Ted Talks - Naomi Klein: Addicted to risk

Video - This is What Global Warming looks like.

"We have to believe what we are witnessing with our own eyes -- floods, fires, melting ice and feverish heat. From smoke-choked Moscow to water-soaked Pakistan, to soaring temperatures in the US and a deteriorating landscape in the High Arctic, our planet seems to be having a breakdown. It's not just a portent of things to come but real signs of very troubling climate change already under way.

Please join with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and take action to protect our planet -- it's the only one we have.

Take action here: http://bit.ly/bArcGx."

Video - Global Warming: Is it True?

"Is global warming true? Look at the evidence and decide for yourself."

Video - Fire and Ice: Permafrost Melt Spews Combustible Methane

"Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2009/08/18/A_REALLY_In...

Environmentalist Dan Miller discusses a possible environmental threat from methane gas contained within melting permafrost. Miller claims the melting permafrost contains twice as much CO2 as Earth's entire atmosphere.

-----

Dan Miller's presentation focuses on why the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) reports are actually best case scenarios. For example, IPCC climate models do not include the effect of melting permafrost releasing greenhouse gases, even though the permafrost is melting now and it holds more greenhouse gases than all that mankind has ever released.

Another example is that IPCC predictions of sea level rise only take into account thermal expansion of the oceans and melting of glaciers; the largest factor, disintegration of glaciers, was not included because it is hard to model. The result is that sea level rise will likely be substantially higher this century than the IPCC predicts.

Miller discusses several other potential catastrophes that are not included in IPCC predictions and also discusses tipping points that could put climate change solutions out of our reach in years or decades, the psychology of climate change, and why it is difficult for people to respond to the threat posed by a warming earth.

His talk concludes with a discussion of ways to address climate change and the risks and opportunities that companies face due to the climate crisis. - Berkeley Cybersalon

Dan Miller is Managing Director of the Roda Group. He is the former president of Ask Jeeves, Inc., a Roda Group affiliate company. He is currently working with a number of Roda Group affiliated companies to assist them with their business development efforts. Mr. Miller sits on the Board of several Roda Group companies.

At the end of 1994, Mr. Miller retired from his position as Executive Vice President of TCSI Corporation (Nasdaq: TCSI), a company he co-founded with his Roda Group partner, Roger Strauch. Mr. Miller retired from the Board of Directors of TCSI in June of 1997. TCSI is a leading provider of integrated software products and services for the global telecommunications industry.

Prior to TCSI, Mr. Miller was a systems engineer at Hughes Aircraft's Space and Communications Group where he was responsible for designing communications payloads for commercial communications satellites."

Listen to Climate Wars by Gwynne Dyer

A bit dated but still informative look at the state of affairs, including some very interesting projections. A bit less entertaining than the Age of Stupid but worth listening to nonetheless, a good reality check.
A bit scary.


"Global warming is moving much more quickly than scientists thought it would. Even if the biggest current and prospective emitters - the United States, China and India - were to slam on the brakes today, the earth would continue to heat up for decades. At best, we may be able to slow things down and deal with the consequences, without social and political breakdown. Gwynne Dyer examines several radical short- and medium-term measures now being considered - all of them controversial."

Listen to Climate Wars at CBC Radio One or read the book. Here is a video interview from Democracy Now, my single daily news source, as well.

"Democracy NOW! - DN! As a heat wave from Boston to Baghdad to Beijing sets record-breaking temperatures in cities across the world, a new analysis says the world is headed for an average temperature rise that far exceeds pledges at the Copenhagen climate conference last year. We speak with geopolitical analyst and columnist Gwynne Dyer about his new book, "Climate Wars: The Fight for Survival as the World Overheats." Published with written permission from democracynow.org. http://www.democracynow.org Provided to you under Democracy NOW! creative commons license. Credits for this video belongs to democracynow.org, an independent non-profit user funded news media, recognized and broadcast world wide," 


Here is a fascinating debate with Mr. Dyer and Vandana Shiva on Geo Engineering over at Democracy Now!

