Denial of a Clear and Present Danger

2009-7-1 – 4:42 pm

Wilkommen! New here, eh?
Me, too.
A word of advice. Pay No Attention to the Troll.
Oh, and you may want to humor the editor and subscribe to the RSS feed.
Bye Now!

Global Warming: Getting To Carbon Neutral

As repeatedly noted, they, i.e., almost the entire Senate, have chosen to ignore their official responsibility to respond to degradation of the atmosphere brought about by anthropogenic emissions. This is even after the Administration released a study, which noted Thomas Schueneman represented the compilation of work done by 12 federal agencies, among them the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Defense, NASA, and Department of Commerce.

“Observations show that warming of the climate is unequivocal. The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas), with additional contributions from the clearing of forests and agricultural activities.”

Notes Schueneman, the report focused upon “specific geographic regions, economics sectors, and facets of society, the study is aimed at providing the best and latest information for society, government, and individuals.”

Key Findings

  1. Global warming is unequivocal and primarily human-induced.
    Global temperature has increased over the past 50 years. This observed increase is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. (p. 13)
  2. Climate changes are underway in the United States and are projected to grow.
    Climate-related changes are already observed in the United States and its coastal waters. These include increases in heavy downpours, rising temperature and sea level, rapidly retreating glaciers, thawing permafrost, lengthening growing seasons, lengthening ice-free seasons in the ocean and on lakes and rivers, earlier snowmelt, and alterations in river flows. These changes are projected to grow. (p. 27)
  3. Widespread climate-related impacts are occurring now and are expected to increase.
    Climate changes are already affecting water, energy, transportation, agriculture, ecosystems, and health. These impacts are different from region to region and will grow under projected climate change. (p. 41-106, 107-152)
  4. Climate change will stress water resources.
    Water is an issue in every region, but the nature of the potential impacts varies. Drought, related to reduced precipitation, increased evaporation, and increased water loss from plants, is an important issue in many regions, especially in the West. Floods and water quality problems are likely to be amplified by climate change in most regions. Declines in mountain snowpack are important in the West and Alaska where snowpack provides vital natural water storage. (p. 41, 129, 135, 139)
  5. Crop and livestock production will be increasingly challenged.
    Agriculture is considered one of the sectors most adaptable to changes in climate. However, increased heat, pests, water stress, diseases, and weather extremes will pose adaptation challenges for crop and livestock production. (p. 71)
  6. Coastal areas are at increasing risk from sea-level rise and storm surge.
    Sea-level rise and storm surge place many U.S. coastal areas at increasing risk of erosion and flooding, especially along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, Pacific Islands, and parts of Alaska. Energy and transportation infrastructure and other property in coastal areas are very likely to be adversely affected. (p. 111, 139, 145, 149)
  7. Threats to human health will increase.
    Health impacts of climate change are related to heat stress, waterborne diseases, poor air quality, extreme weather events, and diseases transmitted by insects and rodents. Robust public health infrastructure can reduce the potential for negative impacts. (p. 89)
  8. Climate change will interact with many social and environmental stresses.
    Climate change will combine with pollution, population growth, overuse of resources, urbanization, and other social, economic, and environmental stresses to create larger impacts than from any of these factors alone. (p. 99)
  9. Thresholds will be crossed, leading to large changes in climate and ecosystems.
    There are a variety of thresholds in the climate system and ecosystems. These thresholds determine, for example, the presence of sea ice and permafrost, and the survival of species, from fish to insect pests, with implications for society. With further climate change, the crossing of additional thresholds is expected. (p. 76, 82, 115, 137, 142)
  10. Future climate change and its impacts depend on choices made today.
    The amount and rate of future climate change depend primarily on current and future human-caused emissions of heat-trapping gases and airborne particles. Responses involve reducing emissions to limit future warming, and adapting to the changes that are unavoidable. (p. 25, 29)

Stupidity, Greed, Arrogance, Mendacity
“In the last two years,” writes Joseph Romm, “our scientific understanding of business-as-usual projections for global warming has changed dramatically.” Yet denial by members of Congress persists at a time when “inaction is inexcusable” and insufficient measures, malignant

Furthermore, if the conclusions drawn from climate models are correct, and, so far, the forecasts have erred on being too conservative, then by the time that the corrupt influence of the carbon/nuclear lobby over our government is counteracted, it will be too late. A rise in global temperatures and a concentration of carbon emissions in the atmosphere will be such that abrupt and irreversible climatic shifts will occur which will be harmful and in some cases catastrophic to life on the planet as we know it.


