iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Global Warming: 2011 Tied For The 10th Hottest Year On Record

World Temps Maintain The Heat Of Global Warming

ARTHUR MAX   11/29/11 12:14 PM ET   AP

DURBAN, South Africa — International climate negotiators were at odds Tuesday on how to raise billions of dollars to help poor countries cope with global warming. A major shipping group is willing to help, endorsing a proposal for a carbon tax on vessels carrying the world's trade.

Details of the tussle over the funding emerged as the U.N.'s weather agency reported that 2011 was tied as the 10th hottest year since records began in 1850. Arctic sea ice, a barometer for the entire planet, had shrunk to a record low volume, said the World Meteorological Organization.

Putting the final touches on what's known as the Green Climate Fund is a top issue at the 192-party U.N. climate conference that was in its second day Tuesday in the South African coastal city of Durban, and one of the keys of a strategy to contain greenhouse gas emissions and keep global warming within manageable limits.

The two-week conference is to finalize a plan on managing climate finances, due to scale up to $100 billion annually by 2020.

The International Chamber of Shipping, representing about 80 percent of the world's merchant marine, joined forces with aid groups Oxfam and WWF International Tuesday to urge the conference to adopt guidelines for a levy on carbon emissions by ships.

Details of any levy would be worked out by the International Maritime Organization, the U.N. agency regulating international shipping, the aid groups and the chamber said in a joint statement.

"Shipping has to take responsibility for the emissions and get to grips and drive them down, and they see that the best way to do that it to have a universal charge applied to all ships that is going to generate billions of dollars" to fight climate change, Tim Gore of Oxfam said on the sidelines of the climate conference.

About 50,000 cargo ships carry 90 percent of world trade, and most ships are powered by heavily polluting oil known as bunker fuels. Last July the U.N. maritime organization decided that new cargo vessels must meet energy efficiency standards and cut pollution.

It was the first climate change measure to apply equally to countries regardless of whether they are from the industrialized or developing world.

At the conference, differences came into focus over the Green Climate Fund.

Delegations disagreed about how independent the fund will be, by whom it will be guided over the years, and whether the bulk of the money will come from public funds and government aid or from private sources and investments.

A 40-nation committee worked on a draft agreement in several lengthy meetings over the last year, but a consensus at the final meeting last month was blocked by objections from the United States and Saudi Arabia. Now negotiators in Durban must settle the final disputes.

"We are going to have a very thorough and open discussion on that very contentious paper," said Pedro Pedroso, the delegate from Cuba.

U.S. delegate Jonathan Pershing said Monday the U.S. has "substantive concerns" about the committee's plan, but "we believe these issues can be fixed."

Washington wants to ensure that private investments are not hamstrung by bureaucracy and that they can bypass any approval process by governments.

The world temperatures report released Tuesday provided a bleak backdrop to negotiators seeking ways to limit pollution blamed for global warming.

2011 has been a year of extreme weather, the WMO reported. Drought in East Africa has left tens of thousands dead; lethal floods submerged large areas of Asia; the United States suffered 14 separate weather catastrophes with damage topping $1 billion each, including severe drought in Texas and the southwest, heavy floods in the northeast and the Mississippi valley, and the most active tornado season ever known.

"The science is solid and proves unequivocally that the world is warming," said R.D.J. Lengoasa, the WMO's deputy director, and human activity is a significant contributor.

"Climate change is real, and we are already observing its manifestations in weather and climate patterns around the world," he said.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

DURBAN, South Africa — International climate negotiators were at odds Tuesday on how to raise billions of dollars to help poor countries cope with global warming. A major shipping group is willi...
DURBAN, South Africa — International climate negotiators were at odds Tuesday on how to raise billions of dollars to help poor countries cope with global warming. A major shipping group is willi...
Filed by Jade Walker  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,320
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (22 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:12 PM on 12/05/2011
Despite meager government investment when compared to the historical norm for emerging sources of energy like nuclear and fossil-fue­ls, growth in the clean energy sector is outpacing the rest of the economy.

Clean Energy is a job creator

Renewable energy jobs grew at an average annual rate of 11.1 percent between 2003 and 2010, more than twice as fast as the rest of the economy.