The Judeo Christian bedrock of environmentalism

If you "Love your neighbor as yourself" how is it that you can destroy the foundation of his/her existence, the planetary ecosystem.
"What you do to the least of us, you do to me", climate change is already killing upwards of 300,000 people a year, mostly poor, "the least of us".

Climate Denial Crock of the Week

"One of the enduring classics of denialism, "Global warming stopped in 1998", is of course,
nonsense. Here's why."

High temperatures beat lows - Gerald Meehl (NCAR) on Current & Future Climate

"Twice as many record-breaking high temperatures have been set compared to record lows across the U.S. in recent decades (see http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/200... ). For future climate, computer models show the ratio climbing to 30:1 by 2150 and 50:1 by 2199.

Day-to-day variability means we still get record cold days, but the record highs are far exceeding the lows.

Gerald "Jerry" Meehl is an NCAR senior scientist. His research includes connecting the solar cycle to subtle changes in weather and climate on Earth; examining the consequences of global warming, including heat waves, droughts, storms, and other weather extremes; regional climate change; and El Niño and other influences of the tropics on global climate. "

The scientists predicted more extreme weather and here it is!

As predicted, the longest coldest weather in over 30 years with temperatures lower than ever recorded in the UK. Could this be due to Global Warming? Seems likely to me.

Over at Climate Progress they've dealt with the foolish who in their ignorance that this suggests that some sort of confirmation of global Cooling! Here's a little excerpt;

"Robert Henson, author of The Rough Guide to Climate Change also has a good piece in the UK’s Guardian, “Snow, ice and the bigger picture“: The cold snap tells us little about climate change, but if you want something to blame it on, try the Arctic oscillation,” which notes:

What’s different now is that climate change is shifting the odds towards record-hot summers and away from record-cold winters. The latter aren’t impossible; they’re just harder to get, like scoring a straight flush on one trip to Vegas and a royal flush the next.

It’s also critical to remember the “global” in global warming. Even if every inch of land in the northern hemisphere were unusually cold, that would only represent 20% of Earth’s surface. There’s plenty of warmth elsewhere around the world. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration data through November hints that 2009 may end up ranked as the southern hemisphere’s warmest year on record. For the planet as a whole, last year falls solidly among the 10 warmest years of the past 100. And despite all the talk about Earth having cooled since the late 1990s, this past decade trumps the 1990s as the warmest on record."

Global Warming from A to Z

It is so easy here in the affluent west to think of global warming and climate change as something to fear or deal with in the future. For billions of people in the developing world it is impacting their lives right now. These are the people who have contributed least to the problem and are being impacted the most, essentially because of us, the affluent west. This is environmental imperialism. Our desire for extreme and wasteful convenience is depriving them of the basics necessary to live the most simple and non polluting of lifestyles; water, farmland, energy. We have claimed them directly or indirectly as our own.

The good folks over at Climate Progress put together this list of impacts from A to Z.

A

East Antarctica, long stable, is now losing ice.

B

Bolivia needs $1 billion over the next seven years to build reservoirs, as the glaciers that hold the nation’s water supply are shrinking rapidly.

C

Leatherback sea turtles that spawn on the beaches of Costa Rica are threatened with extinction by warmer temperatures and rising seas.

D

Denmark joined United States, Norway, Canada, and Russia in identifying climate change as “the most important long-term threat” to future existence of polar bears.

E

The rapidly warming highlands of Ethiopia are becoming too hot for its elite athletes, such as local-born Haile Gebrselassie, to train there.

F

Noting the unprecedented floods this year in Fiji, Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama recently warned that rising sea levels affect not just the islands’ economies, but put into doubt the very existence of his nation.

G

Greece suffered through another storm of extreme wildfires this summer as heat waves and drier conditions increase.

H

Global warming-fueled hurricanes, intense poverty, and widespread deforestation combine to form a gathering storm of disasters for Haiti.

I

The deforested peatlands of Indonesia are drying, disintegrating, and burning.

J

The increasingly early arrival of cherry blossoms in Japan reflects rising global temperatures.

K

The more frequent and severe droughts that are killing off the elephants will likely trigger more conflicts in the arid lands of northeast Kenya.