Related articles by Zemanta
Enhanced by Zemanta
By jcwinnie | Posted in danger, denial, energy, environment, policy, politics, risk, weather, world | Tagged , , , , , | Comments (0)

The People Deserve to Know

2009-6-30 – 1:06 pm

The headline read: “Obama Opposes Tariffs on Nations That Don’t Limit Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” Well, of course he would.

To this blog, his objection seems pretty self-serving given that the United States prior refusal to agree to the Kyoto Accord and now with the chances of H.R.2454 gaining Senate approval equivalent to that of a snowball’s chance in a gasifier. We are a principle source of GHG and ecocidally refuse to place limits on anthropogenic emissions contributing to catastrophic degradation of the Earth’s atmosphere.

Barack Obama with Microphone
A funny thing happened to me on the way to Copenhagen…

But, upon what this blog really wanted to comment was the observation made by House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) about H.R. 2454, “people deserve to know what’s in this pile of shit.” Rather than just add my $0.02 to the 1200 or so other responses to the HuffPo post, this post is praise for the Representative’s foresight.

Think about it. A big pile of crap can be feedstock for anaerobic digestion producing a digestate that can be used as fertilizer plus gases from which methane can be extracted. Such a process is much more environmentally responsible than… say a pipeline from the Alberta tar sands.

So, while “woefully inadequate when it comes to doing what scientists say is necessary to prevent catastrophic climate change” or when it comes to satisfying the rest of the world that we are making any effort at all to reduce our per capita GHG emissions, H.R. 2454 as it left the House, and forthcoming “action” by the Senate does give the Congress critters the opportunity to show everyone just how corrupt they have become when life as we know it is in the balance.

By jcwinnie | Posted in environment, intervention, leadership, security, waste, weather, world | Tagged , , , , | Comments (6)

ACES Equals IFR?

2009-6-29 – 8:17 am

So, when the House got finished with ACES, it was a travesty of a mockery of a sham, and, as the HuffPo News Team observed in a cap and trade Q & A, “Approval of a climate bill in the Senate has been viewed as a long shot. Parts of the bill may need to be changed to secure approval in the Senate.”

What changes you shudder to ask? Well, as #1 W-M cheerleader Romm observed, the bill had a 10-20 percent chance of doing some good environmentally, so it will be the Senate’s job to eliminate even those slender odds.

Nuclear Power Caricature
Hey, kids! Guess what time it is? It’s Chernobyl Zombie Time. It’s Chernobyl Zombie Time.

How? HuffPo contributor Steve Kirsch gives1 us “The Good News.” Nuclear is “a magical power technology.” It isn’t new. It’s old. And, now it’s fast, fast, fast. And, it’s clean, clean, clean!

IFR (Integral Fast Reactor) was developed by a team of hundreds of scientists working for more than 20 years at our top government national laboratory for nuclear energy (Argonne National Laboratory, at its branches in Illinois and Idaho).

The bad news is that the IFR development was abruptly canceled in its final stages in 1994. A decision was made in the early weeks of the Clinton administration by people who formerly worked for the oil and natural gas industry to cancel the project. The three reasons publicly given for canceling the program were all based on misconceptions. Since then we haven’t done a damn thing to exploit their marvelous invention. [Editor's comment: Hawk-sput!]

