climate « WordPress.com Tag Feed

Our Ruined Earth

amzolt — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 01:34:59 +0000

My focus today is what's wrong in Our Family's Home . . .

From the Environment Section of AlterNet:

Why Our Food Waste May Be Our Greatest Asset
Composting is key to reducing waste costs, cutting global warming emissions, and increasing urban food security.

Time to Face the Hard Realities of a Global Energy Crisis
America needs a comprehensive plan to deal with post-peak oil -- and that is going to involve some serious long-term thinking.

Get Ready for the Post-SUV World!
SUVs and big pickups are waddling off into the sunset, leaving Americans with no more excuses for the nation's profligate oil use.

Global Warming's Twin Evil: Wildfires and Drought
The 850 fires burning in California alone should be a wake up call that we're unprepared for rapid climate change.

All this and much more on AlterNet's Site . . .

And, absorb this wonderful, educational, and surprising video: "Solving" climate change from David Keith.

What's driven our Family to this Crisis?

What can we actually do?

How much of the Crisis is manageable?

What needs to occur in political circles to make change actually happen?

Why in the world, considering that the environmental problem was already a concern in the 1950's, have we let it get this bad?

Will prayer help?

Will war help? ( That's a trick question. Just seeing if you're paying attention... ;-) )

What in the World can We DO !?!

I'd Love to see your thoughts and feelings in the comments . . .

Today's quote is from ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT: Statement to the first substantive session of the Preparatory Committee for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED):

"The principle of the unity of mankind naturally implies the need for world peace and security. The World Commission on Environment and Development observed in its report that world peace and security are central to sustainable development. The Bahá'í International Community agrees that as long as the specter of war continues to dominate international relations, the well-being of the human race and the environment will continue to erode. It is the Bahá'í view that the root cause of all war and injustice is the failure to recognize the fundamental oneness of the human race. Acceptance of the principle of oneness will induce the willingness to uncover and permanently resolve all other causes for conflict. Indeed, it must be the foundation for any serious attempt to find ways of living in harmony with our environment and each other."
Bahá'í International Community, 1990 Aug 06, Environment Development

Please leave your thoughts and feelings in the Comments !

~~~~~~~~~
~ Unleash The Life Within ~
~~~~~~~~~

Like this post? Get More!
Subscribe to this blog.

Hanging With the Clouds

daisyq — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 03:57:46 +0000

I can't really explain why I am fascinated with clouds, I just am.
Perhaps it's because they look so comfortable; soft and billowy.

Or the way they pick up and carry water.

Or they way they can sometimes resemble something we've seen, like an object or face.

Next to taking snaps of dusk, dawn, and flowers, I've taken quiet a few, well maybe too many, cloud pics in the past two years.
In the past two weeks there have been some fantastic cloudy days and I have been heading up to the mountains to get some great snaps.
Keeping in Touch :)

Living Loving Laughing
*DaisyQ*

Eco-Saturday: The Colorless Ocean

scienceguy288 — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 00:35:50 +0000

A third of reef-building corals worldwide are threatened with extinction due to climate change and water pollution, according to the first global assessment on the marine creature by 39 scientists. Destructive fishing and the degradation of coastal habitats are also possible problems, but not as big as global warming. The study was compiled by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Conservation International.

Bleached Coral Resulting from Global Warming

Sea temperature rises due to warming bleach and weaken the algae that give the underwater sea life its vibrant colour, and make it more susceptible to diseases. When corals die off, so do the other plants and animals that depend on coral reefs for food and shelter, and this can lead to the collapse of entire ecosystems, so this is not just a small, centralized problem. Reef building polyps are the most vulnerable to global warming.

As reefs are home to over 25 percent of marine species, the loss of reefs could also hurt coastal fishing. The Caribbean has the highest number of highly threatened corals world-wide. The Indo-Malay-Philippine archipelago also has the highest proportions of vulnerable and almost threatened species in the Indo-Pacific.

"We either reduce our CO2 emission now or many corals will be lost forever," warned Julia Marton-Lefevre, IUCN Director General.

Murat Boz Uçurum Klibi

videomuzikleri — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 21:20:50 +0000

[dailymotion id=x5y13o&related=1]

After the flood

evilanemone — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 23:51:46 +0000

Squint/Opera, a film and media production studio in London, recently created a series of five images called "2090: London After the Flood." The series, which has been discussed in Dezeen online design magazine and the Environmental Graffiti news blog, is on show at Medcalf Gallery in Clerkenwell, London from June 20 to this Sunday during the London Festival of Architecture.

Another interesting view of a post-Ice Cap Meltdown world is provided by the Global Warming Flood Maps created by Alex Tingle using Google Maps (and some mad skillz), also in England. There must be something about living on an island and watching the water rise... Anyhow, this site allows you to select a location on the world map and an increment of mean sea level increase, then watch what happens to the coast line when the water rises.

