Blogs

climate (9)

Tim Jackson: An economic reality check

Posted by Tanit on August 13, 2012 at 10:30pm

.. And we've grown our economies so much that we now stand in a real danger of undermining hope -- running down resources, cutting down rainforests, spilling oil into the Gulf of Mexico, changing the climate -- and the only thing that has actually remotely slowed down the relentless rise of carbon emissions over the last two to three decades is recession. And recession, of course, isn't exactly a recipe for hope either, as we're busy finding out. So we're caught in a kind of trap. It's a dilemma, a dilemma of growth. We can't live with it; we can't live without it. Trash the system or crash the planet -- it's a tough choice; it isn't much of a choice. And our best avenue of escape from this actually is a kind of blind faith in our own cleverness and technology and efficiency and doing things more efficiently. Now I haven't got anything against efficiency. And I think we are a clever species sometimes. But I think we should also just check the numbers, take a reality check here..

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/tim_jackson_s_economic_reality_check.html

Read more…

Polar Bears are Protected. But are they Safe?

Posted by Marcia Divack on May 11, 2009 at 4:39pm
Polar bears have become the universal symbol of global warming, not so much because they're cute or cuddly (they're actually ferocious and not opposed to cannibalism), but because it is eminently clear that climate change is killing them. Polar bears depend on solid sea ice for survival; it's where they do their hunting. But when the ice begins to melt — as it has in recent years, thanks largely to warming — the bears can starve and die.A 2007 study by the U.S. Geological Survey found that two-thirds of the polar bears on the planet could disappear by mid-century if Arctic ice keeps melting. So when the Bush Administration bowed to pressure from environmental groups last year and finally listed the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) — admitting that melting sea ice was the reason — it was considered a rare green coup. Since the ESA mandates the government protect endangered species from hazards, listing the polar bear as threatened by global warming would appear to require Washington to control carbon emissions. Some green groups even thought the ESA could be used to fight new coal plants and other big emitters of greenhouse gases, on the grounds that they would accelerate warming and harm the polar bear. (See Germany's latest polar bear celebrity.)But there was a catch. While declaring the polar bear threatened by global warming, the Bush Interior Department added a rule that limited the use of the ESA to curb greenhouse gas emissions. In other words, even though science says that global warming is directly hurting polar bears and man-made carbon emissions are the chief cause of global warming, Washington wouldn't be allowed to use the ESA to do anything about it.President Barack Obama had promised to review those last-minute Bush Administration changes to the ESA. And green groups were hopeful that the new Interior Secretary, Ken Salazar, would restore full protections for the polar bear. But they came away disappointed on May 8, when Salazar announced that he would keep the Bush rule in place, claiming that the ESA wasn't meant to be used to cap carbon emissions. "When the ESA was passed, it was not contemplated it would be a tool to address the issue of climate change," he said. "It seems to me that using the Endangered Species Act as a way to get to that global warming framework is not the right way to go." (See pictures of the effects of global warming.)Though he coupled his announcement with a call for comprehensive climate legislation, Salazar essentially made the same argument that his predecessors had: that the ESA was meant to deal with local threats to species, not global ones. It would be impossible, for example, to directly link the increase in carbon emissions caused by a new coal plant to the polar bears' melting habitat. But environmental groups, several of which had fought in the courts for years to force the Bush Administration to list the polar bear, found Salazar's logic faulty. "From a scientific standpoint they're wrong," says John Kostyack, senior counsel at the National Wildlife Federation. "By doing this, the Obama Administration is missing a chance to tell the American people what global warming is doing their wildlife."Environmental groups were already less than enthusiastic about Salazar heading the Interior Department. A Democratic senator from Colorado, Salazar was a rancher more attuned to the idea of using nature rather than protecting it, and he angered greens early by removing the Western gray wolf from the endangered species list. As the head of Interior, he'll be making decisions on whether to open up new land to oil and gas development, and the polar bear ruling has some environmentalists worried. "This does raise a red flag," says Noah Greenwald, program director for the Center for Biological Diversity, which is fighting the polar bear ruling in court. "You worry this means he is not going to be a friend of the environment and the Endangered Species Act."It's a little early to judge Salazar's tenure at the Interior Department, and the Secretary may have a point — the ESA wasn't designed to counter a threat as global as global warming. The best way to deal with carbon emissions is to pass national legislation that would create a cap-and-trade program, rather than trying to stretch the ESA to fit a purpose its drafters couldn't have foreseen. But the ongoing battle over the polar bear is a reminder that wildlife will be the first victims of global warming — and that saving them won't be easy.
Read more…

And So It Begins . . .