L

The incidence of wildfires in the cedar forests of Lebanon has increased tremendously over recent years.

M

“If things go business-as-usual, we will not live, we will die,” Maldives President Mohammad Nasheed told the UN General Assembly. “Our country will not exist.”

N

The ministers of Nepal have held the world’s highest cabinet meeting on Mount Everest, as rapidly rising temperatures have reduced snowfall over the mountains and caused glaciers to melt.

O

More than 50 per cent of the population of Oman lives on coastlines vulnerable to rising seas, but its supplies of peridotite may help sequester carbon dioxide emissions.

P

The massive floods that killed hundreds in the Philippines this summer are becoming the norm.

Q

Petroleum-soaked Qatar emits 60 tons of carbon dioxide per person, the most of any nation on earth.

R

Increased floods and malaria outbreaks from global warming, deforestation, and unsanitary conditions have hit Rwanda hard in the past decade.

S

The inhabitants of the Alpine villages of Fieschertal and Fiesch in Switzerland have asked for the Pope to bless their prayers for the restoration of their nation’s glaciers, which shrank by 12 percent over the past decade.

T

Newly discovered, exotic species like the fanged frog of Thailand are especially vulnerable as climate change will further shrink their already restricted habitats.

U

Agriculture in the United States has been ravaged this year by catastrophic droughts in Texas and California, heat waves in Louisiana and Nebraska, storms across the High Plains and the Midwest, floods in North Dakota and Minnesota, and torrential rains in Illinois and Georgia.

V

Speaking from Vatican City on the eve of the Copenhagen conference, Pope Benedict XVI counseled “all people of good will to respect the laws laid down by God in nature and to rediscover the moral dimension of human life.”

W

Warming oceans and sea level rise threaten the coral reefs of the remote Polynesian islands of Wallis and Futuna.

X

The nomadic descendents of Kublai Khan in Inner Mongolia, where Xanadu once stood, are being driven from the grasslands as the Chinese government attempts to fight the region’s desertification.

Y

Sanaa, the capital of Yemen, may be the first capital city in the world to run out of water, as drought and overuse diminish its supply.

Z

On the border of Zambia and Zimbabwe, the flow of Victoria Falls is far below average, as drought and high temperatures reduce the Zambezi.

Chomp!

I found this over at Climate Progress;

Sea level rise and you

As the coast of North Carolina disappears beneath the waves the population of the area will need to relocate. Whether it be next year due to storm surge on top of sea level rise or 20 years down the line due to sea level rise itself there will be an ever increasing inevitable exodus from low lying coastal areas. My wife and I have purchased rental properties far inland just shy of the foothills of the Appalachians. We are counting on inland property values going up as the population shifts our direction, not to mention that all those folks will need somewhere to live. Do you think we are premature in this calculation? Consider this.

"... ocean levels are set to rise dramatically. According to UCLA scientists, the last time carbon dioxide levels were as high as they are today was 15 million years ago. At that time, the sea level was between 20 and 36 metres higher (75 to 120 feet), there was no permanent ice cap in the arctic, and very little ice in Antarctica or Greenland. That is where we are headed.", as reported over at Culture Change by Keith Farnish and Dmitry Orlov.

So the question is, how soon are we going to see significant sea level rise? Again from the Culture change article;

"There are two schools of thought, but they basically come down to when the temperature of Greenland increases by either 4°C or 8°C above the mean global average of the last 100 years.

Four degrees... haven’t we seen that first figure before? In fact, a global rise of 4 degrees corresponds to a considerably larger rise of Arctic temperatures: conventionally this is between 5 and 6 degrees, but if you look at the 2009 Hadley Centre forecasts, a global rise of 4 degrees actually corresponds to an 8 degree rise across much of Greenland. Pick any number you like, but Greenland is melting."

There is also the considerable mass of the Antarctic ice sheet to consider. As temperature increases are largest at the poles we can't leave Antarctica out of the equation.

"The WAIS (West Antarctic Ice Sheet) is largely below sea level, having over several million years pushed down and scoured out the bedrock beneath it, but because of its huge area, the part of it that is above water still manages to comprise around 10% of the total Antarctic ice volume. If this were to melt then the oceans would rise by another 5 metres, in addition to the thermal expansion of 1.4 metres, plus whatever has been sloughed off the Greenland ice sheet, giving us 13.6 metres, or close to 45 feet."