Hint: the shallower the incline along the coast line, the greater the visual effect as the sea fills in your city. It's actually not as bad as that in Seattle, which has a fairly abrupt rise from the water's edge. The Interbay area would be flooded, but Downtown would stay pretty dry. For a fun view, watch what happens to the San Francisco Bay area and especially the East Bay at a default depth of 7m...

And in case you're not sure you should be buying a bathing suit (and a parka, just in case) to welcome the new coastline and the new climate, go check out what NOAA and NASA have to say about the mess we've created. It's going to be no end of fun.

Al Gore 2.0 and The Coming Renewable Energy Ice Age--The Big Chill

Raymond — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 02:24:54 +0000

"...Today I challenge our nation to commit to producing 100 percent of our electricity from renewable energy and truly clean carbon-free sources within 10 years.

This goal is achievable, affordable and transformative. It represents a challenge to all Americans -- in every walk of life: to our political leaders, entrepreneurs, innovators, engineers, and to every citizen. "

~Al Gore

There is no climate crisis except in Al Gore's mind.

Climate continues to change. Nothing new here or to get worried about.

We are still in the current ice age and are overdue for another period of glaciation.

When will this occurr, nobody really knows.

Enjoy global warming why you can, the big chill is coming sooner or latter.

Al Gore continues to lie and try to scare people into taking action based upon government funded junk science of computer climate models.

In addition to the increased demand for energy by developing countries such as China and India, the US government through regulations and laws has restricted the production of energy in the United States and thereby reduced the supply. The result-- higher prices due in part to the Federal government.

The main reason both gasoline and electrical power has been increasing in price is government regulation in the market to stop the drilling for oil and the prevention of the building of nuclear and coal powered plants and oil refineries.

A second reason the price of gasoline and electrical power has been increasing is due to state and federal government significantly increasing taxes on these energy sources.

Without these government regulations and taxes, their would be an abundance of both oil and electrical power at affordable prices.

The Federal government is the problem and not the solution to more affordable energy for generating electricity, moving vehicles and heating.

More government subsidies and tax credits for solar and wind power is taxing all Americans to pay a few that benefit from the subsidies. This is exactly what is happening with ethanol subsidies that is resulting in rising gasoline and food prices for all the American people.

Glaciers all over the world have been both advancing and retreating from time immemorial.

The same is true of the polar ice packs.

Frankly the American people could care less.

Only those with a vested interest in scaring people and profiting from it maintain that man is responsible for global warming.

Please prove that man is the primary cause of global warming.

Gore knows scientists cannot prove this hypothesis.

Man has very little to do with with climate change and is certainly not the primary or even secondary cause.

Until Gore can prove that man is the primary cause for global warming, none of Gore's policy recommendations should be given any consideration.

Gore's policy recommendations, if followed, would wreck the United States economy and result in millions of people losing their jobs.

He favors a cap and trade tax that would increase the cost of all good and services consume in the United States.

The goal of producing all of America's energy from carbon-free sources such as solar, wind, and geothermal in the next ten years is not challenging, it is impossibe without huge and very costly government subsidies that would require a massive tax increase.

Let us briefly review the numbers to get the big picture.

In the United States the primary fuels are:

Oil
Natural Gas
Coal
Uranium
Hydro
Wood

The three primary uses for these fuels are as follows:

Transportation: move vehicles
Heating
Electricity.

For transportation the primary fuel is oil.

For heating the primary fuels are natural gas and oil with a small percentage supplied by wood.

For electricity the primary fuels are coal, uranium, natural gas, and hydro.

In round number the United States uses about 110 Quads of energy per year and growing of which 40% is used to produce electricity, 30% is used to move vehicles and 30% to produce heat.

Although the numbers change from month to month, and from year to yeat, in round numbers about 51% of electricity in the United States comes from coal fired plants, 20% from nuclear fired plants, 19% from natural gas fired plants, and 6% from hydro powered plants. These four sources account for over 96% of the electricity produced in the United States.

"...Coal-fired plants contributed 50.1 percent of the Nation’s electric power, year-to-date. Nuclear plants contributed 19.7 percent, 19.2 percent was generated at natural gas-fired plants, and 1.2 percent was generated at petroleum-fired plants (Figure 1). Conventional hydroelectric power provided 6.2 percent of the total, while other renewables (primarily biomass, but also geothermal, solar, and wind) and other miscellaneous energy sources generated the remaining electric power. Figure 2 shows net generation by month for the last 12 months. ..."

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html

Solar, wind and geothermal produces less than 1% of the electricity in this country.

Despite decades of subsidies and tax credits promoting the use of solar, wind and geothermal power, they account for less then 1% of electricity generation.

Assume for the moment that the automotive industry does produce affordable cars and trucks that can run on electricity.

