James Hansen, Top NASA Scientist, Calls For Moratorium On Coal

New York Times:

Twenty years ago on Monday, James E. Hansen testified before the Senate Energy Committee -- in a room kept intentionally warm by committee staff -- that the atmospheric buildup of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels and forests was already perceptibly influencing Earth's climate.

Then, as now, Dr. Hansen, the director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, was pushing beyond what many of his colleagues in climatology were willing to say -- at least publicly. His supporters say that, given how science and events appear to be catching up with his projections of two decades ago, the world had better heed his new recommendations. His critics show few signs of ever accommodating the ideas he now presses, which include a prompt moratorium on new coal-burning power plants until they can capture and store carbon dioxide and a rising tax on fuels contributing greenhouse-gas emissions, with the revenue passed back directly to citizens, avoiding the complexities of "cap and trade" bills.

Watch Hanson in an interview with Andrew C. Revkin:

Read the whole story: New York Times

Comments

[HeevenSteven]

If we could use B.S. for fuel, congress and the corporate media would be an inexhaustible resource.

[wadenelson1]

And they claim George Carlin is dead. He lives!!!!

[WilliePilgrim]

How about a moratorium on products made in China as that might actually reduce the burning of coal in China where they burn it using the most archaic techniques, spewing out soot and heavy metal residues which settle on the oceanic waters and ices and where the metals are bioaccumulated and the soot melts the ice. Oh, and CO2? Nice try Charlie, but put it about 30th on the list of perilous situations the world faces.

[KillTheMessenger]

We could carbon tax every Chinese import. The money could be used to reduce US energy efficiency. If the Chinese protest, we can tell them that part of the tax can be used by them to buy highly efficient power plant technology in the US. This keeps the foreign deficit low, creates US jobs, helps the Chinese and the planet. No downside when compared to any other scheme.

[thundermummy]

See, that makes sense. And well, WilliePilgrim and the other trolling shaved apes don't respond well to sense. Once they are done smelling their fingers and sounding out the words, they will respond with nonsensical crap. just wait and see.

[kingcityguru]

I would support that moratorium on coal for electrical generation if it coincided with a push for the nuclear generation of electricity as it is air pollution free (and CO2 free, if you care). In addition, nuclear waste retains over 90% of its electrical generating potential which means Israeli efforts to recycle it will be more practical and common with these high prices. Throw in the fact that a huge majority of the world's uranium is in safe countries of Canada, US, and Australia and it is the source of energy for the future that best matches the needs of industrialization with environmentalism.

[KillTheMessenger]

The problem is not technology. It is the US decision not to recycle used fuel rods because of our fear of Plutonium proliferation. But I have a strong feeling that who is really behind the non-recycling decision are the Uranium mining interests. Once the US starts recycling fuel rods, they lose 90% of their market.

[kingcityguru]

It really is a modern solution for a modern problem. The fact that most so called environmentalists are not behind it with all they have tells me that they are more concerned (or indifferent) about the destruction of industrialization and the removal of its great benefits than anything to do with the environment.

[ohiomark]

These enviro-wackos won't be happy until we are plunged into a 14th century economy.

Ya know, when the medievil warming period occured.

[MajorKong]

There's a reason we stopped heating our homes with coal a century ago. It's a very dirty fuel. Pretty much everything was covered in soot. The air quality could get so bad in some places you could hardly see.

[ohiomark]

Your buddy Barak Obama was touting "clean coal" in Kentucky during the primaries.

I wonder if he has a stake in that just like he does in corn ethanol.

[KillTheMessenger]

It's nice to know that you have full intellectual control over these issues. \sarcasm off

[Exusian]

Markie can't even keep his talking points straight. The mid-14thC marked the end of the medieval warm period and the beginning of the little ice age.

In any case, his underlying argument is specious: they didn't have hydro-electric generators, wind turbines, nuclear, geothermal or solar voltaic panels in the 14thC.

All they had was wood, peat and dung.

But, hey, never let facts get in the way of expressing a perfectly ignorant opinion.

[ohiomark]

Yet they still had a warming period without the help of all that modern technology.

Go figure!

[SonofLiberty1]

Mark,

And kindly post your grades in Science during your High School and College years?

[thundermummy]

You spell like you're from the 14th century.

[ohiomark]

I'm sure you have never misspelled anything in your entire life.

Forgive me, oh perfect one.

Medieval.

[johnnyjust]

I call for a moratorium on volcanic activity and forest fires.

And regulate those cow farts, dammit!

[KillTheMessenger]

You are up to something with the cows, Johnny. However, you drilled two dry holes with the volcanos and the forest fires. Back to school for you!

[thundermummy]

Don't torture the lad! I'm sure high school was the worst 6 years of his life.

[Exusian]

And how much CO2 do volcanoes emit each year, johnnyboy?

