« September 2007 | Main | November 2007 »
October 31, 2007
UK Hoping for a Mild Winter
Britain faces the prospect of power shortages and soaring prices this winter after the National Grid warned of a shortfall in electricity-generating capacity yesterday. The alert coincides with a surge in gas prices, which are now 40% higher than in continental Europe, and the confirmation that a vital import plant in South Wales will not be operational this winter.
The Guardian: Rising fear of energy crisis this winter
Posted by Paul at 10:22 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Japan's $10.5 Billion Carbon Credit Bill
Japan needs to implement measures to lower greenhouse gas emissions and avoid a bill of as much as 1.2 trillion yen ($10.5 billion) to buy carbon credits in global markets, a government report says.
Bloomberg: Japan Needs Measures to Avert $10.5 Billion Carbon Credit Cost
Posted by Paul at 10:12 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
More Australian Junk Science
MORE Australians will die from heart attacks, strokes and respiratory diseases as the planet heats up, a study has found.
Instances of obesity, food poisoning, and mosquito-borne diseases such as the deadly Ross River fever are also likely to rise as climate change raises average and extreme temperatures.
The Healthy Planet, Places and People report released yesterday, says mental health in rural areas is also likely to suffer from more frequent and more intense droughts.
Herald Sun: Climate change to lift death toll in Australia
Posted by Paul at 09:35 PM | Comments (27) | TrackBack
News Round Up of Labor's Shifting Kyoto Position
IT came direct from Kevin Rudd's mouth: the Labor Party cannot commit to ratify a post-2012 second Kyoto period unless Australia's conditions are met.
Having spent 10 years of worship at the symbolic altar of Kyoto, Labor is suddenly selling a very different message. It is the opposite message: Kyoto has become conditional. Its sanctification is coming to an end.
The Australian - Labor sees the light on next Kyoto phase
Labor finally admits the Government was right all along
THE uncomfortable facts about climate change have forced Labor to admit the inconvenient truth about its own position on global warming. If Labor wins office, Mr Rudd may find himself in the same position for which Labor has long criticised the Howard Government, refusing to ratify a post-Kyoto agreement because it does not include developing nations such as China and India.
The Australian - Closing the climate change policy gap
KEVIN Rudd has tried to restore order to Labor's chaotic climate change policy by "absolutely" refusing to ratify the post-Kyoto agreement unless China and India sign on.
The Labor leader's climate change policies were thrown into disarray on Monday when Peter Garrett said it would not be a "deal breaker" for a Labor government if developing nations, such as China, did not accept binding targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
The Australian - Rudd seeks climate control
"I DON'T know if global warming will destroy the earth, but it is already frying brains.
Check out Peter Garrett's.
Labor's environment spokesman has got the faith so bad - saying Labor would sign a deal to slash our emissions even if bigger countries wouldn't - that Labor's leader, Kevin Rudd, had to shoot him.
Which makes two frontbenchers that Rudd has executed for saying precisely what Rudd himself has said.
Now there's a sign of a leader who is making it up as he goes along, and is so hungry for power that he'll say anything and ditch anyone.
But it's also a sign that when it comes to global warming, Labor hasn't a clue how to make the huge but useless cuts in emissions it has promised without bleeding us dry.
What a farce."
Andrew Bolt, Herald Sun - Labor's beds are burning
Posted by Paul at 06:31 PM | Comments (15) | TrackBack
Happy Halloween: Print and Wear Your Own Al Gore Mask
Another way of scaring children, other than making them watch AIT:
Masks will print out in full on one vertical sheet of US Letter (8.5in x11in) paper.
Posted by Paul at 06:58 AM | Comments (13) | TrackBack
October 30, 2007
Lovelock: Damned If We Do, Damned If We Don't
Professor James Lovelock gave a public lecture hosted by the UK Royal Society on Monday 29th October.
Lovelock said, "Any economic downturn or planned cut back in fossil fuel use, which lessened the aerosol density, would intensify the heating. If there were a 100 per cent cut in fossil fuel combustion it might get hotter not cooler....We live in a fool's climate. We are damned if we continue to burn fuel and damned if we stop too suddenly."
The Royal Society Press Release from which the above extract was taken is here.
