Tag Archives: climate-change

Protesters Create "Oil Slick" on Major Roads, or Did They?

Image credit: Climate Camp From beautiful images of a climate camp protest in Wales , to skepticism over protesters’ targeting of offset companies —the ever growing Climate Camp movement never fails to get a reaction—both here on TreeHugger and elsewhere. But it seems the latest Climate Camp protests have garnered atten… Read the full story on TreeHugger

See the article here:
Protesters Create "Oil Slick" on Major Roads, or Did They?

Al Gore, Global Warming Myths. Beware of Prophets Seeking Profits!

A brief list of arguments that each refute the notion that the community should be scared by the idea of global warming.The Swindle The Great Global Warming Swindle Sea Levels Not Rising….. Except In The Lies of the IPCC Solar Cycles,…Not CO2 Determine Climate…Global Climate Explained (If you Want To Worry) Suspend Disaster…The Myth Of Global Warming A Load Of Hot Air…Climate Change Hysteria is Costing Us The Ice Age Cometh…The Real Danger Of An Ice Age Global Warming…Messy Models, Decent Data, and Pointless Policy Hot Politics… Doctoring Of Reports By UN Experts Cool Climate…The Absurdity Of Trying To Control Climate A Pagan Fantasy…The Effect Of Accepting Popular Paranoia As Truth http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aginatur/moregw.htm added by: congoboy

The most evil men in America: The Koch Brothers

David (pictured) and Charles Koch: The billionaire brothers who are waging a war against Obama. The Kochs are longtime libertarians who believe in drastically lower personal and corporate taxes, minimal social services for the needy, and much less oversight of industry—especially environmental regulation. These views dovetail with the brothers’ corporate interests. In a study released this spring, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst’s Political Economy Research Institute named Koch Industries one of the top ten air polluters in the United States. And Greenpeace issued a report identifying the company as a “kingpin of climate science denial.” The report showed that, from 2005 to 2008, the Kochs vastly outdid ExxonMobil in giving money to organizations fighting legislation related to climate change, underwriting a huge network of foundations, think tanks, and political front groups. Indeed, the brothers have funded opposition campaigns against so many Obama Administration policies—from health-care reform to the economic-stimulus program—that, in political circles, their ideological network is known as the Kochtopus. In a statement, Koch Industries said that the Greenpeace report “distorts the environmental record of our companies.” And David Koch, in a recent, admiring article about him in New York, protested that the “radical press” had turned his family into “whipping boys,” and had exaggerated its influence on American politics. But Charles Lewis, the founder of the Center for Public Integrity, a nonpartisan watchdog group, said, “The Kochs are on a whole different level. There’s no one else who has spent this much money. The sheer dimension of it is what sets them apart. They have a pattern of lawbreaking, political manipulation, and obfuscation. I’ve been in Washington since Watergate, and I’ve never seen anything like it. They are the Standard Oil of our times.” pic: http://www.newyorker.com/images/2010/08/30/p465/100830_r19927_p465.jpg added by: derk

Iran Shows Off It’s “Messenger of Death” Drone Bomber

“This jet is a messenger of honour and human generosity and a saviour of mankind, before being a messenger of death for enemies of mankind,” Ahmadinejad said added by: jimhager

Peak oil alarm revealed by secret official talks

Forecasts that crude oil production will reach 150m barrels a day by 2030 have been described as 'unrealistic'. Photograph: Tatan Syuflana/AP Speculation that government ministers are far more concerned about a future supply crunch than they have admitted has been fuelled by the revelation that they are canvassing views from industry and the scientific community about “peak oil”. The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) is also refusing to hand over policy documents about “peak oil” – the point at which oil production reaches its maximum and then declines – under the Freedom of Information (FoI) Act, despite releasing others in which it admits “secrecy around the topic is probably not good”. Experts say they have received a letter from David Mackay, chief scientific adviser to the DECC, asking for information and advice on peak oil amid a growing campaign from industrialists such as Sir Richard Branson for the government to put contingency plans in place to deal with any future crisis. A spokeswoman for the department insisted the request from Mackay was “routine” and said there was no change of policy other than to keep the issue under review. The peak oil argument was effectively dismissed as alarmist by former energy minister Malcolm Wicks in a report to government last summer, while oil companies such as BP, which have major influence in Whitehall, take a similar line. But documents obtained under the FoI Act seen by the Observer show that a “peak oil workshop” brought together staff from the DECC, the Bank of England and Ministry of Defence among others to discuss the issue. A ministry note of that summit warned that “[Government] public lines on peak oil are 'not quite right'. They need to take account of climate change and put more emphasis on reducing demand and also the fact that peak oil may increase volatility in the market.” Those comments were written 12 months ago, but a letter in response to the FoI request written by DECC officials and dated 31 July 2010 says it can only release some information on what is currently under policy discussion because they are “ongoing” and “high profile” in nature. The letter adds: “We recognise the public interest arguments in favour of disclosing this information. In particular we recognise that greater transparency makes government more open and accountable and could help provide an insight into peak oil. “However any public interest in the disclosure of such information must be balanced with the need to ensure that ministers and advisers can discuss policy in a manner which allows for frank exchanges of views and opinions about important and sensitive issues.” Yet the note of the workshop distributed last year talks about secrecy around the topic being “probably not good”, although it also suggests officials stick to the line that the “International Energy Agency is an authoritative source in this field” and stresses how the IEA believes there is sufficient reserves to meet demand till 2030 as long as investment in new reserves is maintained. But the Paris-based organisation has come under increasing scrutiny from a growing group of critics who believe the IEA's optimism is misplaced. Last year the Guardian revealed that the IEA was also riven with dissent over the issue with senior staff members privately telling newspaper they thought the official numbers on future global oil supply were over-optimistic. cont. added by: JanforGore

