.JPG "Earthen Spirituality")
Living within a living, loving planet
Posts tagged global warming
Too many businesses are treating the Earth like a huge candy store
Jul 29th
Too many businesses are treating the Earth like a huge candy store
“We’re dealing with ‘a highly degraded ecosystem of forests that just get continuously logged over and over again.’”
Danna Smith of the Dogwood Alliance, a nonprofit organization.
“…trees cut down in the Southeast are usually replanted. But it can take a sapling decades to grow large enough to absorb and store as much carbon as the tree it replaced.”
Ten percent Sahara expansion
Jul 29th
Ten percent Sahara expansion
“The desert (Sahara) has expanded southward during summer by about ten percent, so it’s a fairly significant increase in the desert expanse over this 93-year period that we analyzed. Most people in the region depend on the food they grow on small family farms. So losing farmland could have grave consequences, especially as populations continue to grow.”
“Nigam is a professor at the University of Maryland. He says decreasing rainfall is likely a result of both natural cycles and human-caused global warming.”
So there we have the kernel of the problem. Decreasing small farmland and increasing population.
Notable mentions and omissions of climate change
Jul 29th
MEDIA ANALYSIS 26 July 2018 12:36
Media reaction: The 2018 summer heatwaves and climate change
Carbon Brief
https://www.carbonbrief.org/media-reaction-2018-summer-heatwaves-and-climate-change
Carbon Brief looks back at how the media has reported the extreme weather and how the coverage has – or has not – referenced climate change.
The summary below is split into five sections:
Roundup of the recent spate of extremes.
How the media has reported the UK’s heatwave.
How it has covered other extreme events across the northern hemisphere.
Notable mentions – and omissions – of climate change.
Summary of the comment and opinion articles.
More Lake Effect Snow
Jan 8th
More Lake Effect Snow
8 January, 2018
Weather is a more immediate effect of changes in the climate. You can’t have one without the other. On the other hand, it is foolish to choose a cold day and then say – “there, you see, the Earth is NOT getting warmer.” It is fair to note that extreme weather events are occurring more frequently. Two major changes have occurred over the last 2,000 years. One, the human footprint has expanded almost beyond belief and two, the CO2 content in the air has increased proportionately. Our species has never experienced this level of CO2. Not helpful is that our measuring instruments were designed to measure inanimate objects on an inanimate planet. No wonder we have so little understanding as to how the Earth “works.” Our living planet’s behaviour is unpredictable just like people’s behaviour is unpredictable. We don’t destroy the medical profession because they cannot always accurately predict whether our prescription will “work” or not. Finally, we must take into account that millions of dollars, pounds etc. have been awarded to “scientists?” to falsify statistics and create “fake” news. Is it any wonder that there are so few tears shed over the destruction of Nature?
JANUARY 04, 2018 | 11:40 AM
A ‘PERFECT STORM’: EXTREME WINTER WEATHER, BITTER COLD, AND CLIMATE CHANGE
World-renowned climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann explains why the bitter cold and snowy conditions gripping the US are “an example of precisely the sort of extreme winter weather we expect because of climate change.”
NY Times hired a hippie puncher to give climate obstructionists cover
May 1st
NY Times hired a hippie puncher to give climate obstructionists cover
Posted on 29 April 2017 by dana1981
https://www.skepticalscience.com/nyt-hired-hippie-puncher.html
I like the analogy below. I also like my analogy in regards to uncertainty. When we go our GP or specialist they are often not certain of the cause of our ailment and thus whether the medicine they prescribe will cure it. They often say, something like, take this and come back in X days if you are not better. We all understand that the body is an incredibly complex organism and most of us accept our physician’s efforts to help us. Well, the Earth systems are complex also and our scientists are limited in their predictive efforts mainly, in my not so humble opinion, because their instruments have been designed to register the outcomes of a machine-like object. Unfortunately, recent scientific research is revealing that Earth “behaves” as if it was a living organism. Earth is a “self-regulating” organism and thus inherently unpredictable. We are caught in the grips of vast greediness supported by our cultural beliefs, economic global order whilst being buried by our mechanistic, capitalistic, materialistic worldview.
“Stephens needs a lesson in risk management
Smoking provides an apt analogy. Each time we smoke, we increase the odds of developing cancer a little bit more. The future outcome is uncertain – we don’t know exactly if or when the disaster of cancer will hit – but we know we’re making it more likely every time we smoke, and the smart move is to mitigate that risk by cutting down on the cigarettes as quickly as possible. With climate change, each time we add more carbon pollution to the atmosphere, we increase the odds of a climate catastrophe a little bit more. The smart move is to mitigate that risk by cutting down on our burning of fossil fuels as quickly as possible.
Stephens’ piece is akin to criticizing doctors and anti-smoking groups for being too mean to the tobacco industry, and for not focusing on the uncertainty about exactly when the chain-smoking patient will develop cancer.”