The convenient solution invented at Argonne is simple: instead of spending billions to dispose of our nuclear waste, we can re-use that “waste” to generate power by using advanced “fourth generation” nuclear power technology. Using just our existing nuclear waste, we can power the entire planet for centuries.

Not only is it a bargain in power, ‘Merika, it now is a way to dispose of the nuclear waste. (Solved that problem, eh?) Even better, the Senatorial sales pitch is that nuclear is clean energy. And, of course, living in the shadow of nuclear annihilation for 60 years, who could doubt that it contributes to our national security?

Climate realist Romm has asked why we still prop up an industry that can’t survive without the taxpayer swallowing the economic risk? I dunno, Joe, could it be that Senators and their supporters are well-invested in nuclear power? Is it because nukes are the Viagara for a faltering Empire?

You Want Nuclear?
At present, solar energy technology is more costly way of delivering electricity than nuclear energy. Still a major clue to current policy… Solar energy is ubiquitous, whereas uranium mines can be owned.

And, this blog wants to thank Steve Kirsch for solving one puzzle. For some time there has been that nagging question. Yes! We can… what?

Fast reactor nuclear power designs, such as the IFR, are more than 100 times more efficient than our existing light water nuclear reactors (LWRs). The waste they produce is minimal, short-lived, and relatively easy to safely store: a factor of 500 less in space-time requirements than the waste from our existing nuclear reactors. If an American used nuclear power their entire life, they would produce enough nuclear waste to fill a soda can.

So, as further corruption of H.R.2454 proceeds and “changing parts of the bill” includes 100 new nuclear reactors as a mainstay of alternative energy policy for the United States, you need not wonder, as Harvey Wasserman recently did,”who will pay for and insure them, where will the fuel come from and the waste go and who will protect them from terrorists.” As the saying goes, when you look around the poker table and you are unclear who the sucker is, dispense with any doubt, because it is you, the one not holding ACES.

Paul Newman in The Sting
“What this all boils down to is that what ACES is actually trying to achieve is investing in a new type of economy,” observed the naive student activist.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
  1. 1Climate Bill Ignores Our Biggest Clean Energy Source
By jcwinnie | Posted in economics, energy, policy, security | Tagged , , | Comments (3)

Washington Theater Presents The MTR Follies

2009-6-26 – 9:15 am

“Everybody wants into da act”. Even, in this case, when it is a school play. This blog will get its review of the MTR Follies in early. “… a delightful show, wherein Gilbert and Sullivan Meet Sweeney Todd.”

“What is he on about now?”

The fight to end mountaintop removal, an incredibly destructive form of coal mining that accounts for only 7 percent of coal production in these United States.

“Fight! Fight!”

Jim Hansen Arrested at Marsh Elementary School
The Massey site is quite proximate to Marsh Elementary School, thus well-chosen as the spot for more arrests, to include the arrest of NASA’s chief climate scientist. By quite proximate we mean the elementary school playground, in which several hundred protesters gathered, is less than 300 feet away from Massey Energy’s Goals Coal preparation plant.

And, by everybody, that is to include, the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Work Committee’s Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife. According to HuffPo contributors Bruce Nilles and Mary Anne Hitt1, the subcommittee is holding a hearing: “The Impacts of Mountaintop Removal Coal Mining on Water Quality in Appalachia.”

The hearing comes on the heels of major arrests during a mountaintop removal protest on Tuesday in the coalfields of southern West Virginia. NASA climate expert Dr. James Hansen, the actor Daryl Hannah, 94-year old retired Congressman Ken Hechler, and Goldman Prize winner Judy Bonds were among the two dozen people arrested in front of Marsh Fork Elementary School, which is located next to a coal processing plant and directly beneath a dam holding back billions of tons of mining waste. As Dr. Hansen told the Charleston (WV) Gazette:

“The reason I have come to West Virginia is that coal is the number one issue in solving the climate problem. It is the cause of half of the excess carbon in the atmosphere. And mountaintop removal is the place that we should start.”