Posted by Paul at 10:51 PM | Comments (14) | TrackBack
Drought and Climate Change 'Not Linked'
MOST farmers believe climate change is a natural phenomenon and not man-made, senior delegates to a farmers' conference said today.
NSW Farmers Association (NFA) executive councillors Howard Crozier and Ian McClintock's comments were applauded by the 60 fellow NFA councillors at their bi-annual meeting in Sydney today.
Read the full article entitled, ''No link' between drought and climate change' in The Australian.
Posted by Paul at 08:40 PM | Comments (45) | TrackBack
Kevin Rudd to 'Save' Australia's Great Barrier Reef
An extensive plan to save Australia's Great Barrier Reef has been announced by Prime Minister John Howard's main rival in the forthcoming elections.
He announced the A$200m (£90m, US$185.5m) plan while on a glass-bottomed boat tour of the reef in Queensland in the north-east of the country.
Mr Rudd said the bulk of the fund, A$146m (£65.4m), will go towards a water quality grants scheme to encourage landowners to adapt more environmentally-friendly agricultural practices.
Read the rest of 'Rudd unveils Barrier Reef plan' on the BBC News Website.
Posted by Paul at 07:13 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
NZ Scientists Find Cure for Frog Killer Fungus
New Zealand scientists have found what appears to be a cure for the disease that is responsible for wiping out many of the world's frog populations.
Chloramphenicol, currently used as an eye ointment for humans, may be a lifesaver for the amphibians, they say.
The researchers found frogs bathed in the solution became resistant to the killer disease, chytridiomycosis.
The fungal disease has been blamed for the extinction of one-third of the 120 species lost since 1980.
Story from the BBC News website: Frog killer fungus 'breakthrough'
Posted by Paul at 06:31 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
Cleaning Oil from Birds: A Note from Ann Novek
Every year millions of birds die in oil spills around the world. Here's the basics of how to clean a seabird:
- The birds suffer from hypothermia and have damages to their internal organs due to toxic oil. They suffer also from dehydration from diarrea.
- Do NOT clean the birds immediately. They need first to be stabilised with fluids and activated charcoal solution.
- It takes about 40 minutes for two people to clean a single bird.
- A good liquid to clean birds with is Dawn's dishwashing liquid.
- After the cleaning, the birds often loose their appetite and need to be tube-fed with suitable nutrients , fluids and drugs.
- After the cleaning, the birds need a very warm place to rest in.
- After some days they are ready for the warm water pools, and finally for the cold water pools.
- Advanced rehab centers take blood samples from the birds to check if they are healthy enough to be released. The hemoglobin will be destroyed if the birds are too toxicated, causing anemia.
Cheers,
Ann
(in Sweden)
PS You can find more information here http://www.ibrrc.org/oil_affects.html
Posted by jennifer at 10:17 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
The Japanese and the Democrats want Australia GM Free
A delegation of Japanese anti-GM activists recently visited Australia demanding our farmers not grow genetically modified canola and then the Australian Democrats declared "keeping Australia GMO free" a federal election issue.
Today the Australian Oilseeds Federation has responded with a media release:
"The Australian Oilseeds Federation (AOF) urges recognition of the Australian grains industry’s capacity to deliver choice across the supply chain spectrum with the commercialisation of approved GM canola.
The capacity to deliver choice is built on the comprehensive and world-class protocols and processes that already operate in the Australian grains industry to enable grains and grain products to meet regulatory and customer specifications, and provide confidence to consumers.
Commenting on some recent claims from lobbyists that the Japanese market didn’t want GM canola, President of the Australian Oilseeds Federation, Robert Green, said the opposite is true.
“Japan has purchased GM canola from Canada for many years. Indeed, more than 80% of Japan’s canola imports are from Canada, and this is generally mixed with canola from Australia and from other countries,” he said.
“However, the AOF and the grains industry supply chain do recognise that within some markets there may be customers who prefer non-GM products.”
Mr Green said this is precisely what the Australian grains industry supply chain has considered, addressed and endorsed.
“If customers wish to purchase non-GM grain they can do so with confidence, knowing that the supply chain can be managed to meet their needs.
In August, the industry released a report signed-off by 29 key industry organisations.
Mr Green said this report demonstrates the industry’s capacity to manage canola in the supply chain and move ahead with the commercialisation of the approved GM canola varieties, whilst still ensuring the supply of non-GM canola.
