Global Warming is Real, Mr. Klaus

The annual world economic forum of global leaders was held in Davos, Switzerland this past week, and Czech President Vaclav Klaus used this forum to verbally attack Al Gore over his stance on global warming.

"I don't think that there is any global warming," said the 67-year-old liberal, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the European Union. "I don't see the statistical data for that."

Referring to the former US vice president, who attended Davos this year, he added: "I'm very sorry that some people like Al Gore are not ready to listen to the competing theories. I do listen to them.

"Environmentalism and the global warming alarmism is challenging our freedom. Al Gore is an important person in this movement."

Speaking on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum, he said that he was more worried about the reaction to the perceived dangers than the consequences.

"I'm afraid that the current crisis will be misused for radically constraining the functioning of the markets and market economy all around the world," he said.

"I'm more afraid of the consequences of the crisis than the crisis itself."

I agree that people tend to become alarmed over perceived dangers, that is after all what warnings are meant to do, if they are taken seriously. This climate threat has been ‘perceived’ by climatologists for many years and those early predictions are beginning to take shape. The non-scientific community needs only observe the changes in weather patterns and the resulting destruction of wildlife habitat to see this is true.

You cannot dismiss the fact that polar ice sheets are melting at a record pace. You cannot ignore the fact that navigable routes have opened through the arctic, about 30 years ahead of predictions.

Nor can you ignore the fact that the planets surface is warming up.

The greatest debate over causal factors is whether these changes are the result of a natural cycle or are they man-made.

The burning of fossil fuels has certainly taken its toll, not only on human health but also on the health of the atmosphere as a result of excavating earths resources, burning those resources and releasing the resulting gases into the atmosphere. The resultant greenhouse gases increase the planets temperature. Not alarmist theory, scientific fact.

Earth’s climate is a closed system. Everything that exists in this system, stays in this system. The melting of polar ice caps produces evaporation and the increased atmospheric moisture results in increased rainfall which then leads to increased severity of hurricanes. A side effect of this increased hurricane intensity is the associated low pressure sucks more moisture away from the drier climates of the world creating more severe droughts. As a result, agricultural patterns worldwide are being affected.

Polar ice cap melt also increases sea levels which could result in future category 2 and 3 storms causing much more severe flooding than anticipated otherwise, in low-lying coastal areas.

As the planet grows ever warmer, and former cold zones give way to rising temperatures, plant and animal species are loosing their habitat and dying off thereby decreasing biodiversity. This does not bode well for planets inhabitants, for man and beast.

Are these the ramblings of ‘alarmists’ for the purpose of “radically constraining the functioning of the markets and market economy”? It seems Mr. Klaus, and by association all other naysayers, is more concerned with the health of the market system than with the health of our planet. And this perfectly illustrates the very reason why we are in this mess today.

We dismiss scientific findings at our own peril. This has proven itself many times throughout history. Taking heed of this lesson is of the utmost importance to prevent a predicted global calamity.

It is a widespread fact that species and their habitats are on the decrease while chances for ecosystems to adapt naturally are diminishing. This cannot be merely brushed aside as ‘alarmist’.


Sources:
Science Daily, Sep 22, 2005

Global Issues, Jan 1, 2009

Climate Change Weather Patterns

John McCain’s Blatant BS

John McCain recently ran a campaign ad featuring a windmill, projecting the idea that he is in favor of alternative energy. The ad claims he stood up against Bush and has a realistic plan to curb greenhouse gas emissions, and protect our environment.

He has had eight opportunities to vote on the renewable energy bill that would have extended the investment tax credit for installing solar energy and the production tax credits for building wind turbines and other energy-efficiency systems. These credits, which expire in December of this year, help these industries to remain competitive with fossil fuel industries. And, he has missed all eight opportunites. Which effectively is a ‘No’ vote.

He is courting oil companies and is taking every nickel, dime and hundred dollar bill they are throwing at him.

What can we derive from these three facts? John McCain thinks Americans are too stupid to see him as he really is. Another political stooge bought and paid for by other oil company stooges (lobbyists) who don’t give a damn about the future of clean alternative energy or the environment.

A recent article in Scientific American laid out a grand plan to end U.S. dependence on foreign oil and slash greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 using technology we have currently available.

