sea pressure gauges to monitor Arctic Ocean circulation from 2002 to 2006. They measured changes in the weight of...(complete article here).
I suspect that we will see more and more reports of similar nature over the coming years.
NASA Sees Arctic Ocean Circulation Do an About-Face
November 13, 2007
PASADENA, Calif. – A team of NASA and university scientists has detected an ongoing reversal in Arctic Ocean circulation triggered by atmospheric circulation changes that vary on decade-long time scales. The results suggest not all the large changes seen in Arctic climate in recent years are a result of long-term trends associated with global warming.
The team, led by James Morison of the University of Washington's Polar Science Center Applied Physics Laboratory, Seattle, used data from an Earth-observing satellite and from deep-sea pressure gauges to monitor Arctic Ocean circulation from 2002 to 2006. They measured changes in the weight of...(complete article here).
I suspect that we will see more and more reports of similar nature over the coming years.
Monday, November 12, 2007
BBC Top 10 on Climate Scepticism
From the BBC -- without judgement...
Climate scepticism: The top 10
What are some of the reasons why "climate sceptics" dispute the evidence that human activities such as industrial emissions of greenhouse gases and deforestation are bringing potentially dangerous changes to the Earth's climate?
As the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) finalises its landmark report for 2007, we look at 10 of the arguments most often made against the IPCC consensus, and some of the counter-arguments made by scientists who agree with the IPCC.
(complete article and Top 10 here)
Climate scepticism: The top 10
What are some of the reasons why "climate sceptics" dispute the evidence that human activities such as industrial emissions of greenhouse gases and deforestation are bringing potentially dangerous changes to the Earth's climate?
As the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) finalises its landmark report for 2007, we look at 10 of the arguments most often made against the IPCC consensus, and some of the counter-arguments made by scientists who agree with the IPCC.
(complete article and Top 10 here)
Saturday, September 29, 2007
A Couple of "Radical" Environmentalists
The following (fairly lengthy) article is about a couple of former "tree huggers" who are taking a more common sense look at Global Warming and the environment. In doing so, they are stirring up the environmental movement. It is a good read if you've got the time.
Two Environmentalists Anger Their Brethren
By Mark Horowitz 09.25.07 2:00 AM
For angry heretics on the run, Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger sure know how to enjoy themselves. Sitting in a cozy Berkeley restaurant just a few blocks from San Francisco Bay, exchanging tasting notes on the vermentino ("cold white wine is so good with fatty, fried food," Shellenberger says), they recount with perverse pleasure, in tones almost as dry as the wine, how they've been branded as infidels by fellow environmentalists. It started in 2004, when they published their first Tom Paine-style essay accusing the movement's leaders of failing to deal effectively with the global warming crisis. "We thought that someone was going to take a swing at us," Shellenberger says. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Sierra Club executive director Carl Pope published withering counterattacks, and the two men were dubbed "the bad boys of American environmentalism" by author Bill McKibben.
Nordhaus, 41, and Shellenberger, 36, didn't set out to infuriate their former colleagues. On the contrary, they were...(complete article here).
One sentence that particularly caught my eye in the article was, "Their vision cuts across traditional political divides: It's pro-growth, pro-technology, and pro-environment." I'm going to have to dig a little deeper into their thinking, but on the surface it seems to make sense.
Two Environmentalists Anger Their Brethren
By Mark Horowitz 09.25.07 2:00 AM
For angry heretics on the run, Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger sure know how to enjoy themselves. Sitting in a cozy Berkeley restaurant just a few blocks from San Francisco Bay, exchanging tasting notes on the vermentino ("cold white wine is so good with fatty, fried food," Shellenberger says), they recount with perverse pleasure, in tones almost as dry as the wine, how they've been branded as infidels by fellow environmentalists. It started in 2004, when they published their first Tom Paine-style essay accusing the movement's leaders of failing to deal effectively with the global warming crisis. "We thought that someone was going to take a swing at us," Shellenberger says. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Sierra Club executive director Carl Pope published withering counterattacks, and the two men were dubbed "the bad boys of American environmentalism" by author Bill McKibben.
