Monday, March 9, 2009

U.S. needs to do more on climate: EU official

From: Reuters

LONDON (Reuters) - The United States must make deeper cuts in greenhouse gas emissions than proposed by PresidentBarack Obama if the world is to stand a chance of avoiding devastating climate change, an EU official said.

Jos Delbeke, the European Commission's deputy director-general of the environment, said a goal of bringing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions back to 1990 levels by 2020, set by Obama last month, will probably not be enough.

"I doubt whether that will bring us to the average required by developed countries," he told Reuters on Friday. "We in Europe would hope the U.S. will do more than stabilization of 1990 levels. I will not hide that."

Scientists say global emissions must stabilize by 2015, then fall by some 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 if the world is to keep temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius.

A rise of over 2 degrees may trigger widespread flooding, droughts, disease and famine, United Nations scientists said.

The 27-nation European Union has committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, upping that target to 30 percent if a successor agreement to the Kyoto Protocol climate pact is signed.

"The EU's position is that developed countries, as a group, must cut 30 percent below 1990 levels by 2020," Delbeke told a clean energy conference held by analysts New Energy Finance.

With its carbon dioxide emissions rising nearly 20 percent since 1990, the United States is the most polluting developed country.

Stabilization of U.S. emissions at 1990 levels in 2020 would make it near impossible for developed countries to reach the EU's 30 percent group target.

Article Continues: http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSTRE5253WJ20090309?feedType=RSS&feedName=environmentNews

Czech leader joins meeting of climate change deniers

• US convention aimed at escalating confrontation
• Klaus to attack 'arrogant, unscrupulous ideology'

A polar bear shakes his body to remove water

Climate change is said to be threatening the future of species such as the polar bear. Photograph: Mathieu Belanger/Reuters

It is billed as the largest ever gathering of climate change deniers, a convention that kicked off last night with a title suggesting global warming is a thing of the past, and a guest list that includes a hurricane forecaster, a retired astronaut and a sitting European president.

Entitled Global Warming: Was It Ever Really a Crisis? and featuring some of the most prominent naysayers in the climate change debate, this week's conference in New York sets out to escalate its confrontation with the scientific establishment, the vast majority of whose members subscribe to the view that humans are the principal cause of climate change.

Conference organisers were celebrating something of a coup in securing as a keynote speaker the Czech president, Václav Klaus, at a time when his country holds the rotating presidency of the EU. Klaus, a Eurosceptic, believes that efforts to protect the world from the impact of climate change are an assault on freedom.

In his remarks last night, Klaus accused European governments of being "alarmist" on the subject of climate change and in thrall to radical environmentalists.

"They probably do not want to reveal their true plans and ambitions to stop economic development and return mankind several centuries back," he said.

He received a standing ovation. But Klaus admitted that his position was a lonely one.

"It is evident that the climate change debate has not made any detectable progress," he said. "It reminds me of the frustration people like me felt in the communist era."

This week's gathering by the Heartland Institute, a Chicago thinktank that shares the Czech president's free-market views, brings together some of the more vocal critics of the scientific consensus, which maintains that rising temperatures are now so dangerous to people's existence as to warrant urgent action.

Among more than 70 participants listed by the Heartland Institute is Jack Schmitt, a former astronaut, who now teaches engineering physics. William Gray, who is regarded as a leading hurricane forecaster, is also listed, along with Fred Singer, the atmospheric physicist who argues that a melting Arctic would have some positive effects, including the formation of the long-sought north-west passage. There is also a strong contingent of free marketeers and conservative commentators, including Christopher Booker and Christopher Monckton, both British.

Environmentalists argue that climate change denial, although the view of a minority, has damaged efforts to introduce policies to address the changes.

Kert Davies, research director for Greenpeace, says the climate change deniers have been adept at adapting their views as the public grows more conscious of the dangers of global warming.

The deniers also have resources. The Centre for Public Integrity said in a report last month that the lobby opposing climate change action gave work to 2,430 Washington lobbyists in 2008. The report estimated that about 15% of Washington's lobbyists were now working to try to stop Congress from passing a law putting a cap on carbon.

"They are on the fringes - when you look at where the public is on this issue, where governments are on this issue, and where scientific organisations are on this issue," said Kevin Grandia, the manager of DeSmogBlog, which seeks to counter misinformation on global warming. "The problem is when you take that fringe and add in the public relations ability to amplify that message. They have ingrained their message so well ... it can easily be used as a tool to oppose legislation."

Opinion polls show that about 58% of Americans believe human activity is causing climate change. However, many do not see a need for urgent action. A poll by the Pew Research Centre this year showed that climate change ranked last among topics of public concern to Americans.

The Heartland Institute was funded by Exxon Mobil until 2006. It disavows such links for this conference, but lists 55 sponsors, some of which do receive funding from Exxon and rightwing thinktanks.

How we deal with climate change: denial

Academics meeting in Bristol at the weekend for Britain's first conference on the psychology of climate change argued that the greatest obstacles to action are not technical, economic or political - they are the denial strategies that we adopt to protect ourselves from unwelcome information. Nearly 80% of people claim to be concerned about climate change, but many people have a tendency to define this concern in ways that keep it far away. They describe climate change as a global problem (not a local one) and as a future problem (not one for their lifetimes). And 60% of people believe that "many scientific experts still question if humans are contributing to climate change" while 30% believe climate change is "largely down to natural causes". Seven per cent deny climate is changing at all.
George Marshall

• George Marshall is founder of the Climate Outreach Information Network

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Capitol Climate Action: Mass Civil Disobedience in D.C. Against Use of Coal at Capitol Hill Power Plant

Democracy Now, New York

www.democracynow.org
Climateactionweb

Over a thousand activists representing a broad alliance of civic groups are converging on Washington, D.C. today for the country’s largest mass civil disobedience against global warming. Dubbed the “Capitol Climate Action,” people are demonstrating against coal at the Capitol Hill Power Plant, which still uses coal to heat and cool several key buildings, including House and Senate offices, the Library of Congress, the Supreme Court, and Union Station. We speak with two well-known environmentalists: Bill McKibben and Judy Bonds. [includes rush transcript]

Guests:

Julia "Judy" Bonds, Appalachian environmental activist from West Virginia and the director of Coal River Mountain Watch. She comes from a family of coal miners and won the Goldman Environmental Prize in 2003 for leading the fight against mountaintop removal mining.