Assume further that more houses and business can obtain heat from electricity.

What this means is that instead of 40% of our energy going toward the production of electrical power, a rising percentage of electricity would be used for transportation as a substitute for oil and for heating as substitute for oil and natural gas.

The only affordable way this can happen is to increase electricity production from coal, uranium and natural gas powered plants.

Al Gore knows or should know as does any one who has looked at the numbers that alternative renewable energy from wind, solar, and geothermal cannot supply the energy needs of the US.

Gore is attempting to destroy the America economy with his continuing disinformation campaign and policy recommendations.

Solar, wind and geothermal power cannot even come close to producing enough electricity to totally replace the electrical power produced by coal, nuclear and natural gas given the state of technology today.

The technology for both solar panels and wind generated power is simply not competitive. This is the reason solar and wind power needs to be subsidized by the government using tax dollars.

If solar and wind could deliver the required energy at affordable prices, it would not need government subsidies.

Companies and investors would have had every incentive to make it happen.

The American people want affordable energy not more talk and lies.

Let the planet and climate take care of itself.

The United States needs to follow the lead of China and start building coal and nuclear powered plants to significantly increase the supply of electrical power and grow our economy.

When wind, solar, and geothermal energy can compete in the market place without government subsidies and tax credits, I am sure the American people will gladly buy from a company offering electricity at a lower price.

The language used in Al Gore's speech smacks of an arrogant totalitarian democrat.

A Generational Challenge to Repower America

"There are times in the history of our nation when our very way of life depends upon dispelling illusions and awakening to the challenge of a present danger. In such moments, we are called upon to move quickly and boldly to shake off complacency, throw aside old habits and rise, clear-eyed and alert, to the necessity of big changes. Those who, for whatever reason, refuse to do their part must either be persuaded to join the effort or asked to step aside. This is such a moment. The survival of the United States of America as we know it is at risk. And even more -- if more should be required -- the future of human civilization is at stake. ..."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-gore/a-generational-challenge_b_113359.html

The person who should watch their language as well as step aside and retire from public life is Al Gore.

This man is a menace and should be challenged.

Gore is trying to destroy the US energy industy and in turn the US economy!

The late Julian Simon was prescient in his assessment of Al Gore:

Julian Simon Remembered:
It's A Wonderful Life

"..So for more than 15 years I was privileged to occupy a front-row seat from which I watched as Simon thoroughly and often single-handedly capsized the prevailing Malthusian orthodoxy. He routed nearly every prominent environmental scaremonger of our time: from the Club of Rome, to Paul Ehrlich, to Lester Brown, to Al Gore. (After reading Earth in the Balance, Julian was convinced that Gore was one of the most dangerous men and one of the shallowest thinkers in all of American politics.) ..."

http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/cpr-20n2-1.html

Looks like Senator Obama, The Messiah--The Anointed One, has found his Vice-President running mate.

Run Al Run.

The American people need to worry about the American elites with their anointed visions or delusions trying to use government coercion and social engineering to limit the liberty of the American people.

The distinct possiblity of Iran developing nuclear weapons and then using them to attack both Israel, Europe and the United States is a far greater risk to the survival of the United States and the future of civilization, than the possiblity of temperatures rising globally a few degrees over the next hundred years.

The detonation of nuclear weapons made in Iran in US cities by one of Iran's surrogate terrorist groups should receive our attention not Al Gore's questionable premise and presumptious challenge.

For the Al Gores of this world, the ends justify the means, and lying is perfectly acceptable, even when it is called something else--"over-representation of factual presentations".

Everything but the Kitchen Cynic

"... Q: There's a lot of debate right now over the best way to communicate about global warming and get people motivated. Do you scare people or give them hope? What's the right mix?

Gore: I think the answer to that depends on where your audience's head is. In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis. ..."

http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110009785

LOL: The Voice of The American People

Alternative Energy Sources...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTJAI1oushw

Hybrid Cars...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=io2L7ggOTUg

John McCain wants to LOWER Gas prices...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qW8W_KS52FI&feature=user

the rolling stones - you can't always get what you want

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzz1VEN1SEk

Background Articles and Videos

Five Ways to Lower Gasoline Prices

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47EkL8crjNs

Lord Al Gore The Global Warming Fascist

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9WFDcZxT0s

Dennis Miller unloads on Al Gore, other greens

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruuux4AuHfQ&feature=related

More Scientists don't see CO2 as temperature driver

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztvxGbH8Mqw&feature=related

Global warming is socialism and political movemnt

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2J-zHo-ILw&feature=related

Is Al Gore Nuts?

"...Frankly no serious analyst is suggesting that within 10 years, given the state of technology and the best case forecast capacity, that solar can make up more than a small single digit fraction of even electricity needs or that wind can make up more than a meaningful minority share (let alone after doubling the global power demand by replacing liquid fuels in cars with electricity, which Al Gore also suggests), especially given lead times on power plants and transmission lines. ..."