Posted by Marcia Divack on April 24, 2009 at 7:39pm
The indigenous people of Alaska have stood firm against some of the most extreme weather conditions on Earth for thousands of years. But now, flooding blamed on climate change is forcing at least one Eskimo village to move to safer ground.Floodwaters rip through the village of Newtok, Alaska, destroying its infrastructure.Authorities have ordered about 340 residents of the tiny coastal village of Newtok to move to new homes 9 miles away, up the Ninglick River. The village, home to indigenous Yup'ik Eskimos, is the first of possibly scores of threatened Alaskan communities that could be abandoned.Warming temperatures are melting coastal ice shelves and frozen sub-soils, which act as natural barriers to protect the village against summer deluges from ocean storm surges."We are seeing the erosion, flooding and sinking of our village right now," said Stanley Tom, a Yup'ik Eskimo and tribal administrator for the Newtok Traditional Council.The crisis is unique because its devastating effects creep up on communities, eating away at their infrastructure, unlike with sudden natural disasters such as wildfires, earthquakes or hurricanes.Newtok is just one example of what the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warns is part of a growing climate change crisis that will displace 150 million people by 2050.The group says indigenous peoples in Asia, Central America and Africa are threatened by shifting environmental conditions blamed on climate change."We will not be able to survive"Tom's ancestors have been living in the region for centuries, he said."Our land is our resource, our source of food; it's our country. We live off of it. If we go to another village or city, we will not be able to survive," Tom said.The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has estimated that moving Newtok could cost $130 million. Twenty-six other Alaskan villages are in immediate danger, with an additional 60 considered under threat in the next decade, according to the corps.The village crisis is taking place as more than 400 indigenous people from 80 nations gather 500 miles (800 kilometers) away in Anchorage, Alaska, at the first Indigenous Peoples' Global Summit on Climate Change.The conference aimed to address global issues effecting indigenous communities like the Yup'ik Eskimos. The five-day summit also hoped to raise global awareness about the crisis facing these indigenous communities and to help them speak with a more unified voice, said Patricia Cochran, chairwoman of the Inuit Circumpolar Council, which hosted the event.U.N. scientists have long blamed increases in average global temperatures on the emission of excess greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide by industry and the burning of petroleum-based fuel.Summit delegates will work on a declaration outlining the climate change-related issues facing indigenous people. The declaration will be agreed upon Friday and presented at the Conference of Parties United Framework Convention on Climate Change in Copenhagen, Denmark, in December."On the international level, the meeting in Copenhagen at the end of the year is incredibly important, it will lay down the road map on how we tackle climate change and who gets to be involved," said Sam Johnston of Tokyo, Japan-based United Nations University, a co-sponsor of the summit."Climate change poses threats and dangers to the survival of indigenous communities worldwide, even though they contribute least to greenhouse emissions," United Nations General Assembly President Miguel D'Escoto said at the summit.Climate change, conference delegates say, is threatening the traditional lifestyles of indigenous peoples around the world. Specific environmental threats include droughts, sea level rise, warmer temperatures; lack of rainfall, flooding and loss of biodiversity, climatologists say. The specific combination of threats varies by region.For example, in the island nation of Papua New Guinea, an increase in population growth coupled with rising sea levels is decreasing the amount of crop land making farming very difficult for the indigenous people of the region, according to the U.N.In the African nation of Kenya, the Samburu tribe is on the verge of a food and economic crisis, the U.N. said, as lengthy droughts kill livestock that provides income and sustenance for the community.In Mexico, highland Mayan farmers are fighting to survive amid decreasing rainfall, unseasonal frost and unprecedented changes in daytime temperatures, the U.N. reported. These conditions are forcing the farmers to plant alternative crops and to search for other sources of irrigation."We are the ones that are the most effected" by climate change, said Saul Vicente-Vasquez, a Mexican economist and longtime human rights activist for indigenous peoples."Climigration" refers to the forced and permanent migration of communities because of severe climate change effects on essential infrastructure. This differs from migration caused by catastrophic environmental events such as hurricanes and earthquakes. The concept of "climigration" implies that there is no possibility of these communities returning home, said Alaskan human rights lawyer Robin Bronen, who coined the term."There needs to be a new institutional framework that is created, that's based in human rights doctrines ... that facilitates relocations," Bronen said.Back in Newtok, village leaders continue to work with federal and state representatives while they plan to relocate."We have a new village, but we don't have all the funding that the village needs to move right now," said Sally Russell Cox planner with the Alaska division of community and regional affairs.If the crisis worsens and forces an emergency evacuation, Cox said officials want to provide "a safe place to go if they need to get out of the village."As for Tom, he said he's looking forward to getting it over with. "We hope to move to the new village site and be able to get on with regular life."
Read more…