We've been hearing for years about the breakup of huge sea ice shelves in Antarctica and while these don't raise sea levels they have been serving as a plug on land ice movement to the sea. This means the land ice is accelerating towards it's watery doom, presaging the doom of our coastal cities.

But combining all the science which deals with one or another sea level raising effect is difficult and there is no consensus on an accurate forecast at this time. One researcher says .82 meters another 1.3 meters by 2100. But remember that scientists are conservative folk and their forecast reflect this, even more so when governments get their hands on them, as in the case of the IPCC. The eventual outcome is what's important.

"We know where we are going to end up eventually: at least 20 metres (65 feet) higher. The one thing we still do not know is how long it will take for us to get there.

We could keep waiting for the scientific community to settle on a consensus forecast, but this may take so long that it will have to be delivered through a snorkel. However, we can already observe that the doubling period of scientific climate forecasts is uncomfortably short, and, to provide for a margin of safety, we should at least double the latest estimates. If the latest forecast is for 2 metres this century, let us assume that we will see at least 4, and plan accordingly.

But do the exact forecasts even matter? We already know enough to say that there is a high probability that ocean levels will rise, significantly, within the lifetimes of most of the people alive today, disrupting the patterns of daily life for much of the world's population, which tends to be clustered along the coastlines and the navigable waterways. We also know that ocean levels will continue to rise far into the future, until they are 20 to 36 metres higher than they are today. We know that continuous coastal erosion and salt water inundation, coastal flooding and displacement of coastal populations, which number in the billions, toward higher ground, will be normal and expected. We also know that there is a high chance these changes will occur based on present carbon dioxide levels, regardless of what is being currently proposed by the governments of the world to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."

I personally believe that if I'm given a normal lifespan of 70 years or more I will see at least a meter of sea level rise. I'm hanging on to my investments in property ... far inland. What's your plan?

A victory in the courts, but will it stand?

While the big polluters, aka dirty coal, are having success in watering down the climate bill to near irrelevance with their bought and paid for senators, some progress has shown up in the courtroom in New York. As reported over at Climate Progress;

"A federal appeals court ruled Monday that states trying to combat global warming can sue six electric utilities to force them to cut the greenhouse gases emitted by their power plants in 20 states.

You can read the full ruling here. David Hawkins, director of the National Resources Defense Council’s climate programs, told Greenwire (subs. req’d) tonight,

Hawkins added, “The import of this ruling is that failure of Congress or EPA to act on GHG will not immunize emitters from legal action to compel reductions in emissions.”

Take that, delayers!

Again, a federal climate bill would be the best strategy for the country — and the world. But if Congress fails to act — and if fiddlers like Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska block EPA action, then the only place left for recourse will be the courts."

Union of Concerned Scientists online book

For years the Union of Concerned Scientists has stood firm against psuedo science and corporate attempts to use it to undermine human and planetary health in the pursuit of profit. They have released an online book called Thoreau's Legacy: American Stories about Global Warming. It's wonderful content and I urge you to read it and support UCS. Here is an excerpt from the foreword by Barbara Kingsolver;