Well, let us hope, Dr. Hansen that environmental justice prevails. Meanwhile, we move the scene from climbing a dragline and a massive protest to the first Senate subcommittee hearing ever on the environmental impacts of mountaintop removal mining.

But, first, a sip of water, as I am thirsty.

Alan Rickman as Judge Turpin
“Judge Turpin: Antagonist. A corrupt and depraved official. An upholder of justice who twists the system to serve his own ends.”

Speaking of water quality, “The Supremes” have been in the act, too, with a major decision. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a case involving the Kensington Gold Mine in Alaska, ruling that the mine could dump all its waste into Lower Slate Lake even though all that waste will kill everything in the lake.

How is this related to mountaintop removal, rhetorically asks Matt Dernoga?

Because the justices referred to a Bush Administration era definition of “fill” under the Clean Water Act, a rule change made to accommodate coal companies that wanted to dump their mountaintop removal waste into streams.

This ruling is terrible news for those around Lower Slate Lake, but it also has national implications. The implications of this ruling increase the pressure on Congress and the Obama administration to restore the original definition of “fill” – if they do not, mining companies will continue dumping their waste into streams in Appalachia and beyond.



“Hundreds of anti-mountaintop removal activists gathered today at the Marsh Fork Elementary in Sundial, WV, deep in the Appalachian mountains. Hundreds of pro-coal counter protesters also turned out, resulting in constant interruption of speakers and musical performers and culminating in charges of battery against a local woman who struck Goldman Environmental Prize winner Judy Bonds in the face.

In this blog’s opinion, federal policy makers are missing a “twofer” here. They could be herding those geezers right into a Massey gasifier, producing CLEAN ENERGY FOR THE FUTURE and cutting HEALTH CARE COSTS at the same time. Let’s get those Yes Men thinking caps on, shall we!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
  1. 1From the Senate to the WV Coalfields, a Pivotal Week for Mountaintop Removal
By jcwinnie | Posted in advocacy, energy, environment, health, history, waste, water | Tagged , , | Comments (4)

My Farmers Don’t Like That

2009-6-19 – 8:08 pm

I have another idea for a cartoon. This one is a split frame.

In the left frame we have a caricature of the Chair of the House Agriculture Committee, Collin Peterson (D-MN), speaking to the Press, stating “My Farmers Don’t Like That“. He is wearing an ear tag.

Collin Peterson
Just more ABAUAAAE (Agri-Business As Usual And Above All Else).

In the right frame we have a caricature of Big Farm. From the office window we see a background that contains images of the carbon footprint of agri-business. In the foreground we are confronted by a steely eyed, pin-striped, greedy looking gent, sitting behind an imposing desk, wearing a straw hat, and saying E-I-E-I-O.

As previously noted, it is likely that the GOM (Gulf Of Mexico) Dead Zone will worsen since petroleum is important to the manufacturer of commercial fertilizers and feed lots are a principle source of manure. Ecologists attribute the worsening situation to commercial fertilizer runoff and animal manure discharge, compounded by human waste from urban areas in Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio and Mississippi.

NOAA image showing Gulf of Mexico dead zone
“Summertime satellite observations show highly turbid waters in the Gulf of Mexico which may include large blooms of phytoplankton extending from the mouth of the Mississippi River all the way to the Texas coast. When these blooms die and sink to the bottom, bacterial decomposition strips oxygen from the surrounding water, creating an environment very difficult for marine life to survive in. Reds and oranges represent high concentrations of phytoplankton and river sediment.”

The Energy and Global Warming News for June 19th encapsulated for us by Climate Progress includes a forecast that this summer, the ‘dead zone’ could be largest on record.

The Gulf of Mexico’s oxygen-depleted “dead zone” could be one of the largest on record this year, a federal scientific team said today.