Bill McKibben, environmentalist and author who frequently writes about global warming and alternative energy. He is the author of nine books, including Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future. He is a co-founder of an environmental mobilization campaign called 350.org


AMY GOODMAN: Tens of hundreds of activists representing a broad alliance of civic groups are converging on Washington, D.C. today for the country’s largest mass civil disobedience against global warming. Dubbed the “Capitol Climate Action,” people are demonstrating against coal at the Capitol Hill Power Plant, which still uses coal to heat and cool several key buildings, including House and Senate offices, the Library of Congress, the Supreme Court, and Union Station.

Last Thursday, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Leader Harry Reid called for the plant to eliminate coal and completely switch to natural gas, which produces about half the greenhouse gas emissions as coal. They called the plant “the number one source of air pollution and carbon emissions” in the nation’s capital. It currently burns about 35 percent coal and the rest natural gas. Earlier efforts to remove coal from the plant’s fuel mixture were thwarted by pro-coal legislators like Republican Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Democratic Senator Robert Byrd from West Virginia.

I’m joined right now from Washington, D.C. by two well-known environmentalists who will be at today’s nonviolent direct action at the Capitol Power Plant, willing to be arrested.

Bill McKibben is an environmentalist who frequently writes about global warming and alternative energy, the author of nine books, including Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future. He is co-founder of an environmental mobilization campaign called 350.org.

Julia “Judy” Bonds is an Appalachian environmental activist from West Virginia and the director of Coal River Mountain Watch. She comes from a family of coal miners and won the Goldman Environmental Prize in 2003 for leading the fight against mountaintop removal mining.

Welcome to Democracy Now! to both of you. I want to start with Judy Bonds. Tell us about this mass protest today.

JUDY BONDS: Well, basically, I will be a speaker at the mass protest, and I’m very proud to be here today with the youth of America that’s demanding change and demanding that the adults take responsibility for creating a mess. So I’m very much looking forward to today’s mass protest and crossing the line.

AMY GOODMAN: Tell us about this particular coal plant in Washington, D.C. It may surprise many that there’s a coal plant right there in Washington, D.C. that fuels the capital.

JUDY BONDS: Absolutely. It may surprise many that we’re still burning coal, as most Americans don’t quite understand where their energy comes from. But this coal plant has been used to burn coal to heat the capital with, and my own senator, Senator Byrd, has refused to actually switch over to a cleaner way of burning coal. So this plant burns some coal that comes from West Virginia, as well. And one of the—the coal mine that uses this plant is using underground sludge injection, by underground injecting this sludge, the coal waste, into old abandoned mines, and it’s leaching into people’s well water.

AMY GOODMAN: Judy Bonds, can you talk about how coal mining has affected West Virginia and also about the massive spill that occurred in December?

JUDY BONDS: Coal mining has greatly affected West Virginia. Right now, there’s almost 400,000 acres of mountains that have been lowered, the tops blasted off. They’re using three-and-a-half million pounds of explosives a day just in West Virginia to blow the tops off our mountains, and it’s blasting our homes, it’s poisoning our air, and it’s poisoning our water. So, basically, the people who live where I do, in coal extraction areas, literally are living in terror and are being poisoned by the coal extraction process here.

And even though that West Virginia still relies upon coal for its economy, we should have diversified many, many years ago, about thirty years ago. And we’re calling, you know, for a diversification of our economy. Basically, where I live at, there’s one mountain left, called Coal River Mountain, and it’s slated for mountaintop removal. And we’re proposing a wind farm on top of this mountain in place of mountaintop removal, so that they can still underground mine the coal, but we will have jobs forever, clean, renewable jobs forever and tax revenues forever for our communities, because we think we have about probably anywhere from fifteen to twenty years of coal left in the valley where I live at.

AMY GOODMAN: And explain exactly how mountaintop removal works, Judy Bonds.

JUDY BONDS: Well, basically, the coal industry comes in and cuts all the trees off the top of the mountain, and most of the time they don’t even use the trees. Then they set—they take bulldozers and scrape the wonderful topsoil from the top of the mountain, and then they drill holes and use ammonium nitrate, which Timothy McVeigh used in the Oklahoma City bombing, and they load those charges, and then they set a blast off. And it shakes the whole valley.

You know, we can smell and taste the ammonium nitrate and the silica and the coal dust in our mouths in the valleys below, where we live at. So when they set off these blasts, that shakes our homes, and the problem is, it’s pretty hard to go to the bathroom between 4:00 in the evening and 5:00 in the evening, because that’s when they blast. And it’s literally—we feel as if we’re living in a war zone. And we are. And we are. And we just literally live in terror. Our air and our water both are poisoned from the coal mining and the extraction process.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Judy Bonds, a well-known environmentalist from West Virginia, director of the Coal River Mountain Watch. We’ll come back with Judy Bonds and Bill McKibben, then, later in the broadcast, Tavis Smiley. But before that, Democracy Now! producer Nicole Salazar is down in this massive Washington meeting of 12,000 students, Power Shift ‘09, and we’ll hear some of their voices. Stay with us.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: As we continue with the environmental movement, largest mass civil disobedience planned today in US history. Also, a mass meeting took place over the weekend at Washington Convention Center, 12,000 students from around the country, Power Shift ’09. Among those there, Julia Bonds, Appalachian environmental activist, head of Coal River Mountain Watch, and Bill McKibben, an environmentalists, has written many books, co-founder of the environmental mobilization campaign called 350.org.