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9994015-54.html

High Fuel and Electricity Prices -- Made in Washington

"...This stagnation has been caused by United States government taxation, regulation, and sponsorship of litigation, which has made the U.S. a very unfavorable place to produce energy. Moreover, the U.S. government has spent vast sums of tax money subsidizing inferior energy technologies for political purposes.

The Wall Street Journal recently estimated that 381 nuclear power plants are in design or construction throughout the world, yet not one nuclear power plant has been constructed in the United States in more than 30 years.

United States hydrocarbon resources are vast. Untapped U.S. oil and gas resources are enormous, and the U.S. also has 25% of the world’s coal. Coal, oil, and gas are interchangeable. For example, coal can be liquefied at costs far below current world oil prices. The liquid hydrocarbon fuel available from American coal reserves exceeds the crude oil reserves of the entire world. ..."

"...So, the greatest industrial, technological, and scientific power the world has ever known -- created and made possible through institutionalized human freedom -- is on the road to being turned into a second-rate nation with diminished human freedom. This is being accomplished by political destruction of America’s energy industries and of many of her other industries by similar means.

If we continue to allow our politicians to debase our currency at moneyfactory.com and to diminish our industrial capabilities through restrictions on energy production, we had best be prepared to endure the logical consequences -- gasoline at more than $10 per gallon, $2,000 monthly electricity and gas bills, and, ultimately, energy rationing and technological poverty.

Why not place a mirror in front of your television set during the next political commercial? Then, look at the visage in the mirror and ask, “Do you really prefer to elect politicians who will continue to make the United States uninhabitable for the industries that fuel my car, power my air conditioner, light my lights, power my computer and wide-screen television, and allow my employer to remain in business?”

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24318

Dissecting Al Gore's $5 Trillion Energy Plan

July 18, 2008 11:01 AM ET | James Pethokoukis

"...By my math, using Pickens's numbers, converting the whole economy to renewable energy in a short period of time might cost $5 trillion—and that is if you assume that government-led projects come in on budget. (Remember, the current U.S. gross domestic product is $12 trillion.) That would be like creating another Japan. Or fighting World War II all over again. The latter analogy is especially apt since the Gore Plan would effectively transform our free-market economy into a command-and-control war economy full of rationing and scarcity. Of course, there are many folks like Gore who view global warming as the moral equivalent of war. But Gore would extend the concept into the economic equivalent of war. Again, all this makes sense if you think we are doomed otherwise. ..."

"...This isn't the first time Gore has made a proposal with jaw-dropping economic consequences. Environmental economist William Nordhaus ran the numbers on Gore's idea to reduce carbon emissions by 90 percent by 2050. Nordhaus found that while such a plan would indeed reduce the maximum increase in global temperatures to between 1.3 and 1.6 degrees Celsius, it did so "at very high cost" of between $17 trillion and $22 trillion over the long term, as opposed to doing nothing. (Again, just for comparative purposes, the entire global economy is about $50 trillion.) ..."

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/7/18/dissecting-al-gores-5-trillion-energy-plan.html

Coal-Fired Power Plants Provide

Largest Share of Electricity Supply

Coal-fired power plants (including utilities, independent

power producers, and end-use CHP) continue to

be the dominant source of electricity generation

through 2030 (Figure 61). Although natural-gas-fired

plants with lower capital costs make up most of the

capacity additions over the next 10 years, more

coal-fired plants are built in the later years as natural

gas fuel costs increase. The natural gas share of

generation falls from 20 percent in 2006 to 14 percent

in 2030, while the coal share increases from 49 percent

to 54 percent.

Federal tax incentives, State renewable energy programs,

and rising fossil fuel prices lead to increases in

renewable and nuclear capacity and generation, as

new plants are built. The generation share from

renewable capacity increases by 32 percent from 2006

to 2030 and represents 13 percent of total electricity

supply in 2030. With capacity additions and improvements

in performance at existing nuclear facilities,

nuclear generation also increases; however, the

nuclear share of total generation falls slightly, from

19 percent in 2006 to 18 percent in 2030.