Scientists understood the climate 150 years ago better than the EPA head today
Apr 1st
Scientists understood the climate 150 years ago better than the EPA head today
Posted on 31 March 2017 by John Abraham
https://www.skepticalscience.com/scientists-understood-climate-150-yr-ago-better-than-pruitt.html
Recently he (Scott Pruitt) claimed on CNBC that carbon dioxide is not a primary contributor to global warming:
I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do, and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact. So, no, I would not agree that’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see. But we don’t know that yet. We need to continue the debate and continue the review and the analysis.
“There are two undeniable ironies in this statement. First, taken at face value it would suggest that we actually need to do more analysis – but the current administration is proposing draconian cuts in our climate science research budget. They are doing just the opposite of what he recommends.
The second irony is that scientists have known about the importance of carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas for well over 100 years. There is no debate among any reputable scientists that carbon dioxide is the most important human emitted greenhouse gas. Furthermore, humans have increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by 43%. These are facts.”
“The final stop on our way-back trip brings us to 1896 and Swedish researcher Svante Arrhenius. He became the first person (that I know of) to make predictions about how much the Earth temperature would change as we add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. The title of his work, “On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground” says it all.
Using measurements of the energy incoming from the moon, Arrhenius showed that changes to trace gases in the atmosphere can dramatically affect the temperature of the planet. He also discussed how gases are able to absorb specific wavelengths of light. Using experimental data from other preceding studies, he predicted global temperatures would rise approximately 5–6C in response to a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide.”
30 years ago scientists warned Congress on global warming.
Jun 12th
30 years ago scientists warned Congress on global warming. What they said sounds eerily familiar Chris Mooney June 11, 2016
“Thirty years ago we had a Republican senator who was leading the charge on addressing what he said then was a real and serious threat of climate change from the emission of gases from fossil fuel burning,” says Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), recalling the 1986 hearings. “You can read through all the things that Senator Chafee said back then, and it has all been proven true. It’s very disappointing that thirty years later, there is no such voice anywhere in the Republican Senate, and if you look for a micron of daylight between what the fossil fuel industry wants, and what the Republican Party in the Senate does, you won’t find it.”
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
So, the question is: Who is really running things?
Why can’t we lower CO2 levels?
Jun 30th
Peak oil has either passed or will occur any day now. Informed ecological professionals warn us that fossil fuels must be left in the ground. Where will the money come from to enable airlines to pay for their new aircraft? Where will the money come from to pay for airport expansion? Who is paying for dirty coal extraction and fracking? The answer is taxpayers! In a half an hour I was able to find reliable evidence at the incredible amount of worldwide government subsidies that underpin economic expansion. How can the expanding volume of CO2 and other GHGs be lowered if the obvious coalition of government policy and corporate profit objectives continue?
View references below: Note, increases in commercial aircraft, airports, coal fired power, oil extraction and extensive subsidies.
Airlines Add Capacity Strategically As Demand For Air Travel Soars
Trefis Team Trefis Team , Contributor 8/26/2014
Boeing’s profits surge as commercial aircraft sales increase
22 Apr 2015
“The world now consumes 85 million barrels of oil per day, or 40,000 gallons per second, and demand is growing exponentially.”
“Economic life is ultimately determined by the ability of an aircraft to generate profits for the airlines that operate it both in absolute terms and also relative to alternative aircraft types that might be available as competitors at the outset or introduced later in its life. As a broad rule of thumb, current generation 100+ seat commercial jets will have an economic life of around 25 years, although plenty will still be in commercial service beyond 30 years and life extension through cargo conversion is also possible for some aircraft.”
http://avolon.aero/aircraft-as-investments/
“In reality, some industries consistently achieve excess returns (ROIC [ return on invested capital > WACC) [,weighted average cost of capital] often due to structural or regulatory factors. In any regulated industry, entry – and exit – are typically distorted in some way. The airline sector achieves one of the lowest levels of ROIC of any industry and is one of the few that consistently fails to meet its WACC.”
“According to IATA’s Jun-2013 report “’Profitability and the air transport value chain’”
“the airline industry generated an average return on invested capital (ROIC) of 4.1% in the 2004 to 2011 business cycle, a very small improvement on the 3.8% achieved in the 1996 to 2004 cycle. This remains well below the weighted average cost of capital (WACC), which falls in a range of 7% to 9%.”
“The airline sector achieves one of the lowest levels of ROIC of any industry and is one of the few that consistently fails to meet its WACC.”
“The failure to generate economic returns (i.e. where ROIC > WACC) reflects problems both with the airline industry supply chain and the structure of the industry. Every other element in the supply chain generates higher returns than airlines themselves, in some cases significantly higher.”