Brookings Institute, 2011, National and Regional Green Jobs Assessment

http://www­.brookings­.edu/repor­ts/2011/07­13_clean_e­conomy.asp­x

Investment­s in clean energy produce better results than other sectors
Clean energy investment­s generate 3.2 times the number of jobs as investment­s in the fossil fuel sectors (June 2009, University of Massachuse­tts-Amhers­t study)

http://www­.peri.umas­s.edu/file­admin/pdf/­conference­_papers/Su­rdna/Polli­n-Heintz-G­arrett-Pel­tier_paper­_for_Surdn­a_Conf---3­-16-10.pdf

Report from Pew Charitable Trusts:

"... despite a lack of sustained policy attention and investment­, the emerging clean energy economy has grown considerab­ly--extend­ing to all 50 states, engaging a wide variety of workers and generating new industries­. Between 1998 and 2007, its jobs grew at a faster rate than overall jobs. Like all other sectors, the clean energy economy has been hit by the recession, but investment­s in clean technology have fared far better in the past year than venture capital overall. Looking forward, the clean energy economy has tremendous potential for growth..."

http://www­.pewcenter­onthestate­s.org/uplo­adedFiles/­Clean_Econ­omy_Report­_Web.pdf
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
07:09 PM on 12/05/2011
Conservative Climate Scientist Dr. Barry Bickmore:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I’ve recently been involved with other scientists and scholars in Utah trying to stop the spread of outright lies, half-truths, abuses of data, and distortions about climate change.  Much of this disinformation is coming from (or through) some Republican members of the Utah Legislature, and the other Republican (and some Democratic) members have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker...

I'm a Republican myself, and it galls me that my own party has locally fallen for a bunch of conspiracy theories and scientifically incompetent trash. In my opinion, something has to be done to save the party from disaster in the long run...

Democracy depends on accurate information being readily available to the public, and I see people who propagate such disinformation campaigns as enemies of Democracy.

http://bbickmore.wordpress.com/about-this-blog/
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
behavingbadly
lovingly crafted artisanal comments
07:33 PM on 12/05/2011
F&F to both you and Dr Bickmore.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:03 PM on 12/05/2011
How capitalists address global warming:

Fifteen of the seventeen largest corporations have greenhouse gas emissions control programs; China Construction Bank and Industrial and Commercial Bank of China seemingly don't.

APPLE:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/business/apple-chamber.pdf

EXXON:

http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/safety_climate_mgmt_report.aspx

SHELL:

http://www.shell.com/home/content/environment_society/environment/climate_change/

PETROCHINA:

http://www.petrochina.com.cn/Ptr/News_and_Bulletin/News_Release/PetroChina_Issues_2010_Sustainability_Report.htm

PETROBRAS:

http://www.petrobras.com.br/rs2009/en/relatorio-de-sustentabilidade/meio-ambiente/mudanca-do-clima/

BP:

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/china/bpchina_english/STAGING/local_assets/downloads_pdfs/press_share_0427_EN.pdf

CHEVRON:

http://www.chevron.com/globalissues/climatechange/

WALMART:

http://walmartstores.com/sustainability/9660.aspx?sourceid=greenhousegas&ref=http%3a%2f%2fbusiness.edf.org%2fprojects%2fwalmart%2fwalmart-and-global-warming

MICROSOFT:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdownload.microsoft.com%2Fdownload%2F1%2F9%2F9%2F199b2229-c731-47b2-b420-a6806027d5d5%2FClimate_Change_Policy.pdf&ei=9ibcToGfIeXXiQK0iPDHCQ&usg=AFQjCNGzK87tvYJxW4Kr25J-kbFWEpqeiA&sig2=UylWrKKAa1DS7mU5MhSHYg

NESTLE:

http://www.nestle.com/CSV/WATERANDENVIRONMENTALSUSTAINABILITY/CLIMATECHANGE/Pages/ClimateChange.aspx

BHP BILLITON:

http://www.bhpbilliton.com/home/aboutus/sustainability/Pages/Environment.aspx

CHINA MOBILE:

http://www.chinamobileltd.com/images/pdf/2011/sr/en/7.pdf

INTEL:

http://www.intel.com/intel/other/ehs/product_ecology/globalclimate.htm

IBM:

http://www.ibm.com/ibm/environment/climate/position.shtml
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:15 PM on 12/05/2011
So, regarding global warming, you can side with the COMMUNIST CHINESE BANKS,

or join, RUPERT MURDOCH, the ultra-conservative leader of Fox News and News Corp. who began his companies' push toward carbon neutrality four years ago and achieved it this year.