Technology choices for new plants and utilization of

existing capacity are affected by relative fuel costs

and changes in environmental policies. For example,

natural-gas-fired plants are projected to supply 21

percent of total electricity supply in 2030 in the low

price case but only 10 percent in the high price case,

but coal-fired plants supply 49 percent of the total in

the low price case and 57 percent in the high price

case. Changes in environmental policies could also

have a significant effect on the fuel shares of total

generation.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/trend_3.pdf

Net Generation by Energy Source: Total (All Sectors)

Electric Power Monthly with data for February 2008
Report Released: July 10, 2008
Next Release Date: Mid-August 2008

Table 1.1. Net Generation by Energy Source: Total (All Sectors), 1994 through February 2008 (Thousand Megawatthours)
Period	Coal[1]	Petroleum Liquids[2]	Petroleum Coke	Natural Gas	Other Gases[3]	Nuclear	Hydroelectric Conventional	Other Renewables[4]	Hydroelectric Pumped Storage	Other[5]	Total
1994	1,690,694	98,440	7,461	460,219	13,319	640,440	260,126	76,535	-3,378	3,667	3,247,522
1995	1,709,426	66,944	7,610	496,058	13,870	673,402	310,833	73,965	-2,725	4,104	3,353,487
1996	1,795,196	73,521	7,890	455,056	14,356	674,729	347,162	75,796	-3,088	3,571	3,444,188
1997	1,845,016	82,773	9,782	479,399	13,351	628,644	356,453	77,183	-4,040	3,612	3,492,172
1998	1,873,516	116,859	11,941	531,257	13,492	673,702	323,336	77,088	-4,467	3,571	3,620,295
1999	1,881,087	107,276	10,785	556,396	14,126	728,254	319,536	79,423	-6,097	4,024	3,694,810
2000	1,966,265	102,160	9,061	601,038	13,955	753,893	275,573	80,906	-5,539	4,794	3,802,105
2001	1,903,956	114,647	10,233	639,129	9,039	768,826	216,961	70,769	-8,823	11,906	3,736,644
2002	1,933,130	78,701	15,867	691,006	11,463	780,064	264,329	79,109	-8,743	13,527	3,858,452
2003	1,973,737	102,734	16,672	649,908	15,600	763,733	275,806	79,487	-8,535	14,045	3,883,185
2004	1,978,620	100,040	20,731	708,854	16,766	788,528	268,417	82,604	-8,488	14,483	3,970,555
2005	2,013,179	100,095	22,427	757,974	16,317	781,986	270,321	87,213	-6,558	12,468	4,055,423
2006
January	169,258	4,251	1,893	43,529	1,326	71,912	27,437	8,442	-533	1,143	328,658
February	158,648	3,270	1,664	47,152	1,260	62,616	24,762	7,369	-447	1,040	307,333
March	161,355	2,434	1,601	54,585	1,421	63,721	24,625	8,210	-435	1,214	318,730
April	141,456	3,054	1,654	55,795	1,352	57,567	28,556	7,849	-587	1,162	297,858
May	157,051	2,920	1,520	65,302	1,440	62,776	30,818	8,019	-444	1,213	330,616
June	169,726	4,079	1,708	80,787	1,326	68,391	29,757	7,775	-423	1,134	364,260
July	187,860	5,142	1,882	107,862	1,374	72,186	25,439	8,098	-638	1,215	410,421
August	189,488	6,595	1,793	106,289	1,474	72,016	21,728	7,881	-695	1,193	407,763
September	161,630	3,057	1,603	72,402	1,299	66,642	17,201	7,702	-629	1,146	332,055
October	161,434	3,370	1,537	70,351	1,358	57,509	17,055	8,279	-507	1,181	321,567
November	159,472	3,366	1,393	53,161	1,216	61,392	20,272	8,290	-553	1,149	309,159
December	173,547	3,117	1,460	55,829	1,215	70,490	21,596	8,509	-667	1,188	336,283
Total	1,990,926	44,655	19,709	813,044	16,060	787,219	289,246	96,423	-6,558	13,977	4,064,702
2007
January	175,919	4,438	1,547	59,653	1,322	74,006	26,405	8,512	-572	1,138	352,369
February	163,590	7,710	1,250	58,087	1,173	65,225	18,648	8,119	-447	1,061	324,415
March	159,904	4,081	1,252	56,363	1,419	64,305	24,272	8,890	-458	1,172	321,198
April	146,516	3,872	1,184	60,729	1,337	57,301	23,854	8,739	-374	1,151	304,309
May	157,841	3,540	1,343	66,469	1,341	65,025	25,930	8,557	-547	1,202	330,701
June	173,990	4,238	1,524	81,185	1,361	68,923	22,860	8,382	-523	1,142	363,084
July	185,433	4,268	1,325	97,046	1,366	72,729	22,623	8,118	-595	1,190	393,503
August	190,681	5,877	1,450	120,761	1,339	72,751	20,002	8,631	-651	1,213	422,053
September	169,839	3,648	1,256	87,741	1,266	67,582	14,667	8,618	-756	1,119	354,981
October	162,642	3,551	1,163	78,321	1,164	61,690	14,826	8,867	-786	1,171	332,609
November	159,525	1,969	1,073	60,159	1,168	64,969	15,727	8,607	-685	1,049	313,561
December	174,691	2,765	1,385	66,696	1,160	71,983	18,498	8,948	-601	1,206	346,731
Total	2,020,572	49,956	15,752	893,211	15,414	806,487	248,312	102,988	-6,994	13,815	4,159,514
2008
January	182,579	3,136	1,313	72,090	1,249	70,686	22,358	9,647	-754	962	363,268
February	167,000	2,427	1,200	59,902	1,126	64,936	20,234	8,679	-375	778	325,906
Total	349,579	5,563	2,513	131,992	2,376	135,623	42,593	18,326	-1,129	1,740	689,175
Year-to-Date
2006	327,906	7,521	3,557	90,680	2,586	134,527	52,198	15,811	-979	2,183	635,991
2007	339,509	12,148	2,797	117,741	2,495	139,231	45,053	16,631	-1,019	2,199	676,784
2008	349,579	5,563	2,513	131,992	2,376	135,623	42,593	18,326	-1,129	1,740	689,175
Rolling 12 Months Ending in February
2007	2,002,529	49,282	18,949	840,104	15,970	791,922	282,101	97,243	-6,597	13,993	4,105,495
2008	2,030,642	43,371	15,468	907,463	15,294	802,879	245,852	104,684	-7,104	13,356	4,171,904
[1] Anthracite, bituminous, subbituminous, lignite, waste coal, and coal synfuel. [2] Distillate fuel oil, residual fuel oil, jet fuel, kerosene, and waste oil. [3] Blast furnace gas, propane gas, and other manufactured and waste gases derived from fossil fuels. [4] Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture byproducts, other biomass, geothermal, solar thermal, photovoltaic energy, and wind. [5] Non-biogenic municipal solid waste, batteries, chemicals, hydrogen, pitch, purchased steam, sulfur, tire-derived fuel, and miscellaneous technologies. Notes: Beginning with 2001 data, non-biogenic municipal solid waste and tire-derived fuels are reclassified as non-renewable energy sources and included in "Other". Biogenic municipal solid waste is included in "Other Renewables." See Glossary for definitions. Values for 2007 and 2008 are preliminary. Values for January through July 2007 are revised. Values for 2006 and prior years are final. - See Technical Notes for a discussion of the sample design for the Form EIA-923 and predecessor forms. Totals may not equal sum of components because of independent rounding. Sources: Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-906, "Power Plant Report;" Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-920 "Combined Heat and Power Plant Report;" and predecessor forms. Beginning with 2008 data, the Form EIA-923, "Power Plant Operations Report," replaced the following: Form EIA-906, "Power Plant Report;" Form EIA-920, "Combined Heat and Power Plant Report;" Form EIA-423, "Monthly Cost and Quality of Fuels for Electric Plants Report;" and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC Form 423, "Monthly Report of Cost and Quality of Fuels for Electric Plants."