“A central argument of some U.S. airlines seeking government protection from foreign competition is that the Persian Gulf States have been inappropriately and unfairly helping the Gulf carriers become established with financial aid. What this report shines a bright light on is the simple fact that government assistance has long been provided on a very large scale to airlines around the world, including in the U.S.,” stated BTC [Business Travel Coalition] Chairman Kevin Mitchell.”
“In addition to federal subsidies, U.S. airlines also benefit from state subsidies. Unite Here, a union affiliated with the AFL-CIO, issued a report last month claiming that U.S. airlines receive state subsidies that it says amount to $1 billion a year.”
“It is time to ensure U.S. airlines and their workers are operating on a level playing field with their state-funded competitors in the Middle East. U.S. airlines shouldn’t have to compete with the treasuries of foreign governments who offer their state-owned carriers blank checks.”
http://skift.com/2015/04/09/wikileaks-disclosure-shows-u-s-airlines-received-billions-in-subsidies/
“The petition, presented to the Parliament Petitions Committee chair Cecilia Wikström and Green MEP Keith Taylor, calls for an end to the absurd situation where European governments miss out on €40 billion every year because commercial airlines pay no tax on fuel and are exempt from VAT.”
Fossil fuels subsidised by $10m a minute, says IMF
‘Shocking’ revelation finds $5.3tn subsidy estimate for 2015 is greater than the total health spending of all the world’s governments”
Skeptical Science: Time is running out on climate denial.
Jan 2nd
“Greg Craven summarized why by examining the extreme possible outcomes in his viral climate ‘decision grid’ video.”
Posted on 30 December 2014 by dana1981
http://www.skepticalscience.com/time-running-out-on-climate-denial.html
If you can afford to watch a video for 9+ minutes, this is a good investment. And, as I recollect, the US government made the column “A” choice over the possibility of a nuclear attack by Russia in the 50’s. Billions of dollars, maybe all total over a trillion, were spent on the nuclear deterrent, mainly by the Air Force Strategic Air Command keeping bombers in the air heading towards targets 24/7 plus a 24/7 command aircraft in the air plus who knows how many Nike missile sites and hundreds of missiles: not to mention the personnel and support costs. The US government definitely took column “A” and avoided the column “B” true. So the method has been tried and proven effective in that case. I suggest it will work in the case of climate change caused by global warming. The boss may not always be right but is still the boss. Humans may not be causing global warming but the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans are still warming. What do you think?
Waiting for Godot?
Nov 3rd
“The overall rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide during the last deglaciation was thought to have been triggered by the release of CO2 from the deep ocean – especially the Southern Ocean. However, the researchers say that no obvious ocean mechanism is known that would trigger rises of 10-15 ppm over a time span as short as one to two centuries.”
“The oceans are simply not thought to respond that fast,” Brook said.
http://phys.org/news/2014-10-abrupt-pulse-carbon-dioxide-deglaciation.html
I read daily updates on climate change science and suspected results of the certain rapid increase in CO2 and methane levels in both the atmosphere and oceans. In the oceans it increases acidification to the detriment of crustaceans and other hard shelled animals. In addition I read about climate change deniers and detractors; many of which are paid to create cherry picking and inaccuracies that result in doubt in public opinion.
I find constant revisions and updated findings. The uncertainty fuels deniers who demand scientific “proof.”
Science does not and never has supplied “truth.” The primary cause of the subject of uncertainty is a misunderstanding of the nature of Earth. Earth is a living being and not a machine. Earth events are often unpredictable and constantly break the “laws of Nature” that we persist in holding onto. Earth rhythms and cycles never exactly repeat. Variation resides in the very core of what it is to be planet Earth.
Take our medical Doctor visits. We learn to accept the “uncertainty” of our health and our illness treatments. We think nothing of following medical advice. For instance, the exact cause of an illness often cannot be determined accurately. We are sometimes told to take this medicine and come back in awhile to see if it worked. If not then other medicine is prescribed.
Governments and other power structures have habituated the “do nothing until we have absolute proof,” and “not enough data has been collected” excuses. They fiddle while Rome burns. It is time to stop searching for who started the fire and concentrate on putting out the fire.
We don’t need to know the exact extent of anthropogenic causes to become aware that humans, within the present cultural and global economic system, contribute a significant and irrefutable amount of greenhouse gases. These gasses are undeniably present and increasing. Weather in most regions of Earth is becoming more severe,[see: http://mashable.com/2014/11/02/super-typhoon-nuri-strongest-storm-2014/#:eyJzIjoiZiIsImkiOiJfeGhoOTN4dDhsbmZvcmc1ayJ9] sea levels are rising, glaciers and polar icepacks are melting faster than predicted, and oceans are warming while life-forms that make up our food chain are dying. Desertification is increasing whilst global air currents carry little or no moisture from the rainforests to sustain vegetation.
Surely it is obvious to all rational beings that we can wait no longer for certainty, for “scientific proof.”