" We find ourselves in a chapter of history I would entitle "Isolation and Efficiency, and How They Came Around to Bite Us in the Backside." We're ravaged by disagreements, bizarrely globalized, with the extravagant excesses of one culture washing up as famine or flood on the shores of another. Even the architecture of our planet—climate, oceans, migratory paths, things we believed were independent of human affairs—is collapsing under the weight of our efficient productivity. Twenty years ago, climate scientists first told Congress that carbon emissions were building toward a disastrous instability. Congress said, We need to think about that. Ten years later, the world's nations wrote the Kyoto Protocol, a set of legally binding controls on our carbon emissions. The United States said, We still need to think about it. Now we watch as glaciers disappear, the lights of biodiversity go out, the oceans reverse their ancient order. A few degrees look so small on the thermometer. We are so good at measuring things and declaring them under control. How could our weather turn murderous, pummel our coasts, push new diseases like dengue fever onto our doorstep? It's an emergency on a scale we've never known, and we've responded by following the rules we know: efficiency, isolation. We can't slow productivity and consumption—that's unthinkable. Can't we just go home and put a really big lock on the door?
Not this time. Our paradigm has met its match. Now we can either shift away from a carbon-based economy or find another place to live. Imagine it: we raised our children on a lie. We gave them this world and promised they could keep it running on a fossil substance—dinosaur slime—and it's running out. The geologists disagree only on how much is left, and the climate scientists now say they're sorry, but that's not even the point: we won't have time to use it all. To stabilize the floods and firestorms, we'll have to reduce our carbon emissions by 80 percent within a few decades.... The arc of history is longer than human vision. It bends. We abolished slavery, we granted universal suffrage. We have done hard things before. Each time it took a terrible fight between people who could not imagine changing the rules and those who said, "We already did. We have made the world new." The hardest part will be to convince ourselves of the possibilities and hang on. If we run out of hope at the end of the day, we'll rise in the morning and put it on again with our shoes. Hope is the only reason we won't burn what's left of the ship and go down with it. If somebody says, "Your money or your life," you can say, "Life." And mean it."

What does the future climate of the US look like?

Here's some cheery news to start your day. I got this from the Environmental Defense Fund and find it quite interesting. We really do need to insure that the bill before congress, which is already too weak, is not further weakened by corporate lobbyist controlled legislators. There is a link at the bottom you can follow to take action.

"If you aren't sure why global warming is our top priority, please read this email.

Moments ago, the White House released a detailed scientific report forecasting devastating impacts of global warming in the United States if we don't take dramatic steps now to cut our global warming emissions.

The report, Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States, breaks down climate impacts region-by-region

The Northeast:

• Hartford and Philadelphia could average 30 days of 100+ temperatures per year while Boston could see more than 20 100-degree days per year;
• Native maple, beech, birch, spruce and fir forests could be almost entirely lost;
• The climate of New Hampshire could resemble the climate of North Carolina.

The Southeast:

• Much of Florida and southeast Texas could see more than 180 days in the 90s per year while other southeastern states could see more than 100 90-degree days per year;
• Spring and summer drought has already increased by 12 percent and 14 respectively over the last 30 years. The frequency, intensity and duration of droughts in the region are likely to increase;
• Sea level rise and stronger storm surges could inundate and ultimately flood coastal communities along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts.

The Midwest:

• The climate of Michigan could resemble the climate of Oklahoma and the climate of Illinois could resemble the climate of Texas;
• Deadly heat waves like the one that killed more than 700 people in Chicago in 1995, will become more frequent. Under higher emission scenarios, Chicago could experience up to three such heat waves every year;
• Higher emissions scenarios would cause a water level drop of 1-2 feet in the Great Lakes, threatening shipping, infrastructure, beaches and ecosystems.

The Great Plains:

• Hotter, drier summers will threaten the already overused High Plains aquifer, which irrigates 13 million acres and provides water to 80% of the people in the region;
• Increased temperatures and higher carbon dioxide levels will threaten farming activities with more drought, pest infestations, and faster weed growth;
• Under higher emission scenarios, North and South Dakota, which currently see only a handful of 100-degree days, could see 50 or more days of 100+ temperatures per year.

The Southwest:

• Under higher emission scenarios, the southern half of Arizona, southeastern California and Las Vegas could see more than 120 days with 100+ temperatures;
• Most of the region could see precipitation levels decline by more than 40%, pushing already water-strained areas over the edge;
• Southwestern forests will be decimated with less water, more wildfires and more invasive pests. Under higher emissions scenarios, California's mountain forests could decline by 60-90%.

The Northwest:

• Mountain snowpack runoff, critical water needs, could run 20-40 days earlier, threatening water resources in summer months;
• Declining summer streamflows and warmer water temperatures could push salmon and other cold water fish species, already stressed by human activities, over the brink;
• 100-degree days are rare today in the Northwest. Under higher emission scenarios, much of the region could see 30-40 days of 110+ temperatures per year.

