The Future Looks Bleak

Subtitle: And, all because Google refuses to use a black background

Greenhouse Effect
More study, more words, more data disappears as the ice caps melt and every five minutes, the United States spends more than $2 million on imports of oil and other petroleum products.

In “Congress Hears From Muzzled Scientists,” Slashdot reports that the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee held hearings on the issue of Climate Change.

“More than 120 scientists across seven federal agencies have been pressured to remove the phrases ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ from various documents. The documents include press releases and, more importantly, communications with Congress. Evidence of this sort of political interference has been largely anecdotal to date, but is now detailed in a new report by the Union of Concerned Scientists.”

James Hansen Testifying about Global Warming
Ignoring the coercion, James Hansen would not be muzzled; he testified about Global Warming before Congress. His behavior may have encouraged other government scientists to speak up.

The hearing held by House Oversight and Government Reform Committee “began by Committee members, including most Republicans, stating that global warming was happening and greenhouse gas emissions from human activity were largely to blame.” It probably is easier to address the muzzling of climate scientists, burning data, etc. than it is to address the influence that Big Oil had and continues to have in Congress.

Slashdot noted that the hearings presage the 2007 report by IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). “Drafted by 1,250 scientists and reviewed by an additional 2,500 scientists, is expected to state that ‘there is a 90% chance humans are responsible for climate change’ — up from the 2001 report’s 66% chance.”

The IPCC follows on the heels of other recent reports that the global mean surface temperature in 2006 is currently estimated to be + 0.42°C above the 1961-1990 annual average (14°C/57.2°F). According to the records maintained by Members of the World Meteorological Organization, the year 2006 is currently estimated to be the sixth warmest year on record; and, 2007 will likely be the warmest year on record.

“It probably won’t make for comfortable bedtime reading,” was the rejoinder. As previously noted, climate scientists are concerned that climate change is accelerating. “The future is bleak”, said scientists.

Not particularly impressed that President Bush mentioned Climate Change during the most recent State of the Union Address, Betsy Rosenberg recently noted that if you can believe more than 120 scientists are speaking their truth then “such suppression of the public service performed by government scientists amounts to reckless endangerment of public health and welfare.”

Betsy Rosenberg
Each day, Monday through Friday, Betsy Rosenberg and her guests bring you environmental news, views and voices from the frontlines of the sustainability movement. Her podcasts are becoming angrier. George and his buddies can “dis” the polar bears and get away with it, but they may get more than they bargained for after riling the eco-feminists.

Her dismay may be in part because the Oily Administration has responded to the concern expressed by growing numbers of the Public over global heating with the appointment of Lee Raymond, former CEO of Exxon-Mobil to lead an influential study to develop policy solutions to America’s energy crisis.

And, besides destroying and discrediting evidence that contradicts the path that they have chosen for the country and the globe, the recalcitrant Big Oil – Big SUV complex, to include the U.S. Department of Energy, has committed to a strategy, which is dangerously unsustainable. There was a great deal of analysis applied to the map recently drawn by President Bush during SOTU. Most analysts agree that the projections were unrealistic. Greenpeace’s Steve Sawyer was a bit more blunt, “He remains delusional,” was Sawyer’s opinion after Bush called for production of domestic oil and crop-made ethanol fuel to be ramped up to ease US dependence on energy imports.

Dan Becker, Sierra Club
“When you ask people about the environment, they’re concerned about it. If you ask them about their automobile, they don’t think about it as an environmental issue right away. They think about cost, they think about filling up at the gas pump. We need to get people to start thinking about the future and about being responsible.” Dan Becker

Dan Becker, a spokesperson with The Sierra Club stated on the PBS News Hour for January 24 that the new energy initiatives President Bush proposed don’t stack up very well for three reasons:

First, the president misled the American people about what it will take to curb our oil addiction and global warming. Second, he fails to take a lot of the right steps. And, third, he’s taking a lot of the wrong steps.

As long as our nation continues to emit more global warming pollution than any other country in the world, we are risking dangerous consequences for our economy, natural heritage and every citizen. Furthermore, our nation, already a global pariah, faces the risk of increasingly more severe consequences fueled by the increasing number of reports citing the callousness of the United States toward greenhouse gas emssions.

In November, the French proposed (TinyURL) a tax on imports from countries that have failed to sign the Kyoto Accord. Unsurprisingly, the U.S. is objecting. There just isn’t enough money to pay enough mercenaries voluntary citizens fighting alongside our troops to guard Big Oil interests forever.

Other Possibly Related AG Posts Automatically Generated

5 Comments

  1. jcwinnie
    Posted 2007-2-2 at 9:21 am | Permalink

    The Guardian (2007-02-02) has an alarming story about an Exxon-Mobil funded lobby group offering money to scientists in return for their combatting the just-released IPCC report.

    Scientists and economists have been offered $10,000 each by a lobby group funded by one of the world’s largest oil companies to undermine a major climate change report due to be published today.

    Letters sent by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush administration, offered the payments for articles that emphasise the shortcomings of a report from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

    Travel expenses and additional payments were also offered….

    Climate scientists described the move yesterday as an attempt to cast doubt over the “overwhelming scientific evidence” on global warming. “It’s a desperate attempt by an organisation who wants to distort science for their own political aims,” said David Viner of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.

    “The IPCC process is probably the most thorough and open review undertaken in any discipline. This undermines the confidence of the public in the scientific community and the ability of governments to take on sound scientific advice,” he said.

    The letters were sent by Kenneth Green, a visiting scholar at AEI, who confirmed that the organisation had approached scientists, economists and policy analysts to write articles for an independent review that would highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the IPCC report….