Climate Change Will Be Irreversible

Posted by Marcia Divack on March 17, 2009 at 7:40pm
The world is facing an increasing risk of "irreversible" climate shifts because worst-case scenarios warned of two years ago are being realized, an international panel of scientists has warned.Drought, flooding, storms and mass extinction in the future will have a heavy social cost as well.Temperatures, sea levels, acid levels in oceans and ice sheets were already moving "beyond the patterns of natural variability within which our society and economy have developed and thrived," scientists said in a report released Thursday.The findings came at the end of a three-day conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, where nearly 2,000 researchers gathered to discuss climate change.The group called on policy-makers to use all tools available to reduce dangerous emissions of greenhouse gases.The current climate situation on the planet may be as severe as the worst-case scenarios predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which issued warnings in 2007 of a future beset by flooding, drought, storms and mass extinction of species.In its report, the researchers also warned of potential social costs across the planet because of climate change.Temperature rises above 2 degrees Celsius would lead to climate disruption for the rest of the century and disproportionately affect poor nations, the researchers warned."Recent observations show that societies are highly vulnerable to even modest levels of climate change, with poor nations and communities particularly at risk," the report said.The conclusions of the conference will be presented to politicians when they meet in Copenhagen in December. It is then that leaders will discuss a new global agreement on greenhouse gas emission levels to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012.
Read more…

Mathematics and Climate

Posted by Marcia Divack on March 25, 2009 at 7:51pm
The American Mathematical Society, the American Statistical Association, the Mathematical Association of America, and the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics announce that the theme for Mathematics Awareness Month, April 2009, is Mathematics and Climate.One of the most important challenges of our time is modeling global climate. Some of the fundamental questions researchers are currently addressing are:How long will the summer Arctic sea ice pack survive?Are hurricanes and other severe weather events getting stronger?How much will sea level rise as ice sheets melt?How do human activities affect climate change?How is global climate monitored?Calculus, differential equations, numerical analysis, probability, and statistics are just some of the areas of mathematics used to understand the oceans, atmosphere, and polar ice caps, and the complex interactions among these vast systems. Indeed, analyzing feedback effects is a crucial component of global climate modeling and often a significant factor in long-term predictions. For example, warmer temperatures cause ice to melt, exposing more land and water, so that more sunlight is absorbed-instead of being reflected, in turn leading to more warming.Mathematics, computer science, and other sciences are inextricably linked, and each is required to begin to solve the fundamental questions about earth's climate, particularly those concerning global warming. Moreover, math and science are central to the development of both traditional and alternative energy sources, and to the evolution of other strategies for mitigating the effects of climate change.Resources for this year's Mathematics Awareness Month program can be found at www.mathaware.org.Each year the Joint Policy Board for Mathematics sponsors Mathematics Awareness Month to recognize the importance of mathematics through written materials and an accompanying poster that highlight mathematical developments and applications in one particular area.
Read more…

