climate change


If there’s one lesson Harper has learned from his Big Brother in the White House, it’s that talk is cheap. He’s also learned the value of saying anything and doing something else.

Jeffrey Simpson points out in the Globe & Mail that Harper’s performance at the G8 summit was just another load of Harper horseshit:

“Some time in mid-2009, the Americans will be ready to talk seriously inside the United Nations negotiations format. The talks are supposed to culminate in an international agreement at a conference in Copenhagen that December, but no one will be surprised if that date slips into 2010.

…This is just as well for Canada, whose federal government has advanced a position in the international arena that cannot be achieved, as everyone in that arena following climate change knows. Extra time will be needed for Canada to bring some credibility to its incoherent position. Otherwise, it will be accurately labelled as a climate-change miscreant, just as it was in the years after it ratified Kyoto, when it compiled the worst climate-change record of any signatory.

Canada’s problem is that the Harper government’s target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions cannot be achieved. It is arithmetically impossible for Canada to reduce its emissions by 20 per cent by 2020, as the government proposes, while Alberta’s emissions are set to rise by 20 per cent. Nor will it be possible to achieve a 50-per-cent reduction target by 2050, as Mr. Harper pretends, if Alberta remains wedded to a policy calling for a mere 14-per-cent reduction by then.

The Harper government knows this. So do other countries’ negotiators. They can see through the veneer of Canada’s position. But the government is unwilling to publicly state this self-evident proposition in case it irritates people in Alberta, its political base.

Mr. Harper can claim that the G8 summit inched toward a stronger common commitment to attack global warming. But if pressed by knowledgeable people, he could not plausibly claim that Canada is inching toward a common federal-provincial position to allow this country to meet Mr. Harper’s own target.”

We’ve seen this before from Harper. For example, when he pushed through the extension of Canada’s military mission to Afghanistan until 2011, he did absolutely nothing to make it remotely possible for us to leave by that deadline. That would have required negotiating with NATO and Washington – exchanging the extension for a binding commitment from Brussels and Washington to come up with a replacement force to take our place when the mandate expires.

Harper assures Canadians that 2011 is it while he knows that the very measures needed to allow us to leave will not be taken, certainly not by him and, therefore, not by NATO or the US either.

So there’s no reason to be surprised that Harper would crow about the G8 agreement as a “breakthrough” in the fight against global warming. It’s a crock and he knows it.

The Canadian public isn’t put off by skyrocketing gas prices, they still want urgent action to combat climate change from their government.

A Canadian Press/Harris Decima poll found Canadians, by a 2-1 margin, want strong action on the environment as a way to find greener, alternative sources of energy.

Gee, given the level of popular support, what could be holding our Furious Leader back? Oh, silly me, I forgot – it’s his boss in Washington and their mutual pals better known as Big Oil.

But wait, didn’t these guys just agree to a 50% cut in emissions by 2050 at the G8 summit? Of course they did but, then again, they would have as easily promised everyone a tasty hunk of green cheese from the moon by 2050 if only they’d been asked.

The Indian government has unveiled a series of climate change initiatives. The eight point programme focuses on solar energy, enhanced energy efficiency, sustainable habitats, water conservation, sustaining the Himalayan ecosystem, developing a ‘green’ India, sustainable agriculture and building a strategic knowledge platform on climate change.

Yada, yada, yada – good luck with that. But what about greenhouse gas emissions? Well, there’s the rub.

India won’t commit to GHG caps except to assure us that per capita emissions in India won’t exceed those of the developed world.

Relax. For India and China to get to North American carbon footprint levels we’d need about three times the maximum sustainable energy our environmentally besieged planet can produce. Since that is a geological impossibility, we can see that assurance for what it is – telling the developed world to take their racist carbon policies and shove them.

The US government’s top climate scientists have just released the first comprehensive analysis of projected weather and climate change effects on North America. As expected, the US Climate Change Science Program is predicting an increase in the number, severity and duration of extreme weather events including heat waves, floods, droughts and hurricanes. Welcome to the new reality, the one we’re seeing in mid-west floods, southern droughts and California wildfires.

From ENN:

“Among the major findings reported in this assessment are that droughts, heavy downpours, excessive heat, and intense hurricanes are likely to become more commonplace as humans continue to increase the atmospheric concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

The report is based on scientific evidence that a warming world will be accompanied by changes in the intensity, duration, frequency, and geographic extent of weather and climate extremes.

Global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced increases in heat-trapping gases, according to the report. Many types of extreme weather and climate event changes have been observed during this time period and continued changes are projected for this century. Specific future projections include:

Abnormally hot days and nights, along with heat waves, are very likely to become more common. Cold nights are very likely to become less common.