“In endorsing this report, the AOF supports the lifting of the market-based moratoria so that farmers who want access to the approved GM varieties can choose to benefit from the technology, just as their competitors in Canada have been choosing to do for the past decade.”
Mr Green notes that the moratoria are concerned with market and trade considerations, the crux of which is the ability to deliver choice.
“Australia has a global reputation for delivering quality grain and oilseed products that meet customer specifications and requirements, and as such, has the capacity and flexibility within its supply chain to deliver choice and meet market requirements,” he said.
The ‘Delivering market choice with GM canola’ report is available via: www.afaa.com.au or www.australianoilseeds.com
Posted by jennifer at 10:02 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
John Howard, not Malcolm Turnbull, Explains Greenhouse Policy
I was interested to hear Australia's shadow Environment Environment Minister, Peter Garrett, on ABC Radio National yesterday explain that should Labor win government, Australia would sign up to a post Kyoto agreement even if China and the US did not come onboard.
I then heard the Prime Minister, John Howard, phone in to local ABC radio claiming to be ''startled" by this revelation.
Mr Howard went on to explain that this was not responsible policy because Australia would be economically disadvantaged... essentially the same reason the Prime Minister uses for not signing Kyoto.
But the Environment Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, has been silent on the issue.
Mr Turnbull also ignored the article, Time to Ditch Kyoto, published in science journal Nature just last Thursday that, while acknowledging that global warming is a real issue, explained in some detail what credible economists have been saying for some time, that the Kyoto Protocol is not a solution.
It is Coalition policy not to sign Kyoto. But such obvious potential life-lines as a major article in Nature supporting Coalition policy are being ignored, including by the Coalition.
Graham Young suggests the problem is Malcolm Turnbull:
"On Kyoto the Liberals have refused to ratify the treaty on the basis that it is mere ineffective symbolism. So you would have thought that they would have jumped on an article in the latest edition of Nature which not only agrees, but suggests the correct solution is to get the 20 largest polluters together to make an agreement, and to spend money on research and development - all Coalition initiatives that have been ridiculed by Labor. Yet they didn't. Sunday's papers made it clear why - Environment Minister Turnbull isn't playing a team game and actually wants to ratify Kyoto...
Read the complete blog post here: http://ambit-gambit.nationalforum.com.au/archives/002493.html
Posted by jennifer at 09:27 AM | Comments (31) | TrackBack
UK Sets Out Climate Change Bill
Details of a strengthened, more effective and more transparent Bill to help tackle climate change have today been set out by Environment Secretary Hilary Benn.
Mr Benn said that the Government would amend its draft Climate Change Bill, following a three-month public consultation and pre-legislative scrutiny by three parliamentary committees.
When originally published in March 2007, the draft Bill set out clear legally binding targets for reducing carbon dioxide emissions in the UK by at least 60 per cent by 2050 and 26 to 32 per cent by 2020. This is to be based on a new system of “carbon budgets” set at least fifteen years ahead. It also proposed the creation of a new independent, expert Committee on Climate Change to advise on the best way to achieve these targets.
The changes to the draft Bill, set out in a Command Paper entitled ‘Taking Forward the UK Climate Change Bill’ published today, include:
As announced by the Prime Minister in September, asking the Committee on Climate Change to report on whether the Government’s target to reduce CO2 emissions by at least 60 percent by 2050 should be strengthened further;
Asking the Committee to look at the implications of including other greenhouse gases and emissions from international aviation and shipping in the UK’s targets as part of this review;
Strengthening the role and responsibilities of the Committee on Climate Change, including by requiring the Government to seek the Committee’s advice before amending the 2020 or 2050 targets in the Bill;
Strengthening the Committee’s independence from Government, by confirming that it will appoint its own chief executive and staff, and increasing its analytical resources;
Increased transparency, by requiring the Committee to publish its analysis and advice to Government on setting five-yearly carbon budgets, which are designed to provide clarity on the UK’s route towards its reduction targets;
Strengthening Parliament’s ability to hold Government to account, by requiring the Government to explain its reasons to Parliament if it does not accept the Committee’s advice on the level of the carbon budget, or if it does not meet a budget or target;
Providing better information and streamlining reporting, including requiring the Government to report annually to Parliament on emissions from international aviation and shipping, in line with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change; and
Strengthening the country’s preparedness for climate change by requiring the Government regularly to assess the risks of climate change to the UK, and to report to Parliament on its proposals and policies for sustainable adaptation to climate change.