Earth Hour a Success

Posted by Marcia Divack on March 30, 2009 at 4:55pm
For environmental activists, the message was clear: Earth Hour was a huge success.Now they say nations have a mandate to tackle climate change."The world said yes to climate action, now governments must follow," the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) said Sunday, a day after hundreds of millions of people worldwide followed its call to turn off lights for a full hour.From an Antarctic research base and the Great Pyramids of Egypt, from the Colosseum in Rome to the Empire State building in New York, illuminated patches of the globe went dark Saturday night to highlight the threat of climate change. Time zone by time zone, nearly 4,000 cities and towns in 88 countries dimmed nonessential lights from 8:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.WWF called the event, which began in Australia in 2007 and grew last year to 400 cities worldwide, "the world's first-ever global vote about the future of our planet."The United Nations' top climate official, Yvo de Boer, called the event a clear sign that the world wants negotiators seeking a climate change agreement to set an ambitious course to fight global warming.Talks in Bonn this week are the latest round in an effort to craft a deal to control emissions of the heat-trapping gases responsible for global warming. They are due to culminate in Copenhagen this December."Earth Hour was probably the largest public demonstration on climate change ever," de Boer told delegates from 175 nations. "Its aim was to tell every government representative to seal a deal in Copenhagen. The world's concerned citizens have given the negotiations an additional and very clear mandate."Earth Hour officially began when the Chatham Islands, 500 miles (800 kilometers) east of New Zealand, switched off its diesel generators. It moved on through Asia, Europe and then crossed the Atlantic to North and South America."Earth Hour has always been a positive campaign," said Earth Hour executive director Andy Ridley. "It's always around street parties, not street protests, it's the idea of hope, not despair. And I think that's something that's been incredibly important this year because there is so much despair around."
Read more…

Where's the Back Door Please?

