Get Ready: Global Warming To Be Hot Topic at G8 Summit In Italy

McClatchy:

Will the United States and Europe act by themselves to cut emissions of the heat-trapping gases that are causing long-term global warming and will they be able to persuade fast-developing nations such as China and India to go along?

Read the whole story: McClatchy

Comments

[gladiator777]

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/07/03/uah-global-temperature-anomaly-for-june-09-zero/

[betty22]

no Italy..close your ears to this man..he rushes without thinking...or reading....exept totous.

[OneVoiceInACrowd]

Of course there are those who not even this applies to as they feel we have been cooling for the last 10 years. Well to them, take a look at any of the recent Global temperature trends and put your thumb over the year 1998, do you still think it looks like a cooling trend?

[OneVoiceInACrowd]

CO2 in the air is different than CO2 in th atmosphere? 0.117% and .0047%, what are you talking about?

if WV is a GHG, yet its process in the atmosphere actually cools the planet like Mioffe explains below than CO2 must have more of a warming role than previously thought GHG in the atmosphere.

Unless. . .

Are posters to this article discounting the warming affect of the water vapor and its process? Discounting the affect of GHG in general, and of the conclusion that the Sun is the only factor in determining our climate or our surface temperatures?

If that is the case, please explain the wild temperatures swings on the moon, a celestial body with no atmosphere that is the same distance from the sun as we are. Please explain why Venus (108mil km from sun), with a very heavy atmosphere is actually hotter than mercury (70 mil km from sun).

Obviously something in addition to the sun plays a large critical role?

So now, climate sleuths, start going through the list of other possible factors.
Is it the:
Color of the surface that affects the absorbtion of light? -
Color of atmoshpere
Heating of the body below from internal processes
Is it a heat trapping gas?

(post to long, cont above..)

[fumes]

a) color of the surface that effects the absorption of light.

a-1) especially the absorption of light in ice:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=soot+melting+ice&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

fun quiz one voice..

i can't wait to see what mioffe has to say!

[OneVoiceInACrowd]

I spent close to a month with Mioffe and his wood burning energy producing theory. What it came down to was that he assumes we can improve our generation efficiency by a factor of 4, or basically produce a 4th of what we are now to satisfy demand. This would require 300 million acres of forest, harvesting 3 million acres of 100 yo trees annually to produce 27 x 10^15 BTU's. Our projected demand is 107x10^15 btu's. So now you see where the 1/4 shaving came in.

That assumption is too big for me to swallow. I stand unconvinced of his theory. And all that time just devoted to calculating the fuel load (which we did on day 1). In his defense it does not seem like English is his first language.

That being said, I would like to hear (or see as you point out) what he has to say, since he is the one discounting WV. You should have a personal interest in it too, for you used to tell me that water vapor was the primary driver of GHG, although it seems your position has changed, which is fine of course.

[RomeoMD25]

Man-made carbon dioxide is only 0.117 percent of total carbon dioxide in the air and contributes only 0.0047 percent carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
The average person has been misled and is confused about what the current Global Warming debate is about, greenhouse gases. None of which has anything to do
with air pollution. People are confusing Smog, Carbon Monoxide (CO) and the pollutants in
car exhaust with the life supporting, essential trace gas in our atmosphere, Carbon Dioxide (CO2).
Carbon and CO2 (carbon dioxide) are fundamental for all life on Earth. CO2 is a colorless, odorless, non-toxic gas.

[gladiator777]

Hmmm...temperature down 1 degree since the inconvenient lie came out.....shouldn't we be burned to a crisp by now?

[RomeoMD25]

The world's best meteorologists using the most advanced computers cannot predict local weather two weeks in the future. So how can global warming proponents predict the entire world's climate 50 or 100 years in the future?

The answer is that they can't.

[fumes]

so who's still afraid of a trace gas that scatters lame long wave radiation in all directions?

no really..

[mioffe]

We must reevaluate science of GW.
Ideas that GHG trapped infra red (IR) radiation are correct, but properties of water more important in GW. They cool the air.

We need 539 kcal to evaporate one kg of water, to heat one kg of water on 1º C we need only 1 kcal. of energy.
Molecular mass of N2 = 28, of O2 = 32, of CO2 =44, of H2O = 18. Water vapor is lighter than most gases in air. As lighter gas it go up to cloud level and above.
Water vapor is invisible gas, what we see in air it is water DROPLETS of fog, clouds and particles which mostly responsible for visibility.
Water vapors also GHG and trapped IR radiation and therefore also heats the air.
In air we always have some droplets of water, energy of molecule, with trapped IR radiation if it will collide with water droplet will evaporate at least one molecule of water from that droplets and this process will cool the air.
Wind always evaporates partially water droplets and this process also cools the air.
What more important that huge amount of water vapor on clouds level condensed to water droplets and released the same energy as they take in process of evaporation. We have only one differences-energy released on 2-7 miles close to space, where IR radiation of condensation will more easily escape to space.
Clouds, which reflect back to space direct sun radiation, also cool the earth.

[tina n]

"They're not willing to do to themselves what we're asking to do unilaterally to the U.S."
It's very disheartening to know that countries like China are not willing to change.

"This is about the fact that it does not matter what is happening with temperatures but that reducing both greenhouse gas emissions and energy use and creating renewable energy makes complete sense even without climate change political debates."
http://blog.cleantechies.com/2009/04/22/global-warming-global-cooling-global-unimportance/

[Katiebar]

So now it doesn't matter that there is no man-made global warming, and maybe the climate isn't changing (where are those violent hurrincanes we were promised?)., we STILL have to wreck the economy with cap and trade and the like? If the goal was really to limit green house gases, then we would be on a fast track with nuclear energy and natural gas, which are clean and abundant sources of dense energy. But we are not, because the real goal is a political one, with money to be made by cap and traders (see Al Gore). The second political aspect is the redistribution of wealth, as fully embraced by the UN, in transferring wealth from the developed countries to the less developed, lining many pockets along the way (see Oil for Food program). The last political goal is CONTROL. This madness gives heretofore unseen control by government over individual rights. In the current Cap and Trade bill, home sellers have to upgrade every appliance and heating/cooling system that isn't rated as "energy efficient", BEFORE they can sell their house! Government interference and control never before imagined.
The UN IPCC computer models have been discredited. There is no scientific consensus, quite the contrary there is a huge swing by scientists away from GW theory. Greenland covered with ice again. Arctic not melting. The sea level is not rising more than normal. Everything predicted in 1997 -2000 turned out to be wrong,.But there is another agenda...