Nordhaus, 41, and Shellenberger, 36, didn't set out to infuriate their former colleagues. On the contrary, they were...(complete article here).
One sentence that particularly caught my eye in the article was, "Their vision cuts across traditional political divides: It's pro-growth, pro-technology, and pro-environment." I'm going to have to dig a little deeper into their thinking, but on the surface it seems to make sense.
More on Global Warming
What we do in the U.S. will not affect what happens in China and India which are some of the fastest growing economies. We must do our part, but the rest of the world needs to adopt the available technology to limit their emissions as well. Kyoto Protocol or not, China and India are horrible polluters.
Scientists Call For 80 Percent Drop In U.S. Emissions By 2050 To Avoid Dangerous Warming
Science Daily — By 2050, the United States must cut its emissions by at least 80 percent below those created in the year 2000 if the world is to avoid potentially dangerous impacts of human-induced climate change, according to a report recently released by scientists at Texas Tech University, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and Stanford University.
To avoid the most severe effects of climate change, the world must stabilize the concentration of heat trapping gases in the atmosphere at no more than 450 parts per million, said Katharine Hayhoe, an associate professor of geosciences at Texas Tech University who performed the emissions-reduction calculations for the joint report.
This 450-parts-per-million limit aims to avoid a temperature increase exceeding 3.5 degrees Fahrenheit in a global average temperature above pre-industrial levels...(complete article here).
Scientists Call For 80 Percent Drop In U.S. Emissions By 2050 To Avoid Dangerous Warming
Science Daily — By 2050, the United States must cut its emissions by at least 80 percent below those created in the year 2000 if the world is to avoid potentially dangerous impacts of human-induced climate change, according to a report recently released by scientists at Texas Tech University, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and Stanford University.
To avoid the most severe effects of climate change, the world must stabilize the concentration of heat trapping gases in the atmosphere at no more than 450 parts per million, said Katharine Hayhoe, an associate professor of geosciences at Texas Tech University who performed the emissions-reduction calculations for the joint report.
This 450-parts-per-million limit aims to avoid a temperature increase exceeding 3.5 degrees Fahrenheit in a global average temperature above pre-industrial levels...(complete article here).
Friday, September 28, 2007
New Image?
If we lead will anyone follow?
Bush Seeks New Image on Global Warming
By JOHN HEILPRIN
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush called on the world's worst polluters Friday to come together to set a goal for reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing the climate to heat up. He didn't exempt his own country from the list.
"By setting this goal, we acknowledge there is a problem, and by setting this goal, we commit ourselves to doing something about it," Bush said in a speech that capped two days of talks at a White House-sponsored climate change conference. "We share a common responsibility: to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while keeping our economies growing."
He said each nation should establish for itself what methods it...(complete article here).
Bush Seeks New Image on Global Warming
By JOHN HEILPRIN
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush called on the world's worst polluters Friday to come together to set a goal for reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing the climate to heat up. He didn't exempt his own country from the list.
"By setting this goal, we acknowledge there is a problem, and by setting this goal, we commit ourselves to doing something about it," Bush said in a speech that capped two days of talks at a White House-sponsored climate change conference. "We share a common responsibility: to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while keeping our economies growing."
He said each nation should establish for itself what methods it...(complete article here).
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Water and the Veto
There is a definite need for a line-item veto power.
Overwhelming Vote for Water Resources Act Answers Bush Veto Threat
Source: Copyright 2007, Environment News Service
Date: September 24, 2007
Despite the looming threat of a presidential veto, the U.S. Senate today passed the Water Resources Development Act conference report by a vote of 81-12. The Senate passage follows House approval in August by a vote of 381-40. The bill authorizes flood control, navigation, and ecosystem restoration projects.
The law now goes to President George W. Bush for his signature, but the administration has signaled that the president will veto the bill when it gets to his desk. Still, there is thought to be strong bipartisan support for the Water Resources Development Act, WRDA, making a veto override possible.