Xmas is Early for Climate Scientists, New CESM Modeling Software is Out!

Image: UCAR One of the Primary Models Used by the IPCC As Freeman Dyson said, “The great advances in science usually result from new tools rather than from new doctrines.” The telescope, the microscope, X-rays and MRIs, etc. Climate modeling software is such a tool, allowing us to make probabilistic estimates about what is likely to happen to our planet’s if we do X or Y or Z. And while we can never be 100% sure about the future, our tools are getting more sophisticated (models take more things into account, faster computers allow more simulations to be run, better instruments and satellites allow better inf… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Continue reading here:
Xmas is Early for Climate Scientists, New CESM Modeling Software is Out!

Andrea Mitchell: I Thought Al Gore Settled the Global Warming Issue

One may think that someone as well connected as long-time Washington correspondent and MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell might also connect the dots. After an unseasonably rough DC winter occurring right in the midst of the ClimateGate scandal, she would be aware of doubt being cast over the idea of manmade global warming. But if you want evidence her mind is made up regardless of any of this, you could detect from her reaction to a report from Politco’s Jim VandeHei that some Republican candidates are using the climate change debate to advance their campaigns. On MSNBC’s Aug. 18 broadcast of “Andrea Mitchell Reports,” Mitchell expressed her surprise that candidates would invoke this issue. “Well, you might think that the link between manmade greenhouse gases and global warming is clearly established science, but some Republican candidates are challenging conventional wisdom this year,” Mitchell said. Mitchell went on to play a TV spot from California GOP Senate hopeful Carly Fiorina, blasting incumbent Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., for her stands on global warming as a national security issue, even though many would argue there are other more serious threats on that front. “Fiorina is not alone as Politico reports today,” Mitchell said. “Joining me now is Politico executive editor Jim VandeHei. Jim, I got to tell you – John Kerry, Lindsay Graham and a whole group of retired generals are part of this national security initiative on climate change, so I just don’t completely get it, especially in California. How does this work in a general election campaign in California?” Mitchell was referring to an Aug. 18 Politico story by Darrel Samuelsohn , which she obviously didn’t read because it explained the strategy behind the use of this issue in a campaign. But VandeHei explained to it her and her viewers anyway. “There’s a big block of Republican candidates in California but also elsewhere, in Wisconsin where Rob Johnson is conservative, challenging Russ Feingold,” VandeHei explained. “We see it in New Mexico. We see it in Nevada, these candidates who are really calling into the science behind global warming and also man’s role in causing global warming. This is obviously been a big debate. We had it during the energy debate on Capitol Hill. What is surprising to us is we found a large number of people on the campaign trail sounding like [Sen.] James Inhofe, who has been one of the most unspoken conservatives on this issue on Capitol Hill.” But the source of Mitchell’s confusion: She had thought that former Vice President Al Gore and “all of that” had settled this debate, as his word was final on the issue. “Well in fact, Sharon Angle said that – she said in June that greenhouse gas legislation was based on an unscientific hysteria over the man-caused global warming hoax,” Mitchell said. “It just seems that I thought that after Al Gore and all of that – that it was pretty much a settled issue . You could argue about the economics and the priorities over it, as Lindsay Graham and others have. I didn’t think that they would be arguing this year that it wasn’t settled science.” But as VandeHei said, there’s a group of people that think the issue as been used politically to get certain provisions written into legislation and that climate change created by carbon emissions isn’t the only way the globe’s temperature is impacted, as Wisconsin GOP Senate hopeful Rob Johnson said in an interview published on Aug. 16 in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel . “But there’s definitely a group of people who do not think it’s settled science, or at least they think that the science is being exaggerated to make a political case in favor of these caps on carbon emissions as part of the larger energy bill,” VandeHei said. “What you’re seeing now is that the feeling manifested in a lot of the rhetoric during these campaigns. Rob Johnson was very, very clear in this interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, where he said, ‘I don’t buy the science. I don’t buy that argument.’ He said that global warming could just as well be caused by, he pointed up in the sky, by sun spots. It’s just a different view and there’s a lot of conservatives who hold that view.”