Sea ice extent is expected to continue to decrease and may even disappear in the Arctic Ocean in summer in coming decades.

Precipitation, on average, is likely to be less frequent but more intense.

Droughts are likely to become more frequent and severe in some regions.

Hurricanes will likely have increased precipitation and wind.

The strongest cold-season storms in the Atlantic and Pacific are likely to produce stronger winds and higher extreme wave heights.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, an agency of the U.S. Commerce Department, is dedicated to enhancing economic security and national safety through the prediction and research of weather and climate-related events and information service delivery for transportation, and by providing environmental stewardship of our nation’s coastal and marine resources.”

The complete text of the reports, including proposals for adaptation and remediation, can be found here: http://www.climatescence.gov/.

If Dion needs ammunition to bolster his Tax Shift/climate change initiative, there’s plenty of it in these reports.

Up til now we’ve been content to view science as something for the geeks – essential, sure, but that’s why we have geeks, right?

Whether we like it or not, our dismissive attitude may not work for us much longer. We’re on the dawn of an age where holding well-informed scientific views is going to be essential to how we live and even how we vote.

Our parents’ world, our grandparents’ world is now much in the past. That world is gone, utterly gone, and it isn’t coming back for centuries. When I was born the world’s population had just set an all-time record of 2-billion people. Little more than half a century later and we’ve bumped that all-time record to 6.5-billion people which we expect to hit 9-billion before the next half-century is out. Just churn that over for a minute and digest it.

For all the thousands of years of our civilization, it wasn’t until about 1814 that we first broke the billion-person mark. 140-years or so later than that, we’d doubled that record. Barely another 60-years yet, we’d gotten 6.5 times more populous than we were when the record was set in 1814. In another 50-years we’re looking to be bigger by up to half again. This is something we really need to come to grips with in order to create the informed citizenry we’re going to require in just a decade from now.

Here’s something to chew on. There is a host of very important, social change decisions that will have to be taken, on a regular basis, fairly soon. What you need to bear in mind is that someone is going to be taking those decisions, one way or the other. If we don’t recover our ability to make suitably important decisions in these critical times, we run the very real risk of that core power of our democracy becoming forfeit to others who believe they will make the decisions for us. Also bear in mind that those who usurp this power can’t necessarily be trusted to make the best decisions in our interest.

Without wanting to sound like a paranoid conspiracy theorist, there is a tendency today and has been for about two decades of dumbing down the public. People seem to be transforming into cogs, losing their intellectual and political robustness. This sort of thing needs to be reversed if we’re not to let our political freedom slip through our fingers. A New York Times article by Columbia physics prof Brian Greene suggests the key may be in science:

A COUPLE of years ago I received a letter from an American soldier in Iraq. The letter began by saying that, as we’ve all become painfully aware, serving on the front lines is physically exhausting and emotionally debilitating. But the reason for his writing was to tell me that in that hostile and lonely environment, a book I’d written had become a kind of lifeline. As the book is about science — one that traces physicists’ search for nature’s deepest laws — the soldier’s letter might strike you as, well, odd.

But it’s not. Rather, it speaks to the powerful role science can play in giving life context and meaning. At the same time, the soldier’s letter emphasized something I’ve increasingly come to believe: our educational system fails to teach science in a way that allows students to integrate it into their lives.

Allow me a moment to explain.

When we consider the ubiquity of cellphones, iPods, personal computers and the Internet, it’s easy to see how science (and the technology to which it leads) is woven into the fabric of our day-to-day activities. When we benefit from CT scanners, M.R.I. devices, pacemakers and arterial stents, we can immediately appreciate how science affects the quality of our lives. When we assess the state of the world, and identify looming challenges like climate change, global pandemics, security threats and diminishing resources, we don’t hesitate in turning to science to gauge the problems and find solutions.

But here’s the thing. The reason science really matters runs deeper still. Science is a way of life. Science is a perspective. Science is the process that takes us from confusion to understanding in a manner that’s precise, predictive and reliable — a transformation, for those lucky enough to experience it, that is empowering and emotional. To be able to think through and grasp explanations — for everything from why the sky is blue to how life formed on earth — not because they are declared dogma but rather because they reveal patterns confirmed by experiment and observation, is one of the most precious of human experiences.

It’s striking that science is still widely viewed as merely a subject one studies in the classroom or an isolated body of largely esoteric knowledge that sometimes shows up in the “real” world in the form of technological or medical advances. In reality, science is a language of hope and inspiration, providing discoveries that fire the imagination and instill a sense of connection to our lives and our world.