Bill, welcome, as well, to Democracy Now! Talk about the significance of this weekend’s meeting. 12,000 students?

BILL McKIBBEN: It’s almost—it’s hard to describe. You know, I wrote the first book about global warming twenty years ago. I’ve spent two decades wondering what the global warming movement was going to look like when it arrived. And this weekend, we’re really finding out. And the answer is, it looks incredibly sweet: 12,000 young people, so fired up, ready to do all that they can to try to slow down this juggernaut of climate change while we still have a very narrow window of opportunity to do so.

AMY GOODMAN: Talk about today’s protest and the significance of it. Are you planning to be arrested, Bill McKibben?

BILL McKIBBEN: Yes. I mean, we’re all planning to risk arrest. And it’s going to be a very interesting day. It’s going to be half victory party, you know. After 103 years of burning coal, on Thursday, as you said, Speaker Pelosi and Harry Reid said, “OK, we’ll turn off that coal.” It was a pretty good demonstration of the power of people’s movements, even before we had the protest. So, today we’ll be celebrating the fact that the people of Washington aren’t going to have to breathe that soot and particulates any longer, and we’re also going to be energizing ourselves for the drive to shut down the 600 coal-fired power plants still operating in this country.

This is a very, very, very symbolic moment, a kind of turn. And, you know, it’s funny. The cable news networks and things have been preoccupied all weekend showing the Conservative Political Action Conference across town here in Washington, a few thousand people kind of leftover from the past. And the future was at the Convention Center, with 12,000 young people saying, “We don’t need the fuels of the past like coal, and we don’t need the ideologies of the past that have bankrupted not only the economy but the climate. It’s time for real change.” And you can feel it, feel it. I just hope we’ve started soon enough.

AMY GOODMAN: Judy Bonds, let me ask you something about a federal judge on—a judge in West Virginia on Friday ordering environmentalists to stop peaceful protest against the Massey Energy’s mountaintop removal operations. What’s the significance of this?

JUDY BONDS: Well, basically, it’s very significant because when a coal company actually orders someone to stay off their property, this—the gentleman that they’re ordering to stay off the property, Mike Roselle, has basically told me it’s going to take more than a temporary restraining order to keep him off an illegal activity. He’s exposing exactly what the coal industry is doing to Appalachia and indeed to all of America. So it’s pretty significant. That means that Mike is poking them pretty hard.

AMY GOODMAN: Bill McKibben, 350.org, your organization, explain the title.

BILL McKIBBEN: Can I show off my necktie for a minute? Because they made it for me yesterday down at the art convergence center here, where people are doing incredible placards and things. It’s got that “350” on it, because it’s the most important number in the world. This protest here today is the beginning of an incredible year of activism. The world meets in Copenhagen in December to come up with a new climate treaty, and it’s our last really plausible bite at the apple, I think, to get it right. We now have a number that defines that process.

Jim Hansen at NASA, who I think may be arrested today with us all, said—his team last year said 350 parts per million carbon dioxide is the most we can have in the atmosphere if we wish to retain a planet similar to the one on which civilization developed and to which life on earth is adapted. Pretty strong language. We’re above that number now. We’re at 387 parts per million and rising.

We need really dramatic action really quickly to bring it down, which is why at 350.org we’re assembling this global grassroots movement. And on October 24th, there will be demonstrations every corner of the world, from high up in the Himalayas to 350 scuba divers underwater in the Great Barrier Reef to people out on Easter Island, the kind of poster child for what happens when you don’t take care of your environment, all trying to get this number across, so that our negotiators actually have some target they have to hit, so that they can’t come back from Copenhagen and just say, “Oh, you know, we’ve reached an agreement.” Not good enough. We’re now up against the wall, and if we don’t get a really strong agreement really soon, then we all might as well not even go through the process.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to turn now to an ad that CNN reportedly refused to play last week. It’s about the coal industry and so-called “clean coal.” The website thinkprogress now reports that CNN will be playing the ad this week.

    MAN: All so clean!

    WOMAN: Mm-hmm!

    CLEAN COAL MAN: Is regular clean clean enough for your family? Not when you can have Clean Coal clean! Clean Coal harnesses the awesome power of the word “clean” to make it sound like the cleanest clean there is! Clean Coal is supported by the coal industry, the most trusted name in coal.


AMY GOODMAN: Judy Bonds, your response?

JUDY BONDS: That’s how we live. That dust of gray, black soot that they’re spraying out, that’s basically what’s in our homes and in our lungs. And I’m certainly glad that CNN has changed their mind and will air that ad, because that ad is true. Clean coal is a dirty lie. It’s a dirty lie. Clean coal does not exist. And if people could actually, you know, look at a coal-fired power plant or come to Appalachia and see how they extract coal, then they would understand what we mean when we say clean coal is a dirty lie. They would understand that commercial completely. And I hope, you know, America gets a chance to see more and more and more of this commercial, because I think this commercial is so true about what our children are breathing, too, in the inner cities.

AMY GOODMAN: Thank you both for being there. Judy Bonds, thank you for joining us, Appalachian environmental activist from West Virginia, director of Coal River Mountain Watch, and also want to thank Bill McKibben, author of Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future, among other books, co-founder of the environmental group called 350.org.