Without action, this is the future that awaits our children. We can't let it happen.

The good news? The U.S. House could vote on a landmark energy and global warming bill as soon as next week. We're doing everything we can to pass this bill and keep the pressure on the Senate to move a bill of its own.

Here are three things you can do now to help:

1. Take action to urge passage of the bill in the House.
2. Forward this email to all your friends and family.
3. Share facts about your region on Facebook or Twitter. Please include a link to our action alert: http://support.edf.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=118

Thanks for all you do,
Environmental Defense Fund

P.S. In addition to the human toll, this report reinforces the dire threat American wildlife face in a warming world. Go to our Warming and Wildlife campaign to meet and see seven "ambassador" species that face a bleak future in a warmer world."

Expecting Grandchildren?

For those of you with children in the house you can probably expect to bounce a grandchild on your knee at some point in the next 20 years. That grandchild, if it survives the repeatedly forecast flu pandemic, or the red level threat from terrorists, or the dire effects of lack of credit, will likely live to see the next century. Now, ignoring the fabricated threats the media wants you to be afraid of, take a look at the threats predicted by cold hard science.

" Results of the studies are depicted online in MIT’s “Greenhouse Gamble” exercise that conveys the “range of probability of potential global warming” via roulette wheel graphics (shown above). The modeling output showed that under both a “no policy” scenario and one in which nations took action beginning in the next few years to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the odds have shifted in favor of larger temperature increases.

For the no policy scenario, the researchers concluded that there is now a nine percent chance (about one in 11 odds) that the global average surface temperature would increase by more than 7°C (12.6°F) by the end of this century, compared with only a less than one percent chance (one in 100 odds) that warming would be limited to below 3°C (5.4°F).

To repeat, on our current emissions path, we have a 9% chance of an incomprehensibly catastrophic warming of 7°C by century’s end, but less than a 1% chance of under 3°C warming."

Should we not act decisively RIGHT NOW we can kiss the greenland ice sheet goodbye, raising sea levels approximately 20 feet, and a good portion of the antarctic ice sheet, raising them perhaps another 50 or more, agriculture worldwide will collapse, water shortages will be severe. I'll leave it up to your imagination to project the social upheavals that will follow.

Please contact your representative in Washington and express your support for the Waxman Markey climate bill. It is a small but necessary first step. After you have done that, plan a diet that reduces your family intake of meat, plan a schedule that reduces your automobile use, plan a renovation that enables you to stop using air conditioning, build a solar hot water heater, get some solar PV panels. If we don't lead, who will follow? Do it for your grandkids.

Read more about the MIT research at Climate Progress.

Climate Change: Dire Consequences for California's Agriculture

The US is heavily dependent on food from California. As the article linked to below points out, that food supply is seriously threatened by climate change as the snowpack on the western mountains disappears. The question is, will this threat get translated into aggressive action to mitigate GHG emissions? Will every effort to make substantive progress get undermined by corporate lobbyists looking for sweetheart deals for their industries regardless of the consequences?

Fossil fuel use must be curtailed or we don't have a chance. Leave it in the ground.

Contact your representatives and express your concerns.In the meantime you can reduce your own consumption, of everything. I'd also suggest you get that garden planted and your compost heap started!

Climate Change: Dire Consequences for California's Agriculture over on Celsias

Conclusive proof of Global Warming

One of the most authoritative blogs on Climate Change is Joe Romm's "Climate Progress"
Check out his post on the latest evidence for Global Warming. It contains some excellent video footage.

Conclusive proof of Global Warming.

Yes We Must!

As scientists warn that we are fast running out of time to prevent runaway climate change (a global challenge that dwarfs this financial crisis both in size and importance, literally and singularly too big to fail), naysayers claim that the Obama administration is trying to do too much, talking heads and pundits on corporate media are saying we need to slow down on developing a smart grid, and the politicians that are owned by the lobbyists and corporate interests that have created the multipronged mess we are in do everything in their power to remain firmly stuck in the toxic coal waste mud oozing through the towns of Appalachia, President Obama is forging ahead with plans to rebuild the economy on the technologies of the future and put the world on a path towards sustainability. I may not agree with everything he is doing but I am willing to give him leeway to put a plan in place and will continue to try to influence the process through contact with my states' politicians and petitions to the Congress, Senate, and White House. In the meantime is incumbent upon us all to personally reduce wasteful consumerism, increase energy efficiency, invest in sustainability, fight dirty coal and reduce driving (the chief culprits in global warming), and further reduce our carbon footprint by eating local and organic. This isn't about Can Do it is about Must Do.

