Dedicated to the balanced discussion of global warming
carbon offset / trading greenhouse kyoto climate model Inconvenient Truth bio fuel ipcc Glacier

The Climate Change Climate Change

Funny title.  You may have to read it a couple times to get it.  I didn’t create it – I am not that creative.

Kim Strassel has an opinion in the Wall Street Journal where she does a fair amount of reporting on the difficulties that politicians are having in dealing with the coming global warming catastrophe. It seems that politicians are a lot like many of my readers, when scientists can’t agree on what is happening (and not just little disagreements but violently opposed to each other) one should probably wait to spend trillions of dollars on which side is correct.

Here are some highlights from Ms. Strassel’s article:

Utilities seem to be a problem for analysis

I have had a few posts on the recent report from the US Administration regarding global warming. My posts all reference the great work of other bloggers on the subject. This post will be no different.

Steve McIntyre builds on the work of Climate Skeptic in digging into the utility industry and the vast increases in outages that they are suffering through due to the rampant bad weather that we are enjoying due to global warming.

Climate Skeptic keeps up the work

I am going to continue to let Climate Skeptic keep up the good work on the latest report from the US Administration regarding the dire circumstances of global warming. He has posted again on the subject and has even done a follow-on to the worry the increased storm activity is upsetting the electrical grid (post number 4 on the subject).

I will quote a few things that I thought were interesting:

Good news for green power in Ohio

Regular readers know that I think that nuclear power is one of the very few ways we can provide the power we need without taking the chance that global warming is caused by carbon dioxide.  If you believe in anthropogenic global warming and don’t believe the human race should live like the Amish, then you really don’t have a choice but to endorse nuclear power.

Contrary to my custom, I will be recreating the complete story here.

Strickland details plans for nuclear plant
Business First of Columbus – by Matt Burns

A third nuclear power station proposed for Ohio likely wont start operating for years, but government officials and energy industry executives are saying it is time to start considering its construction and Piketon is the place for it.

More on report

It seems that everyone else is doing a great job of beating up the report.  I am not sure that I will have to spend any time on it since everyone else is really challenging the science and the techniques in the report.  The folks at RealClimate appear to be quiet on it though.  I would be interested in their thoughts and if they will follow blindly or will they actually be critical of the parts that bear questioning?

This comes from Climate Depot

U.S. Government Scientist: ‘I disagree strongly with the hurricane-related conclusions of this report!’

and this was later in the post.

Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States

I was about to write about the new report by the US Administration titled “Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States” and was starting my research. I was happy to find that Climate Skeptic had already started to review the document. I may add some thoughts on a future post but for now I will recreate some of his statements here and point you to that site.

I guess I am doing a review of the review!  But I have done that before and it seems to be popular and provides a service to my readers.

Here is a rather long video that was released by the US Administration:

The debate is over! (Evidently NOT!)

If you read this site often, you will think that title implies something about statements that former US Vice President Al Gore made regarding global warming. If you so thought, you are only partially correct. I just read an article about another scientific issue that EVERYONE thought was true. 

For years, it has been assumed that one or two drinks of alcohol per day were good for you. I am sure the vintners of the world helped to increase that belief. Now, the NY Times (and I saw it on Lifehacker) is reporting that this may not be true. It seems that just because healthy people drink an occasional glass of wine, the wine itself is not making them healthy!

World’s Dirtiest Rivers and Lakes

image Treehugger recently did a slideshow on the World’s Dirtiest Rivers and Lakes. While the slideshow doesn’t have anything to do with global warming, it should be important to all and especially the readers that stop by this site each week. If you are concerned with global warming then you should be concerned with most things where we have screwed up the environment to our own detriment.

Recently, there was a rather foolish announcement that said that said global warming kills over 300,000 per year already.  I didn’t talk much about this report here, as I thought it didn’t merit my time.  However, I do wonder how many real deaths (as opposed to Kofi’s fictitious 300K) are caused by poor drinking water. If you have ever been in a Starbucks, you have likely seen the bottles of Ethos water which donate part of the proceeds to clean drinking water to poor countries. Their site says:

Global Wind Day

Today is Global Wind Day.

While there are some problems with relying on wind power for the bulk of our energy needs in the US, wind probably has a place to augment and help us meet our needs, especially if the US doesn’t quickly add more nuclear generation capability!

A short video from Wind Power Works

 

While I typically do not reproduce pages in whole, I am going to put the entire text of the Wind Day campaign here for your convenience. You should also go to the Global Wind Day site.

Climate change failure ‘immoral’ – Oxfam

A new report from Oxfam has been released that states that the UK and the US must cut its output of carbon dioxide by 45% to prevent the catastrophe that awaits us. In addition, the poorer nations of the world would need to receive $148 billion US (90B ).

There does not appear to be any new scientific evidence of global warming in this paper.  Instead it references the 2007 IPCC findings and then studies that financial impact of those assertions.

The Telegraph recently wrote a story on the report.

The UK needs to cut greenhouse gases by 45 per cent by 2020 to prevent the world “lurching into climate disaster”, according to a new report from Oxfam.