"Climate change poses clear, catastroph­­­­ic threats. We may not agree on the extent, but we certainly can't afford the risk of inaction.

We must transform the way we use energy, and of course not only because of climate change...

When I look around the world today, I see continued dependence on oil from vulnerable regions... and oil money going to leaders of countries hostile to us. Then there's accelerati­­­­ng developmen­­­­t in China, India and other developing economies that are reliant on fossil fuels."

http://www.newscorp.com/energy/full_speech.html

4 years later, RUPERT said:

"I am proud to announce that News Corporatio­­­­n has reached its first major sustainabi­­­­lity milestone: we have become carbon neutral across all of our global operations and we are the first company of our kind to do so."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/01/rupert-murdoch-news-corp-carbon-neutral_n_829640.html?ir=Green
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
11:18 AM on 12/05/2011
Global Warming "Skeptic" Bob Carter Debunked

Prominent global warming "skeptic" Dr. Robert M. "Bob" Carter tried to Hide The Incline in global warming over recent decades.*

Bob Carter is a leader of and/or contributor to several of the most prominent organizations that are "skeptical" of man-made global warming, including:

* The Heartland Institute

* The Science & Public Policy Institute (SPPI)

* The Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

* The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC)

* The International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC)

Dear Reltna08,

Isn't prominent global warming "expert" Bob Carter committing de facto global warming fraud by representing increasing global temperature trends as flat?* 

Isn't that like a global warming scam, a climate science hoax, a blatant deception, an indefensible lie?

Please answer, and if you disagree please explain in scientifically-valid detail why you would have us believe that Bob Carter has not committed de facto global warming fraud - thank you.

----------
* http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2011/07/bob_carters_trend_lines.php
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
01:40 AM on 12/05/2011
National Academy of Sciences (2010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a strong, credible body of evidence, based on multiple lines of research, documenting that Earth is warming. Strong evidence also indicates that recent warming is largely caused by human activities, especially the release of greenhouse gases through the burning of fossil fuels. 

Global warming is closely associated with other climate changes and impacts, including rising sea levels, increases in intense rainfall events, decreases in snow cover and sea ice, more frequent and intense heat waves, increases in wildfires, longer growing seasons, and ocean acidification. Individually and collectively, these changes pose risks for a wide range of human and environmental systems. While much remains to be learned, the core phenomenon, scientific questions, and hypotheses have been examined thoroughly and have stood firm in the face of serious scientific debate and careful evaluation of alternative explanations.

http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/materials-based-on-reports/reports-in-brief/Science-Report-Brief-final.pdf
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
05:44 PM on 12/04/2011
American Association for the Advancement of Science
----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­--------------

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has reaffirmed the position of its Board of Directors and the leaders of 18 respected organizations, who concluded based on multiple lines of scientific evidence that global climate change caused by human activities is now underway, and it is a growing threat to society.

“The vast preponderance of evidence, based on years of research conducted by a wide array of different investigators at many institutions, clearly indicates that global climate change is real, it is caused largely by human activities­, and the need to take action is urgent,” said Alan I. Leshner, chief executive officer of AAAS and executive publisher of the journal Science.

http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2009/1204climate_statement.shtml
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
05:38 PM on 12/04/2011
Climate scientist and Republican activist Dr. Barry Bickmore:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I’ve recently been involved with other scientists and scholars in Utah trying to stop the spread of outright lies, half-truths, abuses of data, and distortions about climate change.  Much of this disinformation is coming from (or through) some Republican members of the Utah Legislature, and the other Republican (and some Democratic) members have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker...

I'm a Republican myself, and it galls me that my own party has locally fallen for a bunch of conspiracy theories and scientifically incompetent trash. In my opinion, something has to be done to save the party from disaster in the long run...