Climate change protest disrupts flights at Aberdeen airport

Nine members of campaign group Plane Stupid cut through perimeter fence

Plane Stupid protesters at Aberdeen airport

Plane Stupid climate protesters break through the perimeter fence at Aberdeen airport before setting up a barricade on an aircraft taxiway. Photograph: Plane Stupid/PA

Flights at one of Scotland's busiest airports were disrupted today when climate change protesters dressed as Donald Trump played golf on a taxiway.

Nine demonstrators from the Plane Stupid campaign group cut through Aberdeen airport's perimeter fence at around 2.15am in protest at BAA's plans to expand the airport.

Seven protesters who had put up a "wire fortress" on a taxiway for North Sea helicopters handed themselves over to Grampian police at about 8.20am. Two others on the terminal roof surrendered to police at about 9.30am.

Plane Stupid said the protesters were dressed as golfers in imitation of the New York property tycoon, who is building a major £1bn golfing resort north of Aberdeen and supports the airport's growth.

Wearing wigs and golfing visors, the demonstrators staged a mock game of golf with plastic clubs and balls.

The protesters on the roof unveiled a banner stating: "Nae Trump Games with Climate Change".

The protest was timed to prevent commercial flights from beginning at 5am and led to delays of at least three hours to all early morning services, including flights to Heathrow, Paris and Amsterdam.

Four incoming flights – from Paris Charles de Gaulle, Bristol, East Midlands and Humberside – were cancelled before scheduled flights resumed shortly after 9am.

Incoming flights from Wick, Durham Tees Valley and Newcastle were also delayed, while a flight to Sumburgh, in Shetland, was cancelled.

The protest also disrupted routine North Sea oil industry helicopter flights from what is one of Europe's busiest heliports.

Some services were able to resume at 8am after BAA shifted takeoffs to another area of the airport, but the disruption has continued.

"It has been a bit stop-start," a spokeswoman for Bristows, one of the main North Sea operators, said.

Plane Stupid said the protests, the first to disrupt commercial flights at a Scottish airport, were designed to highlight the escalating impact of aviation on the climate and protest against the UK-wide expansion of airports.

Aberdeen has been given permission to increase passenger numbers by 1.5m by 2015, the group said.

The airport is a major business hub, particularly for the oil and tourism industries, but it also provides lifeline services to Orkney and Shetland and some emergency air services.

The group quoted one of its members on the roof, Jonny Agnew, a 22-year-old from Edinburgh, as saying: "We have been failed by the generation of Donald Trump and Alex Salmond.

"Despite a catalogue of scientific reports warning them that they can't keep on with aviation growth, they continue with disregard for all of us who will end up dealing with the impacts of the climate crisis.

"The reality is that our generation's future is vanishing so that people like Donald Trump and his super-rich friends can jet into Aberdeen for a round of golf."

A BAA spokesman condemned the protest as "dangerous and highly irresponsible", adding: "Aberdeen is one of Europe's busiest commercial heliports and a major transport centre for the north of Scotland, used by tens of thousands of people every day.

"There is no justification for this irresponsible action, which is deliberately calculated to delay and inconvenience the travelling public.

"Passengers are being advised that the airport is not closed, and are asked to contact their airlines directly for more information about flight schedules."

A Grampian police spokesman said the protesters on the taxiway voluntarily gave themselves up after talks with police.

Last December, Plane Stupid activists disrupted Stansted airport, in Essex, occupying part of the runway and forcing the cancellation of dozens of flights. Police made 38 arrests.

In January last year, more than 20 protesters targeted the offices of private aviation firm Greer Aviation at Edinburgh airport, unveiling a banner that read: "This planet has no emergency exits."

Oceanic Seesaw Links Northern And Southern Hemisphere During Abrupt Climate Change During Last Ice Age

From: Cardiff University

Very large and abrupt changes in temperature recorded over Greenland and across the North Atlantic during the last Ice Age were actually global in extent, according to an international team of researchers led by Cardiff University.

New research, published in the journal Nature, supports the idea that changes in ocean circulation within the Atlantic played a central role in abrupt climate change on a global scale.

Using a sediment core taken from the seafloor in the South Atlantic, the team were able to create a detailed reconstruction of ocean conditions in the South Atlantic during the final phases of the last ice age.


Dr Stephen Barker, Cardiff University's School of Earth and Ocean Sciences and lead author on the paper, said: "During this period very large and abrupt changes in temperature were observed across the North Atlantic region. However, evidence for the direct transmission of these shifts between the northern and southern hemispheres has so far been lacking".

The new study suggests that abrupt changes in the north were accompanied by equally abrupt but opposite changes in the south. It provides the first concrete evidence of an immediate seesaw connection between the North and South Atlantic. The data shows, for example, that an abrupt cooling in the north would be accompanied by a rapid southerly shift of ocean fronts in the Southern Ocean, followed by more gradual warming across the south.

Dr Barker explains: "The most intuitive way to explain these changes is by varying the strength of ocean circulation in the Atlantic. By weakening the circulation, the heat transported northwards would be retained in the south."

Climate physicist, Dr Gregor Knorr, co-author of the study and now based at the Alfred Wegener Institute in Germany, said: "Our new results agree with climate models that predict a rapid transmission of climate signals between the two hemispheres as a consequence of abrupt changes in ocean circulation."

The study has wide implications for our understanding of abrupt climate change. Dr Ian Hall, School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, said: "While it is unlikely that an abrupt change in climate, related to changes in ocean circulation, will occur in the near future, our results suggest that if such an extreme scenario did occur, its effects could be felt globally within years to decades."