The legislation authorizes nearly $7 billion for wetlands restoration and flood control projects to put Louisiana on the path to Category 5 storm protection, and authorizes dozens of other critical...(complete story here).
Some of the projects in this legislation are probably worthy of taxpayer money. I have problems with Category 5 protection for Louisiana. Now, let me qualify that. Some wetlands restoration in Louisiana and Florida makes sense. Natural protection is better than artificial. However, if we are anticipating rising seas due to Global Warming, what good will be done by wetlands restoration in vulnerable areas? Most of New Orleans should never have been built. If you build below sea level you can expect to get wet. Coastal wetlands naturally protect against storm surge such as inundated New Orleans during the last hurricane. Rising seas will push those wetlands further inland -- if you accept Global Warming as real.
Overwhelming Vote for Water Resources Act Answers Bush Veto Threat
Source: Copyright 2007, Environment News Service
Date: September 24, 2007
Despite the looming threat of a presidential veto, the U.S. Senate today passed the Water Resources Development Act conference report by a vote of 81-12. The Senate passage follows House approval in August by a vote of 381-40. The bill authorizes flood control, navigation, and ecosystem restoration projects.
The law now goes to President George W. Bush for his signature, but the administration has signaled that the president will veto the bill when it gets to his desk. Still, there is thought to be strong bipartisan support for the Water Resources Development Act, WRDA, making a veto override possible.
The legislation authorizes nearly $7 billion for wetlands restoration and flood control projects to put Louisiana on the path to Category 5 storm protection, and authorizes dozens of other critical...(complete story here).
Some of the projects in this legislation are probably worthy of taxpayer money. I have problems with Category 5 protection for Louisiana. Now, let me qualify that. Some wetlands restoration in Louisiana and Florida makes sense. Natural protection is better than artificial. However, if we are anticipating rising seas due to Global Warming, what good will be done by wetlands restoration in vulnerable areas? Most of New Orleans should never have been built. If you build below sea level you can expect to get wet. Coastal wetlands naturally protect against storm surge such as inundated New Orleans during the last hurricane. Rising seas will push those wetlands further inland -- if you accept Global Warming as real.
Monday, September 24, 2007
Foot-and-Mouth and Bluetongue
From the BBC...
New foot-and-mouth case suspected
Another suspected new case of foot-and-mouth is being investigated at a farm in Hampshire, the National Farmers' Union (NFU) has said.
It comes as farmers await test results which will show whether two different livestock diseases have spread.
Officials have said a suspected new case of foot-and-mouth on the Hampshire-West Sussex border was a false alarm.
The latest suspected case is in the West Tytherly area, near Stockbridge.
Animals have also been slaughtered at a farm in Englefield Green, near Egham in Surrey as a precaution, the NFU said.
Government vets are trying to determine if the UK's first case of bluetongue disease, found in a cow in...(complete story here).
Great Britain's livestock woes continue. My question is this: Since Bluetongue disease is common in Africa and has migrated through Europe in recent years, is the movement due to Global Warming? It is an insect-borne disease. Could a minute average temperature variation be the driving force causing the insects to move farther north? Whether it is or not, you can bet that it is an angle that will be played by the Global Warming alarmists.
New foot-and-mouth case suspected
Another suspected new case of foot-and-mouth is being investigated at a farm in Hampshire, the National Farmers' Union (NFU) has said.
It comes as farmers await test results which will show whether two different livestock diseases have spread.
Officials have said a suspected new case of foot-and-mouth on the Hampshire-West Sussex border was a false alarm.
The latest suspected case is in the West Tytherly area, near Stockbridge.
Animals have also been slaughtered at a farm in Englefield Green, near Egham in Surrey as a precaution, the NFU said.
Government vets are trying to determine if the UK's first case of bluetongue disease, found in a cow in...(complete story here).
Great Britain's livestock woes continue. My question is this: Since Bluetongue disease is common in Africa and has migrated through Europe in recent years, is the movement due to Global Warming? It is an insect-borne disease. Could a minute average temperature variation be the driving force causing the insects to move farther north? Whether it is or not, you can bet that it is an angle that will be played by the Global Warming alarmists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