Here's excerpts from Obama's speech at the SCE Electric Vehicle Technical Center in California as reported on Climate Progress,

"... our greatest discoveries are born not in a flash of brilliance, but in the crucible of a deliberate effort over time. And often, they take something more than imagination and dedication alone — often they take an investment from government. That’s how we sent a man to the moon. That’s how we were able to launch a world wide web. And it’s how we’ll build the clean energy economy that’s the key to our competitiveness in the 21st century.

We’ll do this because we know that the nation that leads on energy will be the nation that leads the world in the 21st century. That’s why, around the world, nations are racing to lead in these industries of the future. Germany is leading the world in solar power. Spain generates almost 30 percent of its power by harnessing the wind, while we manage less than one percent. And Japan is producing the batteries that currently power American hybrid cars.

So the problem isn’t a lack of technology. You’re producing the technology right here. The problem is that, for decades, we have avoided doing what must be done as a nation to turn challenge into opportunity. As a consequence, we import more oil today than we did on 9/11. The 1908 Model T earned better gas mileage than a typical SUV sold in 2008. And even as our economy has been transformed by new forms of technology, our electric grid looks largely the same as it did half a century ago.

So we have a choice to make. We can remain one of the world’s leading importers of foreign oil, or we can make the investments that will allow us to become the world’s leading exporter of renewable energy. We can let climate change continue to go unchecked, or we can help stem it. We can let the jobs of tomorrow be created abroad, or we can create those jobs right here in America and lay the foundation for our lasting prosperity.

... In the next three years, we will double this nation’s supply of renewable energy. We have also made the largest investment in basic research funding in American history — an investment that will spur not only new discoveries in energy, but breakthroughs in science and technology."

The dangers of the blinkered US media

I've requested on several occasions recently that readers of this blog let me know if they had seen reporting of various environmental or climate change stories on the mainstream media. Of course, with recent news about Anna Nicole Smith to cover, the major purveyors of news in the US just didn't have time to cover threats to human civilization as we know it!

Joe Romm has written an interesting piece about it over on Climate Progress.
Here is an excerpt;

"Energy Daily (subs. req’d) notes of the U.S. media non-coverage of Copenhagen:

Ironically–given the Gallup finding that two in five Americans think the press is exaggerating climate change concerns–only a few of the major U.S. news outlets published accounts of the Copenhagen gathering, which received heavy coverage by news outlets in Europe and Asia.

Great point — though “ironically” isn’t the right word. There is nothing ironic about this. It is cause and effect. The right word is “tragically. ...

West Coast Climate Equity notes:

Last time mean global temperatures reached 2 to 3 degrees Celsius above present levels, in the mid-Pliocene (3 million years ago), an event associated with CO2 levels of about 400 parts per million, polar regions were heated by near-8 degrees C and sea levels have risen by 25+/-12 meters relative to the present. This represents near-total melting of Greenland and west Antarctica ice sheets (Robinson et al., 2008: “Pliocene role in assessing future climate impacts” (http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/ abstracts/ 2008/ Robinson_etal.html).

A rise of mean global temperatures above 4 or 5 degrees Celsius would shift the atmosphere to pre-glacial/interglacial conditions, which dominated the Earth from about 34 million years ago (end-Eocene) (Zachos et al., 2008) http://www.nature.com/ nature/ journal/ v451/ n7176/ full/ nature06588.html

That means ultimate sea level rise of 250 feet, with the best current projection being 5 feet by 2100 (see “Startling new sea level rise research: “Most likely” 0.8 to 2.0 meters by 2100“), rising thereafter 10 to 20 inches a decade (or more) for centuries. Good luck adapting to that, next 50 generations."