ShareThis

Mediterranean Sea Level Could Rise By over 2 feet

From: Plataforma SINC

A Spanish-British research project has come up with three future scenarios for the effects of climate change on the Mediterranean over the next 90 years, using global models from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The conclusions show that ocean temperatures in this area will increase, along with sea levels.

In order to understand and correctly predict risks for the Mediterranean coast, researchers from the Mediterranean Institute for Advanced Studies (IMEDEA, a joint centre run by the University of the Balearic Islands (UIB) and the Spanish National Research Council, CSIC) and the National Oceanography Centre of Southampton in the United Kingdom have analysed simulations based on three scenarios related to climate change and the rise in greenhouse gases. Their goal was to predict the temperature, sea level and salinity of the Mediterranean in the 21st Century.

"The most positive scenario assumes that greenhouse gas concentrations remain constant at their levels in the year 2000, and even in this case climate change still has an impact. The most negative scenario is based on diverse levels of economic development all over the world, with an ongoing increase in greenhouse gas production throughout the 21st Century," Marta Marcos, the study's lead author and a researcher at the UIB, tells SINC.

The study, which has been published recently in the Journal of Geophysical Research-Oceans, shows what could happen in the Mediterranean. The models predict that higher concentrations of gases will lead to an increase in temperatures throughout the entire sea.

In the most positive scenario, the changes are least, with temperature increases of less than 1ÂşC expected to be recorded in the Mediterranean by the end of the 21st Century. The other two scenarios envision an increase in greenhouse gases over coming decades, and foresee an increase in the temperature of the sea of up to 2.5Âş C. In addition, the results show that the temperature increase will accelerate during the 21st Century.

In the long term, sea levels could alter due to changes in temperature (warming leads to an increase in volume) as well as additional mass. "The level of the whole Mediterranean will rise by between 3cm and 61cm* on average as a result of the effects of warming," says Marcos.

There is "greater uncertainty" in terms of the mass likely to be added as a result of melting ice at the poles and from continental glaciers, and this aspect is not incorporated in the study. The most important area in terms of understanding sea level rise is the coasts, "but it is here that we know least because of the low spatial resolution of the models" the expert adds.

In search of greater clarity

The conclusions of this study are not based on observations, but rather on global climate models that include a whole range of possible future socio-economic scenarios in order to predict what is likely to happen in the Mediterranean. According to the scientists, climatic conditions are going to change greatly, and for this reason it is impossible to make a completely precise prediction of what the future really holds.

In these circumstances, Marta Marcos and Michael Tsimplis say that, aside from temperature changes, the models show that the Mediterranean will also become saltier over the coming century. However, this prediction is also very uncertain because "the variations in salinity in the Mediterranean are controlled by the exchange of water through the Straits of Gibraltar, and this has not been incorporated as an indicator, meaning the related results are not very reliable".

This is due to the fact that IPCC models have very low spatial resolution, which means they can show global processes "reasonably well", but not always regional ones. In particular, the 14km-wide Straits of Gibraltar, which are of key importance in the processes of water exchange between the Mediterranean and Atlantic, are not well reproduced in the models.

The global models are of no use in estimating the impact of sea level rise in coastal areas, because of the high level of regional variability for this factor. The solution would be to use high-resolution, regional climate models to show the Mediterranean straits with greater clarity, as well as the oceanic processes that take place within the ocean's basin and coastal areas.

This is a strategy currently being pursued by European research groups working to predict the effects of climate change at a regional level, and it is expected that the level of uncertainty in predictions will be reduced over the short term. In Spain, IMEDEA is working to produce data on ocean levels in collaboration with the Spanish Port System. Without such resolution in the models "we cannot be sure of the scale of the changes", the researcher concludes.

*61 cm is just over 2 feet Imperial measure.

Larger Chart : http://www.sciencedaily.com/images/2009/03/090303084057-large.jpg

ShareThis

Study critiques corn-for-ethanol's carbon footprint

From: Duke University

To avoid creating greenhouse gases, it makes more sense using today's technology to leave land unfarmed in conservation reserves than to plow it up for corn to make biofuel, according to a comprehensive Duke University-led study.

"Converting set-asides to corn-ethanol production is an inefficient and expensive greenhouse gas mitigation policy that should not be encouraged until ethanol-production technologies improve," the study's authors reported in the March edition of the research journal Ecological Applications

Nevertheless, farmers and producers are already receiving federal subsidies to grow more corn for ethanol under the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.

"One of our take-home messages is that conservation programs are currently a cheaper and more efficient greenhouse gas policy for taxpayers than corn-ethanol production," said biologist Robert Jackson, the Nicholas Professor of Global Environmental Change at Duke's Nicholas School of the Environment, who led the study.

Making ethanol from corn reduces atmospheric releases of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide because the CO2 emitted when the ethanol burns is "canceled out" by the carbon dioxide taken in by the next crop of growing plants, which use it in photosynthesis. That means equivalent amounts of carbon dioxide are removed from the atmosphere and "fixed" into plant tissues.

But the study notes that some CO2 not counterbalanced by plant carbon uptake gets released when corn is grown and processed for ethanol. Furthermore, ethanol contains only about 70 percent of gasoline's energy.

"So we actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions only 20 percent when we substitute one liter of ethanol for one liter of gasoline," said Gervasio Piñeiro, the study's first author, who is a Buenos Aires, Argentina-based scientist and postdoctoral research associate in Jackson's Duke laboratory.

Also, by the researchers' accounting, the carbon benefits of using ethanol only begin to show up years after corn growing begins. "Depending on prior land use" they wrote in their report, "our analysis shows that carbon releases from the soil after planting corn for ethanol may in some cases completely offset carbon gains attributed to biofuel generation for at least 50 years."