    Ben Stewart of Greenpeace said: “The AEI is more than just a thinktank, it functions as the Bush administration’s intellectual Cosa Nostra. They are White House surrogates in the last throes of their campaign of climate change denial. They lost on the science; they lost on the moral case for action. All they’ve got left is a suitcase full of cash.” – Guardian

  2. jcwinnie
    Posted 2007-2-2 at 11:38 am | Permalink

    Sebastian Blanco writing for Autoblog Green asks, “Guess who made $1,252 a second, every second last year?”

    If you have any questions about why it will be very, very difficult for biofuel start-ups and solar car enthusiasts to compete in the oil-friendly auto industry, don’t look only at the technological troubles with lithium-ion batteries or getting biodiesel from algae. Look at the cash register over at Exxon Mobil. The company has just posted 2006 profits (not revenue, which was an obscene $377.64 billion last year) of $39.5 billion. Aside from being the largest annual profit by a U.S. company, how much is that, exactly?

    $39.5 billion profit in one year = $39,500,000,000.00 = $759,615,384.62/week = $108,219,178.08/day = $4,509,132.42/hour = $75,152.21/minute = $1,252.54/second.

    I could do a lot with $1,200 a second. What does Exxon Mobil do with it? Paying off scientists in an effort to mislead the public on global warming and pressuring teachers not to show An Inconvenient Truth in schools. In the mean time, Exxon only spends 0.1 percent of its total annual capital investment on sustainable technologies such as renewable energy.

    Other oil companies, like ConocoPhillips and Shell, also made billions last year. Phillips made $15.55 billion and Shell earned $4.37 billion (just in the last three months of the year). Again, these are profit numbers, not revenue.

    With those kinds of profits, you can buy a heck of a lot of scientific advice and political influence.

  3. jcwinnie
    Posted 2007-2-2 at 6:25 pm | Permalink

    The NY Times via The Oil Drum — Discussions about Energy and Our Future reports that President Jacques Chirac has demanded that the United States sign both the Kyoto climate protocol and a future agreement that will take effect when the Kyoto accord runs out in 2012.

    …He warned that if the United States did not sign the agreements, a carbon tax across Europe on imports from nations that have not signed the Kyoto treaty could be imposed to try to force compliance. The European Union is the largest export market for American goods.

  4. jcwinnie
    Posted 2007-2-2 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

    While Al is getting nominations for an Academy Award and the Nobel Peace Prize, others less well known are reminding us what each one of us could do to help. The new President of the Cayman Islands Chamber of Commerce, Angelyn Hernandez, observes that “each of us play a role is unconsciously helping to destroy our environment daily.”

    It is in the way we dispose of our waste, the way we do not conserve on energy and the way we waste generally. It therefore means that we each can play a role in preserving and enhancing our environment. It is way too huge a topic for us to tackle in any real way, but we can take little steps and so gradually bring awareness to this issue and eventually reach the point where it becomes a goal and a way of life in our homes, our businesses and our community.The Temas Blog – “Even the Small Guys…

  5. jcwinnie
    Posted 2007-2-16 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

    According to the New York Times (TinyURL), which seems to be backing an American Empire foray into Iran, XOM Master Rex Tillerson gave an unalloyed defense of the oil industry and predicted that hydrocarbons would dominate the world’s transportation as energy demand grows by an expected 40 percent by 2030.

12 Trackbacks

  1. [...] Meanwhile, in an interview with Beth Holland, one of the lead authors of the IPCC Report, Betsy Rosenberg and her listeners learned that the estimate of an increase in global mean temperature between 2 to 5 degrees may be incorrect. The upper range may be too low! Holy Oceans of Acid, DaVinci Coders. [...]

  2. [...] night and in my dream our National Bird had become the ostrich.” Even if the future appears bleak, the show must go on. advocacy» agriculture» analysis» commerce» [...]

  3. By Oil Addiction Index at After Gutenberg on 2007-2-26 at 1:52 pm

    [...] SUV complex, which then spins out as Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt about alternative and this whole global heating thing. So, while the oil industry would seem to be calling the shots, particularly in the United States, [...]

  4. [...] The future looks bleak elsewhere besides [...]

  5. [...] “Such suppression of the public service performed by government scientists,” observed one environmental advocate, “amounts to reckless endangerment of public health and [...]

  6. By The Princeton Wedge at After Gutenberg on 2007-3-22 at 6:06 pm

    [...] was dismayed that most of the press discussions focused on the material that presented “we’re doomed” [...]

  7. [...] (PDF). Writing from Australia, where they know something about drought, the Big Gav1 hopes that the seriousness of the global condition finally will sink into the consciousness of the nation that far and away is the biggest contributor [...]

  8. [...] Hansen refused to be muzzled and testified before Congress about evidence that NASA has obtained that supports increasing concern about climate change. His [...]

  9. [...] is worried, noting that the increasing evidence casts a bleak outlook on what already were dire predictions from the IPCC regarding the dwindling water supplies, poor [...]

  10. [...] years later, there are more than 800,000 in circulation. What changed? Well, one would like to say the Kyoto Accord, but, more to the point, Prius sales started growing “when gas prices went [...]

  11. [...] most of those in television wasteland simply will refuse to see how bleak the future appears, which, as Professor Romm has observed, is quite dangerous, such denial plays into the hands of [...]

  12. [...] suppression of the public service performed by government scientists,” observed one environmental advocate, “amounts to reckless endangerment of public health and [...]

Bad Behavior has blocked 2489 access attempts in the last 7 days.