Some of the world’s largest solar projects in the country, the Arizona desert, in the Mojave Desert, and elsewhere in California, are going to have to resign themselves to the fact that alternative energy in this country is a pipe dream. We have the consensus, the desire and the technological ability to begin cleaning up our environment and making ourselves energy independent but our leaders prefer to remain lapdogs of the oil industry.

And in doing so we are being forced to subjugate ourselves to king oil’s whims.

Despite all of the toxic pollutants we have seen dumped around oil wells fouling the surrounding land and waterways,

despite all of the disruption we have witnessed with wildlife habitat,

despite all the pollution that have been proven to result from burning fossil fuels,

despite the proven benefits to our nation and the world to be had from converting to clean alternative energy,

despite scientists warning that we need to offset greenhouse gas emissions,

despite the positive effect that pushing a new clean energy would have on stimulating our economy,

despite falling behind Germany in an industry that we could easily regain, producing and installing of photovoltaic (PV) solar cells,

despite the general public’s outcry to pursue clean alternative energy and wean ourselves from dependence on foreign oil and fossil fuels,

leaders of this country refuse to abandone their financially lucrative associations with big oil and instead continue to forsake the future health of their fellow citizens and the environment.

Running out of fossil fuels would probably be the best thing to happen for this planet. It is the only way the U.S. is going to adopt clean alternative fuels. I sincerely hope I am wrong, but I doubt it.

American Oil ‘Shortage’ Created by American Oil Companies

The reason Bush likes to place the cause of America’s high gas prices on increased demand from India and China is because American oil companies are shipping U.S. oil to those countries for a bigger profit than what they can get here. So, if they were not willing to pay more for the oil than American’s pay, then, according to George Bush’s profit-polluted logic, there would not be a shortage here and we would not be paying higher pump prices. Now, look here to see who is consuming the most oil.

We are exporting 1.6 million barrels of U.S. refined oil products a day and are being lead to believe that we need to open up more sources here because there is a shortage. We are creating our shortage ourselves. Is this the ‘shortage’ that oil corporations refer to when they say we don’t have enough U.S. oil to address America’s needs? Is this the real reason oil companies and their political supporters want to open up offshore oil drilling?

Here’s how it works, China and India want more oil, U.S. oil companies see a chance to make more money by shipping our oil to them instead of keeping it here in the U.S. and by doing so they create a shortage here resulting in American’s paying a higher price at the pumps. This is what is known as a win-win, for the oil companies.

Go ahead, someone try to convince me that we need more offshore oil drilling. Only the oil companies need access to more oil. Because of their need for more profit. The need of the struggling American family to keep gas prices low does not enter into the equation, except as a byproduct American oil makes even more profit off of us. I have presented facts on this very blog that the U.S. government experts have said those new oil wells will not help at the pump. This is just a mere drop in the bucket. Here we have oil companies selling oil products to foreign countries while our politicians, the oil company stooges, are trying to convince the American public that by opening up those oil fields we will have lower prices at the pump. I really, truly want to know how many people are actually buying this load of crap.

And did anyone pickup on the fact that the oil tanker that crashed in New Orleans a few weeks back was loaded with biofuel headed for foreign ports? If we have such a fuel shortage here in the U.S., enough that our fuel prices are being raised, then why the hell are we sending our fuel overseas? Oh right, they pay a higher price for it. One can only assume that if we do allow more offshore oil wells then this oil will also go to foreign ports. Why? Repeat after me, “because they pay more for it”.

What is the true reason behind the federal government throwing subsidies at farmers to convert more corn fields into biofuels? To ship it over seas because they pay more for it. They have too quickly adopted the manufacture of an alternative fuel that offers very little reduction in greenhouse gas emissions because it brings a higher profit for themselves than investing in solar, wind, hydrogen, or wave power. Plus, the increased production of biofuels is worsening world hunger. Only after we stop sabotaging alternative energy progress, because it disrupts profit streams of current technology, can we truly begin our quest to break free of foreign oil dependence. Are all of you people who complain about high gas prices and just accept the governments reason for it beginning to see what is really happening here?

Oil companies and other profiteers are willing to destroy the natural beauty and wildlife habitat of such places as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the Rocky Mountain area. They are willing to deal a final blow to an already struggling coastal economy, still reeling from the hurricanes of 2005, to extract oil that we Americans will most likely not even get to use because oil companies are keeping it away from the American people so they can make more profit from it overseas. What we really need to do is to turn the management of these American oil companies over to someone who actually has America’s best interest at heart. Because it is clear the oil company executives do not.