Ice age to warming - and back?

"...While policymakers have worried long and hard about global warming, which might raise Earth's temperature 1.4 to 5.8 degrees C by century's end, a growing body of evidence suggests natural forces could just as easily plunge Earth's average temperatures downward. In the past, the planet's climate has changed 10 degrees in as little as 10 years. ..."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0318/p13s01-sten.html

Last glacial period

"The last glacial period was the most recent glacial period within the current ice age, occurring in the Pleistocene epoch. It began about 110,000 years ago and ended between 10,000 and 15,000 BP. During this period there were several changes between glacier advance and retreat. The maximum extent of glaciation was approximately 18,000 years ago. While the general pattern of global cooling and glacier advance was similar, local differences in the development of glacier advance and retreat make it difficult to compare the details from continent to continent (see picture of ice core data below for differences).

The last glacial period is sometimes colloquially referred to as the last ice age, though this use is incorrect because an ice age is a longer period of cold temperature in which ice sheets cover large parts of the Earth. Glacials, on the other hand, refer to colder phases within an ice age that separate interglacials. Thus, the end of the last glacial period is not the end of the last ice age. The end of the last glacial period was about 12,500 years ago, while the end of the last ice age has not yet come: little evidence points to a stop of the glacial-interglacial cycle of the last million years. ..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_glacial_period

Charlie Rose - Alternative Energy / Internet Technology

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9ngECk1FQk

Ice Age

"An ice age is a period of long-term reduction in the temperature of the Earth's surface and atmosphere, resulting in an expansion of continental ice sheets, polar ice sheets and alpine glaciers. Glaciologically, ice age is often used to mean a period of ice sheets in the northern and southern hemispheres; by this definition we are still in an ice age (because the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets still exist). More colloquially, when speaking of the last few million years, ice age is used to refer to colder periods with extensive ice sheets over the North American and Eurasian continents: in this sense, the most recent ice age peaked about 11,000 years ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age

Why were there four long, generally cool periods during which continent-sized glaciers advanced and retreated?

http://www.museum.state.il.us/exhibits/ice_ages/why_4_cool_periods.html

Geology: Glaciers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gce9SqEy7BE

300 year history of renewable energy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIXuXlfKyrc

Lesson 19 Glaciation - Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJG6pqh3q28&feature=related

Lesson 19 Glaciation - Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RF0uOotKhrc

Lesson 19 Glaciation - Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlYRWb3zBYY

Lesson 19 Glaciation - Part 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aJtWPPjGTc

Lesson 19 Glaciation - Part 5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFeRFeo_01Q

Lesson 19 Glaciation - Part 6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=su_h1aXSSo0

Lesson 19 Glaciation - Part 7

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82vPk6eVUhY

Are We on the Brink of a 'New Little Ice Age?'