Mr Benn said:
“We need to step up the fight against climate change and we need to do it fast.
“The draft bill we set out earlier this year, and have now refined, is a ground breaking blueprint for moving the UK towards a low carbon economy.It will bind us to legally enforceable emissions reduction targets at home, while giving us greater clout at the international negotiating table.
“I am extremely grateful for the invaluable input from the three Parliamentary committees, and from industry and the wider public that has brought us to this point. Thanks to their efforts we will now have a Bill that is stronger, more effective and more transparent.
“In short, they have helped make a good Bill better.”
Mr Benn also confirmed that the Bill will be used to:
·Introduce the Carbon Reduction Commitment - a new cap and trade scheme for large organisations not already covered by other schemes;
·Help ensure that the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation, which is expected to deliver significant carbon savings from the road transport sector by increasing the use of biofuels, delivers environmental benefits; and
·Provide a power so that a number of local authorities who want to can pilotincentives for household waste minimisation and recycling.
Taken together it is estimated that these three policies could save the equivalent of up to 9.4 to 13.9 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year by 2020.
The Government now plans to introduce a revised Bill to Parliament at the earliest possible legislative opportunity.
Notes to editors:
The Command Paper ‘Taking Forward the UK Climate Change Bill’ and summary of consultation responses can be accessed at www.defra.gov.uk.
The Command Paper responds to reports by three parliamentary committees: the Ad Hoc Joint Committee on the Draft Climate Change Bill, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee in its Fifth Report, and the Environmental Audit Committee as part of its enquiry entitled Beyond Stern: From the Climate Change Programme Review to the Draft Climate Change Bill. It also responds to the nearly 17,000 responses to the public consultation on the draft Bill, which ran from 13 March to 12 June 2007.
Other key points of the draft Climate Change Bill, set out in March 2007 include:
A new system of legally binding five year "carbon budgets" , set at least 15 years ahead, to provide clarity on the UK's optimum pathway towards its key targets and increase the confidence and certainty for business planning and investment in technology needed to move towards a low-carbon economy.
A new statutory body, the Committee on Climate Change, to provide independent expert advice and guidance to Government on achieving its targets and staying within its carbon budgets.
A new system of annual open and transparent reporting to Parliament. The Committee on Climate Change will provide an independent progress report to which the Government must respond. This will ensure the Government is held to account every year on its progress towards each five year carbon budget and the 2020 and 2050 targets.
A requirement for Government to report at least every five years on current and predicted impacts of climate change and on its proposals and policy for adapting to climate change.
DEFRA PR, 29th October 2007
Posted by Paul at 01:06 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
October 29, 2007
Land Clearing and Climate Change in Australia
The University of Queensland's Dr Clive McAlpine said their research showed the clearing of native vegetation had made Australian droughts hotter.
"Our findings highlight that it is too simplistic to attribute climate change purely to greenhouse gases," said Dr McAlpine of UQ's Centre for Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Science.
The study titled "Modelling Impacts of Vegetation Cover Change on Regional Climate" will be published later this year in Geophysical Research Letters.
Read the full article in The Sydney Morning Herald entitled, 'Land clearing blamed for climate change.'
Posted by Paul at 06:17 PM | Comments (12) | TrackBack
Boyd's Forest Dragons
Boyd’s Forest Dragons Hypsilurus boydii are endemic to the rainforests of Australia’s Wet Tropics. They can reach a total length of 54 cm and may live to thirty years. They prefer the vertical surface of a tree-trunk, particularly one with a slightly larger diameter than their own girth, to hide behind upon the approach of any potential threat. Occupying a territorial distribution of one dragon per 500 square metres of forest, they protect themselves from Amethystine Pythons in another peculiar way.
They distinguish themselves from all other rainforest reptiles by maintaining a consistently colder body temperature. This is achieved by avoiding exposure to direct sunlight in an unusually precautionary thermo-regulation. By ensuring that their body temperature is always precisely the same as the temperature of the vegetation upon which they sleep, they remain thermally inconspicuous to the Amethystine Python with its formidable thermo-detection capabilities.
