Dedicated to the balanced discussion of global warming
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:READ MORE
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 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.
By addressing the magnitude of the climate threat with urgency, a powerful global climate change treaty would help establish a firm foundation for a sustainable economic future. This would set a more predictable framework for companies to plan and invest, provide a stimulus for renewed prosperity and a more secure climate system. Economic recovery and urgent action to tackle climate change are complementary – boosting the economy and jobs through investment in the new infrastructure needed to reduce emissions.READ MORE
I don’t typically post news feeds here but I am making an exception in this case. It appears that the House committee has passed the bill to implement the foolish cap and trade (carbon trading) bill. Let’s hope that the larger House is more wise but I have my doubts.
This story is from AP.
By DINA CAPPIELLO and H. JOSEF HEBERT
WASHINGTON (AP) — Legislation imposing the first nationwide limits on the pollution blamed for global warming advanced in the House late Thursday, clearing a key committee despite strong Republican opposition.
The Energy and Commerce Committee approved the sweeping climate bill 33-25 after repeatedly turning back GOP attempts to kill or weaken the measure during four days of debate.
Here is an excellent interview with famed scientist James Lovelock. Dr. Lovelock is best known for formulating the controversial Gaia hypothesis in the 1970s, which states that organisms interact with and regulate Earth’s surface and atmosphere. Later this year he will travel to space as Richard Branson’s guest aboard Virgin Galactic’s SpaceShipTwo.
If you read this site often, you know that I really don’t like carbon trading. I don’t think it will help solve any problems and it is only a way to tax people and push industries into doom. Dr. Lovelock appears to agree with me and he is a fairly strong supporter of the theory that global warming is man made.READ MORE
The use of biological processes to create energy for our cars is very suspect. The current sources of ethanol compete with our food supply which only drives up the price of food which is an extreme burden on the ultra-poor.
While there is a lot of research on alternative sources of ethanol that would not compete with food, this research has yet to make it to development. The Wall Street Journal put out a good article discussing this a few weeks ago so I thought I would share the highlights. Click through here to read the entire article.READ MORE
The Wall Street Journal recently ran a great article that studies the effect of the increased acidification of the ocean by an increase in carbon dioxide.
I know that many of my readers doubt that CO2 actually has changed the climate. I also have doubts on this since the science is so ambiguous and so strongly relies on computer models. However, the acidification of the ocean due to an increased absorption of carbon dioxide is chemistry and is not subject to fuzzy computer models and guesses.
In case you question that the increase of CO2 is man-made and not natural – check out this article.
Some excerpts from WSJ:READ MORE
Stupid title, I know. Everyone knows that the sun comes up in the East, water freezes to ice at 32F and politicians are all screwed up. It has become a fact of life just like death and taxes.
Right now, the Democrat party is in control of the US government. They have a majority in both houses and they control the executive branch. You would think that they could pull of their agenda of taxing energy use dramatically to change the production of carbon dioxide. But a little thing happened on the way to legislation – VOTERS!READ MORE
Mr. Tracinski at TIADaily.com had a very interesting commentary on the recent decision to treat carbon dioxide as a pollutant but not water vapor. While I think that his end conclusion that this could be the beginning of the end of a representative government are likely overblown, his logic and discussion is worth reading and considering.
I originally found this article at RealClearPolitics so please click over there if you want to read every sentence. Here are the highlights that I found interesting.
We all expect that there will be a contest in Congress this year over global warming and a “cap-and-trade” bill limiting carbon dioxide emissions. After all, the government cannot impose sweeping new controls on our lives without extensive public debate and a vote in Congress that must gain the support of a clear majority of the representatives of the people.
It looks like we are going to have to wait for awhile now for better data on what is really going on with our atmosphere and climate. The satellite that NASA sent up to study the flow of carbon dioxide developed technical difficulties and crashed.
Once again, we see that our ability to travel outside of our world is still quite experimental and we struggle to do it with the repeatability of plane flights. If I was a conspiracy fearing individual (which I am not) I would question if scientists deliberately sabotaged the flight so that real data that could prove or disprove climate models could not be gathered. Such speculation is obviously foolish though.READ MORE