Like a life without music, art or literature, a life without science is bereft of something that gives experience a rich and otherwise inaccessible dimension.”

This isn’t to say that we all need to become scientists, not at all. Fortunately our society’s ability to quickly disseminate their discoveries in a form we can comprehend them via the internet and other media is advancing rapidly.

We’ve certainly reached a critical mass of the production, dissemination and access to credible, lay science. RJ Reynolds and Big Oil aren’t gone yet, nor are their shills, but the world is changing, right in front of our eyes, day in and day out, and the list of unresolved challenges gets a bit longer every year.

They always knew their scam couldn’t last forever but that wasn’t what they’ve been after. They were there to buy time they otherwise wouldn’t have had, an extension, a little more time for another round of their rapacious and highly profitable ways.

There are big changes looming and they’ll bring big opportunities as well as big challenges. It would be naive to expect that we’ll all rally to these challenges to seek the greater good. There will certainly be individuals and industries that move to exploit it, to set up their interests against ours. The less we understand what’s happening the greater their prospects of prevailing against us.

That’s why it’s becoming important, vital even, that we re-open our minds to science.

Here’s some tough news for global warming deniers – the climate we once knew is gone and it’s not coming back, at least not for many centuries to come.

The US government’s own Climate Change Science Program has issued its report on what lies in store for agriculture, water resources and biodiversity over the next five decades and it’s clear that big changes are in store.

The rise in concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from human activities is influencing climate patterns and vegetation across the United States and will significantly disrupt water supplies, agriculture, forestry and ecosystems for decades, a new U.S. government report says. From the International Herald Tribune:
“The changes are unfolding in ways that are likely to produce an uneven national map of harms and benefits, according to the report, released Tuesday and posted online at climatescience.gov.
According to the report, Western states will face substantial challenges because of growing demand for water and big projected drops in supplies.
From 2040 to 2060, anticipated water flows from rainfall in much of the U.S. West are likely to approach a 20 percent decrease from the average from 1901 to 1970, and are likely to be much lower in places like the fast-growing Southwest. In contrast, runoff in much of the Midwest and East is expected to increase that much or more.
Farmers, foresters and ranchers nationwide will face a complicated blend of changes, driven not only by shifting weather patterns but also by the spread of non-native plant and insect pests.”
From the CCSP summary:
Grain and oilseed crops will mature more rapidly, but increasing temperatures will increase the risk of crop failures, particularly if precipitation decreases or becomes more variable.

Higher temperatures will negatively affect livestock. Warmer winters will reduce mortality but this will be more than offset by greater mortality in hotter summers. Hotter temperatures will also result in reduced productivity of livestock and dairy animals.


Forests in the interior West, the Southwest, and Alaska are already being affected by climate change with increases in the size and frequency of forest fires, insect outbreaks and tree mortality. These changes are expected to continue.
Much of the United States has experienced higher precipitation and streamflow, with decreased drought severity and duration, over the 20th century. The West and Southwest, however, are notable exceptions, and increased drought conditions have occurred in these regions.

Weeds grow more rapidly under elevated atmospheric CO2. Under projections reported in the assessment, weeds migrate northward and are less sensitive to herbicide applications.
There is a trend toward reduced mountain snowpack and earlier spring snowmelt runoff in the Western United States.

Horticultural crops (such as tomato, onion, and fruit) are more sensitive to climate change than grains and oilseed crops.

Young forests on fertile soils will achieve higher productivity from elevated atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Nitrogen deposition and warmer temperatures will increase productivity in other types of forests where water is available.

Invasion by exotic grass species into arid lands will result from climate change, causing an increased fire frequency. Rivers and riparian systems in arid lands will be negatively impacted.
A continuation of the trend toward increased water use efficiency could help mitigate the impacts of climate change on water resources.

The growing season has increased by 10 to 14 days over the last 19 years across the temperate latitudes. Species’ distributions have also shifted.

The rapid rates of warming in the Arctic observed in recent decades, and projected for at least the next century, are dramatically reducing the snow and ice covers that provide denning and foraging habitat for polar bears.”

http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap4-3/default.php

These are changes that will occur regardless of any measures that may be taken in the near future to curb greenhouse gas emissions. The forecasts are based on what exists today. Can the forecasts be worsened by failure to dramatically cut GHG emissions? Absolutely. The future could be much, much worse unless we somehow find the social and political will to make the drastic changes necessary to break our carbon addiction.