The report said that "cellulosic" species -- such as switchgrass -- are a better option for curbing emissions than corn because they don't require annual replowing and planting. In contrast, a single planting of cellulosic species will continue growing and producing for years while trapping more carbon in the soil.

"Until cellulosic ethanol production is feasible, or corn-ethanol technology improves, corn-ethanol subsidies are a poor investment economically and environmentally," Jackson added.

However, the report noted that a cost-effective technology to convert cellulosics to ethanol may be years away. So the Duke team contrasted today's production practices for corn-based ethanol with what will be possible after the year 2023 for cellulosic-based ethanol.

By analyzing 142 different soil studies, the researchers found that conventional corn farming can remove 30 to 50 percent of the carbon stored in the soil. In contrast, cellulosic ethanol production entails mowing plants as they grow -- often on land that is already in conservation reserve. That, their analysis found, can ultimately increase soil carbon levels between 30 to 50 percent instead of reducing them.

"It's like hay baling," Piñeiro said. "You plant it once and it stays there for 20 years. And it takes much less energy and carbon dioxide emissions to produce that than to produce corn."

As part of its analysis, the Duke team calculated how corn-for-ethanol and cellulosic-for-ethanol production -- both now and in the future -- would compare with agricultural set-asides. Those comparisons were expressed in economic terms with a standard financial accounting tool called "net present value."

For now, setting aside acreage and letting it return to native vegetation was rated the best way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, outweighing the results of corn-ethanol production over the first 48 years. However, "once commercially available, cellulosic ethanol produced in set-aside grasslands should provide the most efficient tool for greenhouse gas reduction of any scenario we examined," the report added.

The worst strategy for reducing carbon dioxide emissions is to plant corn-for-ethanol on land that was previously designated as set aside -- a practice included in current federal efforts to ramp up biofuel production, the study found. "You will lose a lot of soil carbon, which will escape into the atmosphere as CO2," said Piñeiro.

###

The research was funded by the National Science Foundation, the Center for Global Change at Duke University and by the Agencia Nacional de PromociĂłn CientĂ­fica y TecnologĂ­ca of Argentina.

Other researchers in the study included Brian Murray, the director for economic analysis at Duke's Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions and a Nicholas School research professor; Justin Baker, a researcher with Murray and Jackson; and Esteban Jobbagy, a professor at the University of San Luis in Argentina who received his Ph.D. at Duke.

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Climate change timetable slips as Obama backtracks on 2008 deadline

Campaign pledge to quickly pass laws to cut emissions faltering in the first weeks of his presidency

Barack Obama painting

Barack Obama is easing up on emissions rule pledge. Photograph: Patrick Leahy/AP

Barack Obama has been forced to slow down early legislation to reduce the CO2 emissions that cause global warming, a key green objective of his presidency.

Officials conceded that Congress is unlikely to pass such legislation by the end of 2009, a delay that could hurt efforts to reach a global treaty at the climate change conference in Copenhagen this December.

It also frustrates hopes that last week's huge infusion of green investment in the $787bn (£546bn) economic rescue plan would give momentum to efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

Presidential staff say America remains determined to play a leadership role at the climate talks in Copenhagen, but downplay prospects of taking steps to curb its own carbon emissions first.

"What is necessary is for us to demonstrate some leadership," Nancy Sutley, the chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said. She brushed aside the idea that climate change legislation would be seen as evidence of leadership. "I wouldn't comment on whether that is the only thing that would show leadership. It is still early on," she said.

Sutley spoke to reporters on Monday after a speech at a new centre on the law and climate change at Georgetown ­University in Washington DC. The White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, also indicated on Monday that Obama was easing up on his timetable for climate legislation. He told reporters the president would support moves by Congress to act on global warming "whether that's this year or next year".

The shift appeared to be an attempt to downplay expectations for further dramatic action on the environment. It was also testimony to deep Republican resistance to the White House.

Obama's early moves on the environment – and the huge green investment in last week's economic rescue package – had raised expectations for further green legislation.

American environmentalists had routinely described the economic rescue plan as a "down payment" on a new green economy, that would need to be followed up if its potential were not squandered. Legislation to reduce CO2 emissions was seen as a crucial part of that follow-up.

Environment ministers also believe the US would be on a better footing at the Copenhagen conference to press for action from other big polluters, such as China and India, if it could show it was addressing the same problems at home.

Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives had promised legislation on CO2 reductions by the end of May. The Senate is operating on a longer time scale – though the Democratic leadership too has promised to introduce legislation before Copenhagen.

But the White House now evidently believes that both those schedules are unrealistic after the wrangling in Congress over the economic rescue plan.

The rescue plan ran into concerted Republican opposition, preventing Obama from making good on an election promise to end partisan bickering in Washington.

The White House is still trying to build political support for its green agenda. Governors who gathered at their annual meeting in Washington last weekend were briefed by the Obama green team.

Obama also told the governors he supported a cap and trade regime, the Washington governor, Christine Gregoire, said. But he said it would be harder to get such legislation through Congress amid the rows over the economic rescue plan.

"The president said it nicely: 'That as complex as the stimulus package has been, cap and trade will become as well'," Gregoire said.

China's growth is no figleaf for the real source of CO2 emissions: the UK

George Monbiot Blog, UK

guardian.co.uk

China is blamed for soaring carbon emissions and used as an excuse for the west to do nothing

china emissions

A worker rides past coal-fueled cooling towers at a power plant in Guangan Photograph: Frederic J Brown/AFP

Whenever a government or a corporation doesn't want to do something, it blames China. You want fair terms of trade? Sorry, not when China's dumping its goods on the world market. You want a 40-hour week? Forget it, the Chinese are working a 40-hour day.