And how many fossil tree forests burn down each year?

We'll be waiting for your answers.

[MajorKong]

I fear with oil becoming expensive that we may start using even more coal than we are now.

[KillTheMessenger]

That's what I fear, too. Man, as a whole, does not seem to learn well from mistakes.

[Exusian]

That's exactly what we will do.

And when the oil and coal are all gone, how will we then power the manufacture of their magic-bullet replacements?

Madness. Shear madness.

[fumes]

so .038% of our atmosphere rules the rest, and our planet too? 'way back when it was closer to 100%, all it took were some brave cyanobacteria to turn things around! and back when it was closer to 100% there wasn't enough global warming to stop those cyanobacteria from bringing co2 to it's knees. hmm...

[OneVoiceInACrowd]

Not many human s around then were there?

[fumes]

your point being what exactly?

[Exusian]

"038% of our atmosphere rules the rest"

Ah, the argument of dilution. What those who use it don't tell you is that 99% of the atmosphere is transparent to infra red light, yet the remaining 1% is precisely what makes Earth's average surface temperature 33°C warmer than it otherwise would be.

Fact: including water vapour, greenhouse gases make up around 1% of the atmosphere.

But it's not atmospheric water vapour that humans are directly increasing, we couldn't even if we tried to (look up relative and absolute humidity), it's CO2, methane, nitrous oxides, CFCs and host of other powerful trace greenhouse gases that we are adding directly to the atmosphere.

Of course, as those warm the atmosphere it will then be able to hold more water vapour, which will add still more warming, so indirectly we are adding more water vapour, too.

Yes, lowly cyanobacteria did in fact draw down CO2 (never anywhere near 100% of the atmosphere, btw), turn it into limestone, and change Earth's atmosphere and climate over hundreds of millions of years.

Kind puts the lie to those who assert that humans couldn't possibly alter Earth's atmosphere and climate.

[fumes]

thanks exursian for yet another well informed, articulate and respectful response! food for thought bud. my pea brain is just struggling with the concept of such a relatively minute quantity of atmosphere having so much power over the climate. thanks again for addressing my post. back to the books! fumes out for now...

[UnbiasView]

So China is building 2 coal plants a week . . . guess what . . . they don't give an F what you say.

[Exusian]

Especially since the US imports so much of what that coal-generated electricity produces.
It's not just manufacturing jobs that the US has exported, it's also the pollution of production.

But China also manufactures more solar panels than any other coutry in the world, and has stricter auto emission regulations that the US does.

China is very well aware of the deadly problem they are creating by burning coal, and sooner or later they will deal with it.

[UnbiasView]

Of course, the US is the evil guy and China has good emissions laws . . . LOL.

[wadenelson1]

But China ..has stricter auto emission regulations that the US does.

I don't believe they do. I think currently they require EuroIV which is nowhere near US EPA Tier2 Bin 5, especially for diesels.

[KillTheMessenger]

You have just disqualified yourself intellectually. Good luck being taken seriously in life.

[RoloTomassi]

But dear idiotboy, they will, someday they certainly will, and so will you [if you live long enough].

Now run along, you'll be late for your date with the Onceler....

[ronspri]

Tator, you have any idea what a fool you guys are making of yourselves. Even if there is no global warming we need new tech and alternative energy. Quit fighting progress you luddite.

[HumeSkeptic]

Leave Tator alone. Tator is "mentally challenged".

[Exusian]

Tator wouldn't know real science if it bit him in the arse.

[Tator]

268-Anyone who does not believe in the religion of Man-made Global Warming should be put in jail....So says "I believed in global cooling before I believed in global warming"-James Hansen

It's heresy I tell you, heresy!!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jun/23/fossilfuels.climatechange

Real science can withstand questioning...AGW can not, as proven by the constant cover ups of bogus and bad data by Hansen.

[OneVoiceInACrowd]

Do you have any links that support your claim? Where are the constant cover ups? I can think of several off the top of my head of the oil industry and of the administration skewing reports or placing non scientists as editors of scientific research.

But you first.

[Tator]

Sorry honey. I learned a long time ago you can not, with a mountain of facts, change a persons religious beliefs. If you really want to review the scientific skeptics do some searches, but be warned if you have Liberal Arts degree you will not be able to understand any of it.

A simple search will net you a inventory of the US weather stations that show about 90% out of spec and more searches will show Hansen's software is a mess. Their are sites where programmers and statisticians have reviewed the code and the results and deemed "it garbage in garbage out".

[wadenelson1]

Tator Huffpo would be pretty boring without smart conservatives like you around to "educate" us dumb libruls. Not to mention keeping us entertained.

[wayoutleft]

i'm glad you found a newspaper article that suits you. easier than earning an advanced degree in physics like hansen- isn't it...

[johnnyjust]

"Real science can withstand questioning."

Now that is a slogan worth repeating.