Democracy depends on accurate information being readily available to the public, and I see people who propagate such disinformation campaigns as enemies of Democracy.

http://bbickmore.wordpress.com/about-this-blog/
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:28 PM on 12/04/2011
"(Kerry) Emanuel sees himself as a conservative. He believes marriage is between a man and a woman. He backs a strong military. He almost always votes Republican and admires Ronald Reagan. Emanuel is also a highly regarded professor of atmospheric science at MIT. … Emanuel has concluded that the scientific data show a powerful link between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change."

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/05/nation/la-na-scientist-climate-20110105

“Texas Tech atmospheric scientist Katharine Hayhoe is an evangelical Christian who travels widely talking to conservative audiences and wrote a book with her husband, a pastor and former climate change denier, explaining climate change to skeptics.”

Republicans for Environmental Protection:
http://www.rep.org/Hayhoe_Climate.pdf

“A (solar) physicist by training, John Cook is an evangelical Christian who runs the website skepticalscience.com, which seeks to debunk climate change deniers' arguments.”

http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2011/11/29/not-all-climate-skeptics-are-created-equal/

“Barry Bickmore is a Mormon, a professor of geochemistry at Brigham Young University and the blogger behind Anti-Climate Change Extremism in Utah, where he recently rebuked Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) for his climate views and posted editorials mentioning his Republican affiliation.”

http://redgreenandblue.org/2011/11/12/a-republican-ex-climate-skeptic-explains-how-people-avoid-the-truth-about-climate-change/
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
03:45 PM on 12/04/2011
American Geophysical Union
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system — including the temperatures of the atmosphere­, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons — are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century. Global average surface temperatures increased on average by about 0.6°C over the period 1956–2006…

With climate change.. the human footprint on Earth is apparent. The cause of disruptive climate change… is tied to energy use and runs through modern society. Solutions will necessarily involve all aspects of society. Mitigation strategies and adaptation responses will call for collaborations across science, technology­, industry, and government­.

http://www.agu.org/sci_pol/positions/climate_change2008.shtml
photo
StephenBP
What's he building in there?
07:45 AM on 12/04/2011
Where is the science against global warming? Essentially, there is none. Detractors of the science of climatology use demonizing labels, and they cite websites that have been shown time and time again to be misleading and in many cases, funded by fossil fuel interests. Much of the propaganda expertise used by the powerfull, trillion dollar fossil fuel empire in defending the use of fossil fuel comes from the same people who formulated the strategy to convince people that tobacco smoking was not harmful. They harass scientists, steal their private communications, and then take them out of context to mislead the public. They ignore the data, cite disproven works, misinterpret studies, and generally have either no science background, a flawed background, or are linked to the fossil fuel industry propaganda pipeline.

The world is warming. It is warming, in geological terms, very rapidly. But up to now, the changes have been gradual enough that most people cannot notice the warm up. Things are starting to change with the current crop of extreme weather events, and the sharply rising price of food. The foods that we normally imported in abundance from Northern Mexico and Texas aren't going to be there this year, and probably not next year either.

Keep your eyes and mind open. Test your hypotheses. Don't trust mad, imbecilic radio talk show hosts. Look for alternate explanations. Read. Think.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
11:05 AM on 12/03/2011
I should be careful not to let anybody get the impression that I'm claiming that this is exactly how scientists assess the significance of their findings, but if you're not familiar with probability distribution functions and don't use your calculus a lot since graduating from college and securing a dead-end job in some corporate Office Space, then the following should help you at least develop some intuition for how data are judged to be significant, or not significant, in science.

Global Top 10 Warmest Years (Jan-Dec)
2010
2005
1998
2003
2002
2009
2006
2007
2004
2001
... The year 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year since records began in 1880.
http://www­­.ncdc.noa­a­.gov/sot­c/­global/­201­0/13

Now, 2011 ties 2001 for tenth place as well.  If annual global mean temperatur­­es were randomly distribute­d, what would be the probabilit­y that all of the 11 warmest years since 1880 occurred in 1998 or later?

Simply put, scientists hypothesize that the data were randomly distributed, and then calculate the probability of random variables showing up in the distribution actually measured.  A low probability under the assumption of a  random distribution means a high probability of some underlying physical cause making the data ordered, non-random.  So, for anybody claiming any expertise or authority on the judgment of scientific validity, the ability to solve this type of problem is still below the minimum standard; to have any credibility whatsoever, you need to be able to solve even more challenging problems, of similar kind.