Four dollar a gallon gas is still cheaper than what many other countries are paying, and we will adjust to it. But using our dependence on foreign oil as a rally cry to put more profit in big oil’s pockets is the usual short-sighted policy decisions based solely on profit and only serves profiteers. And by doing so further disrupts our national treasures which will in the long run be extremely detrimental to the health and well being of all of us and the planet. If American oil companies insist on selling American oil to foreign countries let them do it after we get our share while developing alternative energy industries. Our dependence on foreign oil undermines our national security. But dependence on any fossil fuel is a danger to world health. We must develop alternative energy sources. If we decide on using biofuel then don’t use food crops.

What is further disappointing about this issue is that both presidential candidates, McCain and Obama, are shifting their earlier stances to now be in favor of offshore drilling. Well, actually McCain could flip again tomorrow, who knows where he will be come election day. Can this flip toward big oil be a sign that these guys are being paid off by big oil? Or is it the result of selling out their beliefs in their disgusting pursuit of votes?



Further reading:
OPEC president says no demand for more oil

Committee Against Oil Exploration (presents a very strong case against further drilling)

Clean Ocean Action

Hydrogen: Hope or Hype?

Progress of Wind Energy

The Technology That Will Save Humanity

Wave Power Scientist Enthused by Green Energy

Listen to the Children

Too often we adults shun advice from children as too naïve and not worth our time to listen to.

Here is a twelve-year-old who has something meaningful and worthwhile to say and actually says it better than most adults. She addressed the United Nations meeting in Brazil with an elegance and style far beyond her years.

Please, take the time to listen, it is only a five minute segment of her speech but in that short time she paints reality far more succinctly than any adult I know ever has.

From her we have so much to learn and just maybe we can learn to share what we have with those who have nothing.

Gas Tax Holiday: Beware Politicians bearing Gifts

Senator John McCain has proposed a gas tax holiday, a ‘gift’ if you will. Every year, just before the summer driving season, someone in congress proposes just such a break to ease our economic woes. Has it ever happened? No. Will it happen this time? Let’s hope not.

The amount of federal tax collected on a gallon of gasoline is 18.4 cents, roughly 5% of the current average price of $3.38/gallon. This would save the average commuter between $3 and $4 per tank. If the average commuter fills their tank once a week, then by the end of this three month no-tax period, he/she could conceivably save $36 to $48 which is truly a paltry sum.

During that time, the federal government would lose $9 billion and more than 300,000 jobs. The federal Highway Trust Fund, which is supported by this tax, is already facing a $3.4 billion shortfall to finance much needed infrastructure repairs nationwide. The federal transportation department says every $1 billion in highway spending creates 34,779 jobs. Sure, it would help companies like FedEx and UPS who are struggling to stay profitable due to high gas prices, but saving some jobs only to lose others is not a very responsible economic policy.

McCain plans to cover this loss with money from the general fund which would add to the deficit. Also, a very stupid and short-sighted idea. It saddens me that this is the best that a presidential candidate can come up with. And of course, since this proposal is outright political pandering for votes, Senator Hillary Clinton jumped right on it. America is in for more serious trouble.

There are several major drawbacks to this ridiculous proposal. First, by making gasoline cheaper during the busiest driving time of the year consumers will only use more of it. This not only quickens our pace towards the bottom of the trough but it would have immediate detrimental financial and environmental effects by increasing the price of a gallon of gas, increasing the amount of CO2 emissions (which contradicts Senator McCain’s stated goal of reducing CO2 emissions) and increasing the profit to oil producers.

Does this still sound like a ‘gift’?

“You don’t want to stimulate consumption,” said Lawrence Goldstein, an economist at the Energy Policy Research Foundation, interviewed by the New York Times. “The signal you want to send is the opposite one. Politicians should say that conservation is where people’s mindset ought to be.”

Mr. Goldstein said that instead of freezing the federal tax, the government should help lower-income populations pay for gasoline. It would be cheaper and benefit those households that need it most.

This guys shows much more leadership quality than any candidate we are currently forced to deal with.

The United States has the lowest gasoline taxes among industrialized countries. It also has the highest gasoline consumption level in the world, nearly 25% of all gasoline consumption is by Americans. Energy experts say the two are related. Raising the tax on a gallon of gas would slow down its consumption and finally force us to think about our driving habits and force us to be more energy conscious.