You want to cut carbon emissions? Pointless when the Chinese are building a new power station every three seconds. Just as it has been for 150 years, the "Yellow Peril" is invoked to frighten us into acquiescing to any number of domestic agendas.

But now, of course, we find that the story is not quite as we have been told. Yes, China's carbon pollution is soaring (though the Chinese still produce less than half as much CO2 per capita as we do), but that's only partly because of China's own consumption.

A new paper in Geophysical Research Letters shows that half the recent growth in emissions, and one-third of China's total carbon pollution, should, in fairness belong to other countries, as they have been produced while manufacturing goods for export. By closing down our manufacturing industries and moving production to China, we have dumped our emissions in another country.

This is the only reason why the UK, among other nations, appears to be meeting its commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. Two studies, one by the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI), the other by economist Dieter Helm show that when the UK's total consumption - rather than just its production - of carbon pollution is audited, our emissions have increased by 18-20% since 1990, rather than falling by 18.4% as the government claims.

The government is well aware of this. After all, it commissioned the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) report – but has sought to hide it from the public. The only acknowledgement of this issue in its latest annual Climate Change Progress report (pdf) was expressed in such a backhanded way that I had to perform several small sums to work out what it meant.

The progress report boasted that even when emissions in countries exporting goods to the UK are taken into account, "the total annual reduction of UK greenhouse gas emissions since 1990 was around 240 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent [MtCO2eq] below business as usual".

Elsewhere in the report, the government says that "business as usual" would have led to an increase of 40% in emissions since 1990. This gives us a figure of 1079 MtCO2eq. Subtract 240 from 1,079 and you get 839, or 187 MtCO2 eq above current emissions.

This means that the emissions for which the UK is responsible have risen by 9%. But even this is only half the real figure, according to SEI and Dieter. It's another of New Labour's blatant attempts to con us.

Dieter Helm argues that by counting only directly-emitted carbon production, the Kyoto treaty gives governments and corporations an incentive to dump as many of their emissions in other countries as possible, through the transfer of manufacturing jobs overseas. He also points out that it leads to optimistic assumptions about the costs of cutting carbon, such as Lord Stern's estimate that preventing climate breakdown would cost only 1% of GDP.

The current accounting method is also grossly unfair on China and other manufacturing nations in the developing world. Unless it is changed at Copenhagen in December, they will be asked to take responsibility for much of our consumption, as well as their own. Justice demands that the ultimate polluter pays: this means consumers in the rich world, not producers in poorer nations.

Monbiot.com

Global warming 'changing balance' of marine life in polar seas

Scientists involved in the most comprehensive study of life in the oceans ever conducted have documented changes in species distribution in the polar regions as warmer oceans spur migration

Arctic creatures

The Pelagonemertes rollestoni. Scientists found that at least 235 species live in both polar regions despite being 6,800 miles apart. Photograph: Russ Hopcroft, University of Alaska Fairbanks/Census of Marine Life

Global warming is changing the distribution, abundance and diversity of marine life in the polar seas with "profound" implications for creatures further up the food chain, according to scientists involved in the most comprehensive study of life in the oceans ever conducted.

Researchers from the Arctic Ocean Diversity (Arcod) project have documented rising numbers of warm-water crustaceans in the seas around Norway's Svalbard Islands. Arcod is part of the Census of Marine Life, a huge 10-year project involving researchers in more than 80 nations that aims to chart the diversity, distribution and abundance of life in the oceans.

They say an increasing number of these species are extending their range towards the poles as previously cold waters between Norway and the North Pole become warmer and more hospitable.

The team, led by Dr Rolf Gradinger, from the University of Alaska, also collected evidence from the polar Chukchi Sea, between Russia and Alaska, which showed that at least three species have extended their range northwards by up to 500km. The most notable is the snow crab, which has crossed the Bering Strait and is occurring in the Chukchi Sea for the first time.

"This is an example of a general trend we are observing where water is warming further north and making this region more suitable for southerly species," Gradinger said.

The Census is a huge 10-year project involving researchers in more than 80 nations that aims to chart the diversity, distribution and abundance of life in the oceans.

The team also found that smaller species are replacing larger ones in some Arctic waters, a shift which could have profound implications further up the food chain.

"We are finding two smaller species of plankton. This difference in size is big enough to cause a problem for the breeding populations of birds and whales as they will be forced to eat smaller species that has less energy content."

Gradinger's team of scientists from the University of Alaska and the Shirshov Institute of Oceanology in Moscow has collected its findings over five years. Their research has been released in conjunction with another survey from the Census of Antarctic Marine Life (CAML) following a series of expeditions during International Polar Year 2007-08. Both projects will contribute data on polar regions to the global Census of Marine Life, which is due to be released in 2010.

"In oceanographical terms these [Arctic] changes are huge," said Gradinger. "A change in temperature of just a few degrees will see the loss of sea ice cover and with it the sea ice algae, small animals and crustaceans which depend on it. By 2050 the arctic oceans may be ice free, we will lose these animals and that will have implications further up the food chain."

"From an Arctic perspective it's not only about an increase in temperature, it's a complete change in the ecosystem - salinity, ice melt, flow, currents - all of these together will have an impact."

The Antarctic team also reported evidence that some species of pteropods - snail-like species also known as sea butterflies - are moving further towards the pole. "It is similar to the Arctic – animals adapted to cold water environments are having to head to the poles to keep to colder climes as northern waters warm," said Dr Julian Gutt of the CAML.