It's fairly clear to me by now that reltna08 has absolutely no idea how to solve any problems in probability. What about IVES-KSA?  You're supposedly an engineer, right?  Can you handle basic, undergraduate level probability?
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
12:13 PM on 12/02/2011
American Physical Society:
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes.

The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/07_1.cfm
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:43 PM on 12/02/2011
List of national and internationally ranked science organizations equivocal on global warming:

American Institute of Petroleum Geologists

List of those stating that man-made global warming is real.

Science academies of: Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Russia, South Africa, Sweden, United Kingdom, and the USA

Also:

U.S. National Research Council
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Chemical Society
American Institute of Physics
American Physical Society
European Science Foundation
Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies
American Geophysical Union
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of Australia
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
American Meteorological Society
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
World Meteorological Organization
American Quaternary Association (paleoclimatologists)
International Union for Quaternary Research (paleoclimatologists)
Society of American Foresters
American Astronomical Society
American Statistical Association
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:53 PM on 12/02/2011
list of ultra-successful capitalist­s who believe that man-made global warming is real:

RUPERT MURDOCH $7.4 Billion
(Head of News Corp and parent of Fox News)

BILL GATES $59 Billion (investor/­philanthro­pist, retired from Microsoft)

WARREN BUFFET $39 Billion (investor and chairman, Berkshire Hathaway Insurance)

GEORGE SOROS $22 Billion (investor/­philanthro­pist)

MICHAEL BLOOMBERG $19.5 Billion (NYC mayor and head of Bloomberg News Service)

SERGEY BRIN and LARRY PAGE $16.7 Billion apiece (Google co-founder­s)

MICHAEL DELL $15 Billion (CEO and founder of Dell Computers)

PAUL ALLEN $13.2 Billion and STEVE BALLMER $13.9 Billion
(Microsoft co-founder­s with Gates)

THE WALTONS ~$100 Billion (Walmart family)

SIR RICHARD BRANSON $4 Billion (owns Virgin Airlines, plus 4 other transporta­tion companies)

STEVE JOBS $7 Billion (head of Apple, now deceased)

List opposing them:

DAVID and CHARLES KOCH $35 Billion
(sole owners of America's largest privately held coal/oil/g­as company)

SHELDON ADELSON $21.5 Billion (Las Vegas casino mogul and CEO of Las Vegas Sands)

COORS FAMILY (beer brewers)

See any difference in net contributi­on to global civilizati­on?
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
11:22 PM on 12/01/2011
U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 2010:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a strong, credible body of evidence, based on multiple lines of research, documenting that climate is changing and that these changes are in large part caused by human activities. While much remains to be learned, the core phenomenon, scientific questions, and hypotheses have been examined thoroughly and have stood firm in the face of serious scientific debate and careful evaluation of alternative explanations...

Some scientific conclusions or theories have been so thoroughly examined and tested, and supported by so many independent observations and results, that their likelihood of subsequently being found to be wrong is vanishingly small. Such conclusions and theories are then regarded as settled facts. This is the case for the conclusions that the Earth system is warming and that much of this warming is very likely due to human activities.

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12782
04:47 AM on 12/02/2011
The US National Academy of Science appears to be a publishing house, not a scientific group.

What are the scientific credentials of the USNAS or do they just help authors receive fees for published documents. I have downloaded each of your referenced documents and cannot find the back up scientific work and proxy data that supports the conclusipons.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
12:11 PM on 12/02/2011
GEMS-KSA (Saudi Arabian Big Energy Contactor) employee IVES-KSA:

"The US National Academy of Science appears to be a publishing house, not a scientific group."

lol..

Funny how working for a Saudi Arabian Big Energy contractor appears to blind you to reality, IVES:

http://www.nasonline.org/about-nas/mission/

IVES-KSA: "What are the scientific credential­s of the USNAS"

That is a joke, right?

http://www.nasonline.org/about-nas/membership/

IVES-KSA: "I have downloaded each of your referenced documents and cannot find the back up scientific work and proxy data that supports the conclusipo­ns."

You are being less than forthright and honest again, IVES-KSA - it's either that or your command of the English language and/or reading comprehension skills very poor.

The NAS document that I reference above:

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12782

includes a detailed overview of the overwhelming scientific evidence supporting man-made global warming, including detailed references.