"...It is that global climate is moving in a direction that makes abrupt climate change more probable, that these dynamics lie beyond the capability of many of the models used in IPCC reports, and the consequences of ignoring this may be large. For those of us living around the edge of the N. Atlantic Ocean, we may be planning for climate scenarios of global warming that are opposite to what might actually occur."

http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=12455&tid=282&cid=10046

Robert Bryce Believes Energy Independence is a Pipe Dream

http://fora.tv/2008/03/18/Robert_Bryce_Believes_Energy_Independence_is_a_Pipe_Dream

The Big Chill Funeral

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiw_3olyJ2c

Gore Challenges America

Thomas Ward — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 01:48:56 +0000

Yesterday, former Vice President, an "An Inconvenient Truth" star Al Gore issued a challenge to the American people to end their reliance on carbon-based fuels, many of which are purchased from China. The goal of this challenge is to make people create 100% of its energy from renewable resources (such as solar and geothermal energy) within the next ten years.

Just in case you missed it, what follows is a complete video of Al Gore's speech. Please watch and feel free to comment, whether you believe in global warming or not, and let the viewing public know where you stand.

50,000 Physicists: Humans off the Hook, The Sun is to Blame for Global Warming

politisite — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 00:13:24 +0000

The American Physical Society, consisting of over 50,000 physicists was touted as the group that Al Gore used as the group where the debate over global warming was over. Well the Truth is the APS is reversing it's view on Climate change and is publicly coming out in dis-belief of Human involvement in Global warning.

The group is so sure of their new found truth that they are offering up a publicly held debate on the subject. The group who are the real numbers crunchers and model generators not social activists that that once called global warming unconvertible. Have new data according to APS forum editors, Jeff Marque, "There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution."

[q url="http://www.dailytech.com/Myth+of+Consensus+Explodes+APS+Opens+Global+Warming+Debate/article12403.htm"]

The APS is opening its debate with the publication of a paper by Lord Monckton of Brenchley, which concludes that climate sensitivity -- the rate of temperature change a given amount of greenhouse gas will cause -- has been grossly overstated by IPCC modeling. A low sensitivity implies additional atmospheric CO2 will have little effect on global climate.

Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chairman of the New England Section of the APS, called Monckton's paper an "expose of the IPCC that details numerous exaggerations and "extensive errors"

In an email to DailyTech, Monckton says, "I was dismayed to discover that the IPCC's 2001 and 2007 reports did not devote chapters to the central 'climate sensitivity' question, and did not explain in proper, systematic detail the methods by which they evaluated it. When I began to investigate, it seemed that the IPCC was deliberately concealing and obscuring its method."

According to Monckton, there is substantial support for his results, "in the peer-reviewed literature, most articles on climate sensitivity conclude, as I have done, that climate sensitivity must be harmlessly low."

Monckton, who was the science advisor to Britain's Thatcher administration, says natural variability is the cause of most of the Earth's recent warming. "In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years ... Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth." [/q]

Unless there are industrialized nations on Jupiter or Pluto, Global warming could be called solar system warming and has very little to do with Human emissions.
The Politisite Bottom Line: (Opinion) Al Gore and other scientists while looking at data from the Earth and coming to the conclusion that the earth is on a warming trend. Coming to the conclusion that since industry has caused increased emission is th reason for the earth warming. What the scientists failed to see what due to the suns increased solar activity, other heavenly bodies where effected as well. most of the Planets with our solar system has increased in temperature as well.

Does this mean, stop conserving resources? We say no. We are on a better trend and n matter ones view of Al Gore, we have made our country better by following some of the environmental steps outlined by those who have blamed humans for the natural unfolding of our universe. So keep those energy efficient lights and keep recycling. Just don't go to therapy for ruining the world for driving your Hummer.

We can solve it!!

oteamvenice — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 23:58:11 +0000

A speech by Al Gore yesterday challenges us to create 100% of our electricity from renewable energy and carbon free sources in the next 10 years. This speech is amazing. Al Gore is a radical! Love him!