Continued here:
Andrea Mitchell: I Thought Al Gore Settled the Global Warming Issue

Russian inquiry into the potential destruction of the world’s oldest seed bank

The fate of the station appeared to be sealed last week when a court ruled in favour of the Pavlovsk research station and its surrounding farmland being turned into private housing. It holds the world's largest fruit collections and was protected by 12 Russian scientists during the second world war who chose to starve to death rather than eat the unique collection of seeds and plants which they were guarding during the 900-day siege of Leningrad. More than 90% of the plants are found in no other research collection or seed bank. Its seeds and berries are thought to posess traits that could be crucial to maintaining productive fruit harvests in many parts of the world as climate change and a rising tide of disease, pests and drought weaken the varieties farmers now grow. At stake, say campaigners for the station, are more than 5,000 varieties of seeds and berries from dozens of countries, including more than 100 varieties each of gooseberries and raspberries. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/aug/16/russia-president-pavolvsk-twit… added by: pdy

2 largest liars/skeptics on climate change admit it’s happening and human caused

“Stu Ostro, Senior Meteorologist at the Weather Channel: “I changed my point of view from what it was in the days of the Fred Singer article, and would do so again if that’s what the evidence shows. But it does not. As I wrote back in 2006, global warming is not a religion. The chemistry, physics, and thermodynamics involved are science, not religion, nor are they liberal or conservative.”” http://current.com/1b9jn4c And from a different article: “CNN's long time climate change skeptic and purveyor of every wingnut talking point on global warming in the book, Chad Myers, finally admits the truth: “Is it caused by man? Yes. Is it 100% caused by man? No.”” http://current.com/179jn4c added by: TopScruffy

Water Scarcity Facing 1/3 of US Counties

One out of three U.S. counties is facing a greater risk of water shortages by mid-century due to global warming, finds a new report by Tetra Tech for the Natural Resources Defense Council. For 412 of these counties the risk of water shortages will be “extremely high,” according to the report, a 14-fold increase from previous estimates. In the Great Plains and Southwest United States, water sustainability is at extreme risk finds the report, which is based on publicly available water use data from across the United States. “This analysis shows climate change will take a serious toll on water supplies throughout the country in the coming decades, with over one out of three U.S. counties facing greater risks of water shortages,” said Dan Lashof, director of the Climate Center at NRDC. “Water shortages can strangle economic development and agricultural production and affected communities.” “As a result,” he said, “cities and states will bear real and significant costs if Congress fails to take the steps necessary to slow down and reverse the warming trend.” Counties shown in dark red are at greatest risk of water shortage by 2050. (Map courtesy Tetra Tech) The report, issued Tuesday, finds that 14 states face an extreme or high risk to water sustainability, or are likely to see limitations on water availability as demand exceeds supply by 2050. These areas include parts of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. Sujoy Roy, principal engineer and lead report author, Tetra Tech, said, “The goal of the analysis is to identify regions where potential stresses, and the need to do something about them, may be the greatest.” “We used publicly available data on current water withdrawals for different sectors of the economy, such as irrigation, cooling for power generation, and municipal supply, and estimated future demands using business-as-usual scenarios of growth,” Roy explained. “We then compared these future withdrawals to a measure of renewable water supply in 2050, based on a set of 16 global climate model projections of temperature and precipitation, to identify regions that may be stressed by water availability,” Roy said. “These future stresses are related to changes in precipitation as well as the likelihood of increased demand in some regions.” The report also is based on climate projections from a set of models used in recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change work to evaluate withdrawals related to renewable water supply. Water withdrawal will grow by 25 percent in many areas of the United States, including the arid Arizona-New Mexico area, the populated areas in the South Atlantic region, Florida, the Mississippi River basin, and Washington, D.C. and surrounding regions, the analysis projects. added by: JanforGore