Posted by Marine on April 24, 2008 at 9:30am
I found this in my mailbox this morning. Scary days ahead ? Free refill !!!Where's the Back Door Please?Is there another way out of this place? I see angry creatures with torches outside the front - yelling for blood - they wanna hang someone, and they don't care who - then they will set fire to the building just to make sure it doesn't happen again.As I have been saying for a couple years now, things will begin heating up significantly by 2008. And sure enough. Of course, there exists no incredible insight into the future on my part, no clairvoyance - it's simply keeping up with the news, doing lots of research and drawing the logical conclusions. Food prices, as predicted when oil and mineral and water supplies got tight, will first experience rapid increases. Those in the developing countries will be affected most because they are poorer. The G8 countries will suffer least in this scenario because let's face it, food represents only about 10-15% of our earnings (today). We can afford some pretty hefty price rises before we really start hurting. No, it's not prices we in the West have to worry about - it's the supply itself - real shortages. That's next. You might begin to see supermarkets limit the sales of basic commodities off the shelf like flour and rice. At some point the shelf will see periods of emptiness as shipments can't get through, or goods simply are no longer available from the producers. People will start hoarding. Governments will start limiting exports to protect their own people. People will hoard more.If all that weren't enough, you will begin to see (actually already seeing) oil prices continue to rise. A lot of things will be blamed for that - poor planning, insufficient investment in drilling and exploration, rising demand in the East, rising demand in the oil exporting countries themselves, distribution problems, refining problems, commodity futures speculation. Al those are true. But they are in fact true because the reason for them happening is clearly seen - we can't produce enough oil any more. Saudi Arabia has announced it hopes to increase production over the next five years by something like 5 million barrels per day. But read to the finish please - it will do so after it invests something like £160 billion to produce new wells, increase refinery capacity, etc. What they aren't telling you is that the increase, if it is indeed real, won't even compensate for the continuing decrease in production levels over that period of time and the continuing increases in demand. Oil producers will have to run just to stay in place. And they can't stay in place forever.I wish I could say that all we have to face is an increase in oil prices, but alas, like the food situation, the oil one will prove to be every bit as bad. First the prices, then shortages. It is now predicted that by the end of 2008 oil demand will reach 89 million barrels per day. But we won't be able to meet that as supply will only reach 87 million barrels per day. It's bad enough to arrive at the petrol station and empty your wallet for the attendant - it's even worse to arrive only to find that there isn't any petrol to purchase anyway. But that's not the worst of it either. Think of the further effect this will have upon food production and the distribution system - in the sky, on the land and on the seas. When lorry operators, air transport, and shipping lines have to pay too much or they can't get what they need, they go out of business. When they go out of business we go out of business.This is all happening now folks. This is not a temporary cycle. What you see happening today is permanent. The days of cheap and available food are gone forever. The days of cheap and available energy is gone forever. No time for alternative energy. No time for infrastructure changes to accommodate alternative energy. We should have been planning for this 30 years ago, but we didn't - consciously, we didn't - intentionally we didn't. It would hurt the economy. And politicians, as today, were too gutless to stand up and tell us what we needed to hear and drive us to where we needed to be driven as a society. And so here we are today, starting our slippery slide into hell, and still we as a society, as a civilisation, are not even recognising that it is happening.So what are we going to do about it? Quickly develop new land to grow food? No time. Change global protectionism? No time. Create a world government to solve all of mankind's problems? No time. Place into service thousands of wind turbines, solar power generators, nuclear facilities? No time. Implement new aggressive government initiatives? No time.There is no way out. There is no time left for this civilisation. The best we can hope for is to plan for survival. And even time for that is slipping away. We can just go on, I suppose, and ignore what is happening as we are today, or discuss unceasingly new ideas for holding on to the life we have - possible new ways of farming, new energy sources, new monetary structures, change our light bulbs, reduce our consumption, etc. We can go on believing that the Tesco store will always be there, or the water will always come out of the tap, or the lights will always come on, or the phone will always work, or the Internet will always be there. We can do that. That's easy. Foolish, but easy. Or we can get so frightened that we either panic, or freeze like deer in headlights, no longer able to function rationally. Or we can face reality and begin the very involved process of planning for the limited future we might be able to salvage from all this.No time, folks. We ran out of time years back. We just didn't see it. We refused to see it. Even today we refuse to see it. The free market would save us then, and will save us yet. Technology would save us then and will save us yet. Genetically modified seeds will save us. The government will at last wake up and drive us forward out of this mess. The Greens will win. The Democrats will win. The pendulum will swing. As Bush says - this is simply a slowdown. We'll be back. Not to worry. Maybe...So much better than spam...Just takes a little longer to read. To quote somebody else :The sun is shining, summer's on the way, the roads are full of busy people. These are the good old days.Of course, it couldn't end like that. As contents of mailboxes are being more and more scrutinised, I was kindly suggested to follow a so-called related link. Here follows what I read :Feel the freedom of total wealth.Simply sign up to receive the §§§§§, a free daily e-letter and we’ll immediately e-mail you this latest research report... Absolutely FREEHow to Profit from the Rice Shortage of 2008Most stocks have dealt a bitter return to investors...But ONE MARKET has been bucking the trend in a big way: rice.Today I'd like to show you a simple way to invest in the global rice boom.There's no need to tear up your back yard and plant crops - and no reason to take on risky "futures" or "options" plays.In fact, there's a much easier way to profit from ag-flation - a way that could reward forward-thinking investors with returns of 61% or more.Look - since late December, rice traders have watched the value of this "white gold" commodity rise by 75.8%...But this historic rally has only just begun!The truth is, this powerful commodity is still well below its inflation-adjusted highs.And it's not alone. Other soft commodities, like corn, soy beans and wheat are poised for a break-out year.That's why I'd like to send you a FREE report from our acclaimed Investment Director, Eric §§§. In his latest report, Eric reveals why soft commodities, including rice, are in the early stages of a massive rally - and how you can easily capitalize on this trend.This report has a retail value of $49. It will only be available for a limited time. To receive your copy, simply sign up for our FREE daily e-letter by entering your email address below.We value your privacy.You'll receive The §§§§§ via e-mail. Each day we’ll help you take advantage of the best investment opportunities throughout the world and help you protecting your assets and your privacy.All of this is yours free. Simply fill out you name and email address in the box below. It’s completely FREE and you may unsubscribe at any time. Your free gift is yours to keep.Irony, anyone ?
Read more…

Latest Blog Posts

Most Popular Blog Posts

Blog Topics by Tags

Monthly Archives