-willia

Global Warming Hoax continued

daxx8 — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:11:28 +0000

McIntyre's blog was awarded "Best Science Blog for 2007". To my skeptics, true, Stephen McIntyre is a Canadian businessman, who did not believe and did not take for granted what was being spoon-fed to him by Gore, Mann etc., so he put together a team of scientists equally curious to examine Mann's data and his results. Unfortunately, Mann said he did not know where his data was or where legitimate scientists could go to examine it in order to replicate his conclusions!

They even took samples from the same tree that Mann did and got different results! John Coleman, meteorologist and founder of the weather channel claims Gore's movie is full of mis-information. A colleague of mine, a climate scientist from UCLA, read Gore's book and his book review was summarized in two words: "Bull shit."

Both John Coleman and my colleague informed me that increased CO2 levels do not cause temperatures to rise (as Gore and Mann would have you believe). In fact, the opposite has been historically true. Whenever there were periods of warming on the planet, they were followed by increased CO2 levels, meaning that the "warming" caused the CO2 levels to rise, not the opposite.

Global Warming Solutions Need Women's Wisdom

wedo2008 — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 14:49:02 +0000

By June Zeitlin, Executive Director, Women’s Environment & Development Organization

The more we experience the effects of climate change, the clearer it becomes that everyone on the planet has a huge stake in what we decide to do now. That is why it is appalling that women are still being overlooked as key to the solution.

When storms and mudslides devastate a neighborhood, women shoulder most of the cleanup, stay home from work or school the most and take care of the injured. When drought hits the developing world, it is women whose crops and animals suffer most, as they produce most of the food in Africa and Asia. Women are the ones who risk assault to go further and further in search of water and firewood.

Women, in short, are the most affected by the disruptions of climate change. But women also have the most experience in coping. Women drive less, consume less and have smaller carbon footprints than men. Women’s initiatives are creating green jobs and slowing environmental damage worldwide. Yet women are generally left out of policy deliberations on what to do about global warming.

It is time for this to change. Next year’s new Congress will consider legislation to mandate new greenhouse gas emission standards and invest in measures to grow a greener U.S. economy. Election season offers politicians the chance to stand out from their opponents by recognizing women’s centrality on this issue and pledging to involve them in its solution. So far, it isn’t happening.

Women produce 65 percent of all the food in Asia and 75 percent of it in sub-Saharan Africa. Erratic weather means they must spend more time farming and gathering food, which leaves less time for education, outside work, personal and family life. The result: ill health, hunger, homelessness, unemployment, forced migration and conflict. But in Kenya, for example, Wangari Maathai started the Greenbelt Movement, urging women to be leaders in planting trees to prevent erosion and stand up for democracy. For this she won the 2004 Nobel Peace Prize.

In Suriname, no one listened when women pointed out that a local river’s annual floods were getting worse and that perhaps the village should relocate to higher ground. It was wiped out the following year. When drought hit Micronesia, women were digging wells and creating new water sources long before the government decided what it could do. When Hurricane Mitch killed thousands in Central America in 1998, no one died in the Honduran town of La Masica because women there participated equally with men in all relief operations, went on rescue missions, rehabilitated local infrastructure, distributed food and took over the task, from men, of monitoring the early-warning system for disasters.

Women are a majority of the world’s poor, and the poor by definition live in substandard housing in marginal areas prone to drought, floods or resource shortages. Up to 70 percent of those killed in the 2004 Asian tsunami were women. In Bangladesh, the 1991 cyclone and flood killed 71 of every 1,000 women, compared to 15 of every 1,000 men. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, women forced into overcrowded housing suffered high rates of sexual abuse, while lack of child care facilities has cost many their jobs and health insurance. Contemplating the slow government response, Wisconsin Lieutenant Governor Barbara Lawton sponsored a resolution at the 2007 national lieutenant governors’ conference calling on officials to commit to action in their states against climate change.

Political candidates should take note that women are both those most affected by climate change worldwide and leaders in dealing with it. At the moment, the debate focuses on technical and economic issues. True, those are crucial: an effective policy should require emission cuts of 25 to 40 percent by 2020, suspend new coal plants and end U.S. fossil fuel dependence through incentives for energy efficiency and renewable resource production.

It should also require research on gender-specific patterns of resource use, vulnerability and coping mechanisms. It should call for new data collection about every proposal’s effects on women, and mandate involvement by women and gender experts in preparing U.S. policy and contributions to international discussions. It should recognize that success of the technical fixes will depend on the ways that women use natural and economic resources and the way they react to policy initiatives.

The planet’s future is at stake in the global warming debate, no question about it. Women are weighing in with reports and suggestions from the field where they know the terrain. It’s time for their voices to be heard and heeded.

***

June Zeitlin is the executive director of the Women’s Environment & Development Organization (WEDO). Founded in 1991, WEDO is an international organization that advocates for women’s equality in global policy.

Omissions Trading Scheme

lolipollie — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 10:59:56 +0000