By comparing notes, Arcod and CAML scientists found that at least 235 species live in both polar regions despite being 6,800 miles (11,000km) apart. Marine life that both poles share includes grey whales, birds, worms, crustaceans and pteropods. Scientists say the discovery opens a host of future research questions over where they originated and how they ended up at opposite ends of the earth.

Another major finding from the 18 research expeditions conducted by CAML during 2007-08 has revealed that life on the seafloor around the Antarctic continent forms a single bioregion - not separate ecosystems, as previously thought. Sampling from 1m locations around the 5,300 miles (8,500km) of Antarctic seafloor - or benthos - has also confirmed that the system is united by a single high-speed current.

"These findings are a major part of new information because so little was really known historically about these regions," said Ron O'Dor, the chief scientist of the census.

Gradinger added: "It's extremely difficult to get information from polar seas because we don't have good historical data. But we must collect data now to evaluate the impact of climate change and the use of the seas for tourism, fishing and shipping. With the warming of Arctic commercial exploitation might increase and therefore it's important to document what species are occurring currently."

Scientists from around the world have been involved in 17 different marine projects that will inform the census, a 10-year project that will provide a snapshot of life in the world's oceans.

The Earth's ice oceans have already revealed some secrets that have excited scientists. Last year at team of British Antarctic Survey scientists working on the census found that seas surrounding an archipelago near the tip of the Antarctic peninsula are richer in animal life than the Galapagos Islands, challenging the notion that warm seas in tropical zones are higher in biodiversity.

In February last year, giant sea creatures, including sea spiders the size of dinner plates and jellyfish with six-metre long tentacles, were found by Australian scientists working on a census project in the deep waters around Antarctica.

Nasa's CO2 satellite crashes into Antarctic ocean

A sunset silhouette of the Taurus XL rocket with NASA's OCO satellite aboard

A sunset silhouette of the Taurus XL rocket with Nasa's OCO satellite aboard sits poised for launch at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. Photograph: Analex Randy Beaudoin/Nasa

Nasa's pioneering satellite, designed to map carbon dioxide concentrations, has crashed into the ocean near Antarctica after running into technical difficulties during launch earlier today.

The Orbiting Carbon Observatory (Oco) blasted off in the early hours of this morning aboard a Taurus XL rocket from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. However, at 10.11am GMT, as the satellite prepared to separate from the launch vehicle, Nasa launch director Chuck Dovale "asked that the contingency plan be implemented".

Three minutes later an explanation came through on the satellite's launch blog: "According to Nasa commentator George Diller, the payload fairing failed to separate from the vehicle during ascent." The 160 centimetre-wide payload fairing is the nose cone that protects the satellite as it blasts through the atmosphere and should have split in two before falling away from the satellite. Because of the additional weight of the fairing, the rocket and satellite failed to reach orbit and subsequently plummeted into the Southern Ocean.

The remains of the satellite are unlikely to be recoverable, said a Nasa spokesman: "I'm not sure there'll be much of the satellite left." He added that fairing failures are not a regular occurrence.

"Certainly for the science community it's a huge disappointment," said John Brunschwyler, Taurus project manager for Orbital Sciences Corp, which built the rocket and satellite. "It's taken so long to get here." The project took nine years to reach the launch pad.

"The loss of this instrument is a serious setback," added Professor John Burrows, a co-investigator for the satellite. "Oco planned to build on the first measurements by the European Sciamachy instrument on Envisat and is complementary to the recently launched Japanese mission, Gosat." The technology onboard Oco was unique and boasted the ability to take more frequent and sensitive readings of CO2 levels than Envisat and Gosat.

Nasa's director of Earth sciences, Michael Freilich, said: "Over the next several days, weeks and months, we're going to carefully evaluate how to move forward and advance the science, given our evaluation of the assets that are in orbit now, the assets of our international partners and the existence of flight spares in order to put together a programme, as rapidly as possible, to pick up where Oco left off."

The £190m satellite was designed to collect precise measurements of the greenhouse gas in the Earth's atmosphere, identifying where it is being emitted, where it being absorbed and what happens to it in between.

"It's critical that we understand the processes controlling carbon dioxide in our atmosphere today so we can predict how fast it will build up in the future and how quickly we'll have to adapt to climate change," said David Crisp, principal investigator for the Oco based at Nasa's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California.

Experts believe a successor to Oco is likely. "Given its relatively low cost, I would expect a second Oco to be approved," said Dr Chris Welch, principal lecturer in Astronautics at Kingston University's Faculty of Engineering.

Arctic Sea Ice Underestimated for Weeks Due to Faulty Sensor

From: Bloomberg

A glitch in satellite sensors caused scientists to underestimate the extent of Arctic sea ice by 500,000 square kilometers (193,000 square miles), a California- size area, the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center said.

The error, due to a problem called “sensor drift,”� began in early January and caused a slowly growing underestimation of sea ice extent until mid-February. That’s when “puzzled readers”� alerted the NSIDC about data showing ice-covered areas as stretches of open ocean, the Boulder, Colorado-based groupsaid on its Web site.

“Sensor drift, although infrequent, does occasionally occur and it is one of the things that we account for during quality- control measures prior to archiving the data,”� the center said. “Although we believe that data prior to early January are reliable, we will conduct a full quality check.’’

The extent of Arctic sea ice is seen as a key measure of how rising temperatures are affecting the Earth. The cap retreated in 2007 to its lowest extent ever and last year posted its second- lowest annual minimum at the end of the yearly melt season. The recent error doesn’t change findings that Arctic ice is retreating, the NSIDC said.

Article Continues:http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=aIe9swvOqwIY

Video

"Manufactured Landscapes" SEE THIS BRILLIANT MOVIE! You'll never have the same shopping experience again.