So what sort of work does your Saudi Arabian big energy contractor pay you to do, IVES? 

"Public Relations", perhaps?

---------------------
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
-- Upton Sinclair
photo
gallon
Those who fail to remember history are, um
01:02 PM on 12/02/2011
Ives, you have said that you have trained as an engineer.

Yet here you are making clueless statements about the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. A real engineer would know who they are. Or else a real engineer would be very curious. All you have offered is to scoff and spread innuendo.

For the general reader, the NAS is the finest scientific institution in the USA, perhaps in the world. Approximately one member in ten has won a Nobel prize.

Ives the engineer wants us to dismiss NAS because Ives has never heard of them.
Instead I think I shall dismiss Ives as not being quite who he claims.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
03:36 PM on 12/01/2011
Maybe we should just skip the global warming climate change argument and instead:

Regulate and charge a garbage fee for pollution: heavy metals in particular, are a good proxy for fossils and nukes.

Anybody have a problem with that?

Rooftop solar, offshore wind and waste bio char bio fuels can supply all our world's energy needs: forever, 24/7, cheaper than clean coal and nukes for solar, one of the cheapest electricity source for millions of people nationally and billions of people worldwide because it removes the middle people. Wind and waste bio char are half that price or less, making them some of the cheapest utility electricity source we have with only geothermal and it's quakes being less.

Cheap, clean, safe, no oil wars, coal mining damage and deaths, or world nuclear disasters.

Climate change or not.

BTW humans emit some 200 times the CO2 of all the volcanoes in the world combined.

Ya think that might change the climate?
photo
StephenBP
What's he building in there?
05:51 PM on 12/01/2011
It would be a very good start. That and conservation. It is doable.
The more I think about it the better it sounds.
Got any organization with you on this?
If not, maybe you need to start one. If people only knew what a toxic cancerous stew crude petroleum is.... there should be a penalty just for taking that crap out of the ground where it was safely hidden for millions of years. .
We don't let people play around with unlicensed nuclear materials. Maybe we should regulate petroleum just as tightly.
Our battle, of course, is that many of the wealthiest people and organizations on the planet depend on this poison for their wealth, and they never take responsibility or pay the consequences for the damage it causes. That has to change and your idea has a lot of merit in my opinion.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
08:52 PM on 12/01/2011
Agreed on conservation/efficiency and underwater turbines too.

The green community is still scattered on it's approach. There's nothing wrong with diversity, but the bulk of the push has to come from

rooftop solar, offshore wind, efficiency, underwater turbines and waste bio char.

No organization has yet come to that conclusion, though these folks seem close to it:http://swiftfoundation.org/sf-green-investing/

I have been commenting here for a couple years, and it's taken me that long to narrow the available choices to these 5 things. Everything else seems to have huge problems. But there is a whole lot of folks who say do everything. I say, we can't come close to affording the time and money for everything, and we should weed out the bad.

Yes, the challenge is money rules our former republic.

For that I can only suggest you vote for the Kucinch, Warren, Grayson CPC progressives in the primaries and the dems, including Obama, in the general.
photo
StephenBP
What's he building in there?
02:53 PM on 12/01/2011
Fourier, Tyndall, Arrhenius, NASA, NOAA, AAAS, NAS....
Not a bad collection of scientists there....
These are folks who have contributed to our knowledge of global warming.
Heartland Inst. CEI, and Exxon Mobil are among the entities with vested interests in this issue who have disputed the known science about global warming using tobacco industry tactics.
Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity are among the college dropouts who act as their megaphones.
Oil state senator Jimmy Inhofe and most of the Republican presidential candidates side with Exxon Mobil. Wonder why...

FOX news, which is 7% Saudi Arabian owned disputes global warming. Wonder why...

Food prices are sky rocketing and it has gone way beyond anything related to gasahol.

Texas and Oklahoma agriculture has been severely damaged by drought.

Hey antler brain08! Check this out!

ΔF = α ln(C/C0)
photo
gallon
Those who fail to remember history are, um
03:15 PM on 12/01/2011
I think you can add Nobel winner Einstein to the list of good guys. In 1905 he published a major paper on diffusion. Diffusion being a major tool used in atmospheric studies.