Seasonal oxygen levels could drop too low to support aquatic life in an area the size of New Jersey, according to the team supported by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Scientists forecast the dead zone at between 7,350 and 8,456 square miles, with a strong chance of it growing larger, given the recent flooding of the Mississippi River. The largest dead zone on record was 8,484 square miles in 2002.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
By jcwinnie | Posted in agriculture, enforcement, environment, standards, waste, water | Tagged , , , | Comments (1)

Carbon Counting

2009-6-19 – 5:36 am

Via Red, Green, and Blue1, we learn that Deutsche Bank unveiled a 70-foot-tall digital billboard at 33rd Street and 7th Avenue in the heart of New York City.

Deutsche Bank Billboard
Cool, fool! The Doomsday Clock has gone digital.

Outside Madison Square Garden and Penn Station, the billboard displays a running total of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. “The measurements track all long-lived greenhouse gases covered under the Kyoto and Montreal Protocols (24 gases excluding ozone and aerosols).”

“It will be a huge task to bring global emissions under control and my hope is that putting this data in the public view will spur both governments and markets to move us more quickly to a low-carbon economy,” said Parker.

  1. 1World’s First Real-Time Carbon Counter Unveiled in New York
By jcwinnie | Posted in advertising, advocacy, danger, denial, economics, environment, forecast, risk, tracking | Tagged , , | Comments (0)

Fossil Fooled and Nuke Duped

2009-6-18 – 5:33 pm

Rob Perks warns us that “those clamoring for ‘all of the above’ on energy really want ‘all of the below’.” They want federal energy policy to continue with Business As Usual when it comes to the use of dirty and dangerous fuels like oil, coal and uranium (for nuclear power).

It is likely that those advocating more of the same dirty business will get what they want from the United States Senate. Almost all Senators have chosen to ignore their official responsibility to respond to degradation of the atmosphere brought about by anthropogenic emissions. Likewise, almost all Senators have chosen to ignore their official responsibility to reduce the risk of radioactive contamination.

Tina Fey posing for Parade Magazine
Voulez-vous coucher avec moi pour la négociation?

The Senate bill that left the Energy and Commerce Committee “is a compromise between Democratic members seeking to reduce energy use and emissions linked to global warming and Republican members intent on increasing production of oil, gas and nuclear power,” informs the Gray Lady, which for the time being still has a street corner*.

*Note to readers unfamiliar with AG obliqueness. Newspapers and sex from prostitutes traditionally have been for sale on street corners.

Extolls the NY Times, “Republicans and Democrats who supported the bill said they hoped to strengthen it, each side to its own advantage, when it reaches the floor.” You, of course, are supposed to be hoodwinked into believing current consideration of a Senate energy bill to be a partisan issue, and one that should be relegated to politics as usual. Meanwhile, there is skullduggery going in the background, e.g., disempowerment of the Clean Air Act. While it may be the same old show on Washington Theater, it is anything but a matter to be resolved by politicians in service to their corporate masters.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
By jcwinnie | Posted in energy, environment, negotiation, policy, politics, weather | Tagged , , , , | Comments (0)

Horsefeathers

2009-6-16 – 7:23 am

Writing for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution David Kyler states1 “subsidies for the nuclear industry are unwise, unfair and unjustified. Instead of sinking billions more tax dollars into this hazardous, extremely expensive source of energy, we should be converting to clean, proven technologies that are far more practical.”

Well, David, while practical, your suggestion is other than politically savvy. When you observe that more offshore drilling, “clean” coal, or more nuclear power plants are distractions from sound energy policy, you really refer to energy policy for the good of the people of Georgia, the United States and the globe.

Special interests behind Congressional policy decisions
“Following six decades of attempting to find a ’safe’ and dependable way of storing radioactive waste from nuclear plants, experts still have no solution. These materials will remain a major public health threat for thousands of years. The more such materials we use, transport and store, the greater that threat becomes.” So, ask yourself why we continue with such detrimental policy?

As this blog repeatedly has observed, it is evident that the United States Congress is intent on acting counter to the interests of the people in the United States and the global community. This is other than policy for the public good, it is BAUAAAE (Business As Usual And Above All Else) by the politicians and those they serve (to include their own investments). (How come Congress critters can avoid identifying their conflict of interest?)