Haven’t we learned yet about what they say about accepting gifts from politicians? We always pay more for it in the long run.

New oceanfront property

One of the worst effects of global warming is nearer than we think. The world’s coastlines are going to change in as little as a few years. We have been hearing this cry for so long that most of us have become numb to the warnings. We think this change will happen so far in the future, certainly not in our lifetimes, that we don’t need to take the warnings seriously. Chicken Little ran around crying ‘the sky is falling’ and no one believed. Scientists have been telling us that global warming is real and no one believes.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) published predictions this year that sea level rise will drastically alter coastlines around the world. Their predictions, based on data that was two years old, said the sea rise could total 20 to 60 centimeters, and we want to believe it won’t happen in our lifetimes. This estimate has turned out to be conservative. The Bush administration dismisses scientific conclusions as the stuff of science fiction stories and ‘blue-sky’ voodoo. This way he doesn’t have to deal with it. These scientists know their stuff. They are not given to exaggeration and hysteria. The rest of us cannot afford to stick our heads in the sand any longer.

On a recent visit to the Greenland ice cap in September of this year, scientists were shocked to learn that ice is melting at a far faster rate than previously thought. It seems that what we have been told, that it would take centuries of ice melt to change the worlds coastlines, needs to be adjusted to taking only decades or years.

If you have ever witnessed a large sheet of ice melting in the sun, either on a lake or in your backyard, you undoubtedly have noticed that it doesn’t just melt around the edges. Holes also form across the surface of the ice that allows melted water to flow down through the ice to the ground below. As enough water flows down those holes and underneath the ice sheet it acts as a lubricant to allow the ice sheet to move. The Greenland ice sheet has already developed thousands of these holes and it is moving. With an ice sheet that large you can imagine that the amount of water flowing down those holes have become very large waterfalls. Several are as big as Niagara Falls.

The front of this glacier is five kilometers long and 1,500 meters deep. Robert Correll, chairman of the Artic Climate Impact Assessment, tries to put it into perspective this way, “That means that this one glacier puts enough fresh water into the sea in one day to provide drinking water for a city the size of New York or London for a year." And this glacier is currently moving at three times the rate it did 10 years ago. This is very significant indeed.

As the glacier moves, chunks of ice, the size of small mountains, are breaking off and causing small earthquakes and creating waves that can sink small ships if they happen to wander too close.

Add the melting effects of this one glacier to all the other glaciers around the world such as Antarctic, the glaciers of Alaska, the Rockies, the Himalayas, or the ocean water itself expanding as it warms, and the magnitude should become clear. Hurricane surges, as we saw during Katrina, will be even more devastating as flood waters will reach even further inland. Whole cities and towns could be wiped from the face of the earth.

Bush can be decisive in using the military to take Iraq for his profit but he can’t use military might to stop climate change, therefore he is totally lost as to what to do. Too bad none of his cronies are scientists, then, maybe, he would believe them. Too bad there is no profit to be made for him to take global warming seriously, then we would stand a better chance at seeing some action taken to stop or slow down global warning.

All he has done so far is spout rhetoric in front of 16 of the biggest greenhouse gas emitters in Washington last month about how, along with terrorism, climate change is the biggest threat to the earth. But when it comes down to demanding something be done about it, he would rather put it off onto the next president by suggesting voluntary cuts in emissions. Since when does any corporation or nation do anything voluntary that will cost them money even if it is to help save our species?

America is the biggest user of fossil fuel in the world and creates more greenhouse gas emissions than anyone else. Therefore, we need to lead the way in curbing these emissions. Bush will not demand anything be done, because implementing the necessary policies to force his cronies corporations to clean up their act would damage his political party’s standings. Again, it would not be profitable enough for him to do anything, even if it means the very survival of our species.

Science tells us we need to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80% if we are to stave off catastrophic climate change, Bush doesn’t understand science and so he chooses not to give it any importance. This way, by his narrow, feeble minded thinking, if it isn’t real it can’t hurt him.

He puts more faith in creationism than in science and his narrow view-point is once again endangering us all. He cannot hide from facts behind his faith. This threat of dramatic sea level rise is as real as he is blind to it.

So all of you who are living on the coastlines better trade in your homes for what will certainly become the new oceanfront property.

To learn more about climate change click here.