What does the future hold? I just don’t see the big emitters of the world reaching any meaningful consensus in time to avoid the problems that are looming. We’re struggling just to reach agreement on greenhouse gases alone and haven’t even begun to come to grips with the other environmental, resource and population challenges that, taken collectively, could pose as great a threat to mankind as global warming itself.

One thing is clear. In terms of climate change, there’s no going back. In addition to wrestling with GHG emissions we also need to be taking action, now, on remediation and adaptation. Of course that too is hampered by the heel-draggers fighting the rearguard action on emissions controls. The last thing they want is an informed, public discussion of just what does lie in store for our countries in the next half century.

Here’s the world’s first tidal turbine power generator that just went into operation in Northern Ireland’s Strangford Slough. The designer, Marine Current Turbines, says, “they can be installed in the sea at places with high tidal current velocities, or in places with fast enough continuous ocean currents, to take out copious quantities of energy from these huge volumes of flowing water.”

The prototype, called “Seagen,” is said to be powerful enough to provide the electricity needs of 1,000 homes. The twin rotors that can range from 15-20m in diameter, can be reverse pitched to function on both ebb and flood tides. The power units are attached to a wing-like structure that can be raised above sea level for maintenance.

Unlike windmills or solar generators, tidal energy is predictable and completely reliable. Tides ebb and flood every day, twice a day, without fail. Seagen is able to operate between 18-20 hours per day.

Rainforest Clearing – Brazil

Kite Flying in Beijing

Coal Fueled Generator in Yorkshire

River Pollution in China

Drought in Australia

These pictures, reprinted from The Guardian, tell just part of the story of what’s happening to our world. Floods, droughts, crop failures, desertification, resource depletion, freshwater exhaustion, species extinction not to mention widescale pollution of the air, land and water.
Living in Canada we experience these global realities mainly through the occasional disturbing photograph. For most people in the world this is the reality of their own back yards, of their streets and cities and rivers.
Today’s Globe & Mail has a moving story on the effects on the world’s poor people of the doubling of grain prices over this past year. The “humanitarian” news services are running these stories every day, without exception. Around the world, more and more people can no longer afford the basic staples they see on their store shelves. That number is growing rapidly. Out of sight, out of mind? Maybe for now but not for long.
Desperate people are often angry people, especially if they can see the cause of their misery and suffering as someone else. Maybe they see you running around in your SUV as responsible for their children’s hunger. A lot of these people do have some access to television even if they never could dream of having one themselves. At some point they’re bound to catch a look at Western programming showing how we lead our lives, our seemingly inexhaustible abundance.
These folks already know that we rich Westerners are responsible for their climate change problems, the full effects of which they’re experiencing already. Do you really think this isn’t going to create a lot of hotheads seeking to avenge their people’s suffering? If you don’t believe that the Pentagon and the British Ministry of Defence who’ve studied this growing problem certainly do.
Forget Islamist terrorism, that’s for kids.

The Conference Board of Canada is recommending the prompt introduction of hefty carbon taxes on businesses and individuals alike in order to curb greenhouse gas emissions in Canada. From the Toronto Star:
“The think-tank joined a growing list of research and business groups calling for taxes or other financial policies to reduce emissions from coal, oil, gas and other fossil fuels.
All companies and individuals should pay a tax that stings enough to make them change their behaviour and adopt less-polluting technologies, the report says.
The recommendation includes measures far tougher than what the report calls the federal government’s “modest” climate change plan. It also suggests a starting price of about $25 a tonne for emissions – far higher than Ottawa has proposed in its limited scheme – and says the price should keep rising.

For Canada’s largest greenhouse gas emitters – mainly in the oil and gas industry, electricity generation and major energy users such as steel, aluminum, chemicals, mining, cement and forest products– the board proposes the tax be accompanied by an emissions cap-and-trade system.
“Canadians pay nothing to spew greenhouse gases, even though the pollution will cause floods, droughts, storm damage, physical and mental health problems and many other “potentially irreversible disruptions,” the report says. “Since there is no price on these negative consequences, consumers and producers have no need to factor the cost of emissions into their decision-making.”
The challenge, the board says, “is to derive a price … which consumers and producers would then take into account.”

Special Ed has announced he’ll jump on the short bus and split for Edmonton this afternoon while the gettin’s good.

The Alberta premier has decided to head for the foothills before his fellow premiers begin their summit on climate change tomorrow. Stelmach, whose otherwise modest little province churns out a third of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions, has apparently been stampeded out of Vancouver by the representatives of every other province in the country.

Instead of explaining and defending his feeble greenhouse gas plan, Ed seems to have figured that what’s good enough for Dick Cheney is good enough for him and for Alberta and for Canada.

Next Page »

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started