Some want to ascribe partisanship, e.g., the Repugnants alternative energy policy, to such policy making. Horsefeathers! As previously noted, almost all Senators and many members of the House of Representatives choose to ignore their official responsibility to respond to degradation of the atmosphere brought about by anthropogenic emissions. These are the makers of law; such action could only be construed as criminal by an international court. Yet while not criminal, the current course of action taken by elected representatives in the United States Congress certainly is morally wrong. (This blog went so far as to describe it previously as malefic.)

  1. 1Nuclear Power, Bad in So Many Ways
By jcwinnie | Posted in crime, democracy, energy, environment, ethics, history, human rights, policy, politics | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments (2)

With Representatives Like These, Who Needs Senators?

2009-6-13 – 4:20 pm

Collin Peterson (D-MN), the chair of the House Agricultural Committee, has a big problem with H.R.2454. “Mixing climate change together with energy independence. I don’t think that is smart.”

By smart, I take it he means politically savvy, since to switch away from oil dependency to the production of clean energy makes very good sense from many other perspectives.

Weekend at Bernies
Despite considerable effort to prop up Bernie Waxman-Markey by some indispensable bloggers, it is evident that the United States Congress will continue to act counter to the interests of the people in the United States and the global community.

If, on the other hand, you decouple the two concepts, then the COB crowd (Cruise On Booze) could promote biofuels as a means of energy independence. It then becomes more convenient to ignore the poor performance of biofuels in terms of clean energy.

Peterson opposes new renewable fuels standards that H.R. 2454 would establish because those standards consider the global warming consequences of biofuel production. Instead, observes Think Progress, he wants “Congressional leadership to allow agricultural giants like Monsanto and Archer Daniels Midland to rewrite this critical climate and clean energy legislation to their benefit.”

For weeks, Peterson has threatened to block Waxman-Markey if his demands on behalf of industrial agriculture are not met. And, right now, it looks like he’s going to win.

By jcwinnie | Posted in agriculture, energy, environment, leadership, policy, politics, security, standards | Tagged , , , | Comments (1)

Coal Ash Impoundments Too Dangerous

2009-6-13 – 8:33 am

We learn from HuffPo reporter Ryan “It’s Getting Grim” Grim1 that these coal ash impoundments are toxic.

“How toxic are they?”

So toxic, so dangerous, that an enemy of the United States could easily cause them to spill out and lay waste to any area nearby.

Marsh Fork Postcard
Massey Energy of Richmond, Virginia has built a coal waste impoundment directly above Marsh Fork Elementary School. A March, 2007 protest against Marsh Fork impoundment by Mountain Justice members in the governor’s office resulted in 14 arrests.

And, because the coal ash situation has become so bad, “the Department of Homeland Security has told Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) that her committee can't publicly disclose the location of coal ash dumps across the country.”

There are 44 sites deemed by the Environmental Protection Agency to be high hazard, but Boxer said she isn't allowed to talk about them other than to senators in the states affected. “There is a huge muzzle on me and my staff,” she said.

“Homeland Security and the Army Corps [of Engineers] have decided in the interests of national security they can't make these sites known,” she said.

There are several hundred coal ash piles across the nation, she said, all of them unregulated.

Of course, the logical next step would be to arrest any protestors at such sites because they disclose the location. And, those arrested probably should be kept from spilling the beans, a.k.a. Gitmo or the “S-21 de jure“ Bound. Oh, and medical reports about the incidence of certain diseases probably should be censored to prevent untoward detection. Et cetera.

You get the picture. Nothing to talk about here, citizen. Move along.

  1. 1Coal Ash Spills Too Dangerous To Reveal To Public, Says DHS
By jcwinnie | Posted in crime, democracy, denial, energy, enforcement, environment, knowledge, policy, politics, waste | Tagged , , , , , | Comments (0)

Bad Behavior has blocked 7214 access attempts in the last 7 days.