They do, however, leave a scent trail, but this unavoidable legacy is offset by false trails and the selection of a sleeping position that replicates that of the Spectacled Monarch as described previously. Juvenile dragons sleep at the very ends of flimsy branches on under-storey plants so that their instinctive sensitivity to vibration wakes them from sleep upon the approach of a snake. Adults rely more upon the sensitivity of the tip of their tail, which is thermally indistinguishable from the tree, but some lose portions of tail which do not regenerate with this species.
Posted by neil at 08:42 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
NewsBusters: 'Funding Global Warming Hysteria' by Noel Sheppard
As media regularly accuse every scientist skeptical of man's role in global warming as being on the payroll of Big Oil, you almost never see a news report addressing the funding of those responsible for spreading climate alarmism.
This all changed Thursday when the Seattle Post-Intelligencer published an op-ed by the John Locke Foundation's Paul Chesser detailing how one environmental advocate receives funds from largely liberal donors to encourage state governments to impose strict regulations on all things speculated to be causing global warming.
Read the full article: 'Funding Global Warming Hysteria'
Hat tip to Woody.
Posted by Paul at 04:22 AM | Comments (11) | TrackBack
October 28, 2007
Amethystine Pythons and Spectacled Monarchs
Pythons (particularly the Amethystine Morelia amethistina) are well equipped with facial heat-receptor pits. They hunt nocturnally and are able to detect minute temperature changes from direct absorption of optical radiation through the thin pit organ membrane.
Birds are conspicuously exothermic targets at night. They roost strategically along vegetation that requires thoroughfare of heat-seeking snakes to ensure forewarning through vibration.
Nesting, however, is another matter. Some bird species, including the Spectacled Monarch Monarcha trivirgatus build nests on isolated under-storey shrubs with a cup-design that conceals the greatest portion of the heat signature. Nesting is also timed to coincide with high ambient temperatures to lessen the contrast.
The challenge of successful nesting is also dependent upon the onslaught of the heavy wet season. A couple of clients last year informed me that their indigenous guide at Mossman Gorge had forecast the beginning of the wet in three weeks time, as the birds had just started nesting. I agreed that the nesting was only one night old, but as it turned out, the wet arrived that night and the birds had an unsuccessful nesting.
Posted by neil at 09:07 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
October 27, 2007
Inhofe Speech: 2007 - Global Warming Alarmism Reaches a ‘Tipping Point’
INHOFE GLOBAL WARMING SPEECH TODAY - Planned 2 hour Speech on Latest Science & Economics
Selected Speech Excerpts: (Full speech available upon delivery) via Marc Morano
Senator Inhofe on Climate propaganda to Kids:
Hollywood activist Leonardo DiCaprio decided to toss objective scientific truth out the window in his new scarefest “The 11th Hour.” DiCaprio refused to interview any scientists who disagreed with his dire vision of the future of the Earth. In fact, his film reportedly features physicist Stephen Hawking making the unchallenged assertion that “the worst-case scenario is that Earth would become like its sister planet, Venus, with a temperature of 250 [degrees] centigrade.” I guess these “worst-case scenario’s” pass for science in Hollywood these days. It also fits perfectly with DiCaprio’s stated purpose of the film. DiCaprio said on May 20th of this year: “I want the public to be very scared by what they see. I want them to see a very bleak future.” (…) And this agenda of indoctrination and fear aimed at children is having an impact. Nine year old Alyssa Luz-Ricca was quoted in the Washington Post on April 16, 2007 as saying: "I worry about [global warming] because I don't want to die." Unfortunately, children are hearing the scientifically unfounded doomsday message loud and clear. But the message kids are receiving is not a scientific one, it is a political message designed to create fear, nervousness and ultimately recruit them to liberal activism.
Senator Inhofe on how many on the Left have become disenchanted with global warming activism:
The global warming scare machine is now so tenuous, that other liberal environmental scientists and activists are now joining [Geologist Dr. Robert] Giegengack and refuting the entire basis for man-made global warming concerns. Denis G. Rancourt Professor of Physics and an environmental science researcher at the University of Ottawa, believes the global warming campaign does a disservice to the environmental movement. Rancourt wrote on February 27, 2007: “Promoting the global warming myth trains people to accept unverified, remote, and abstract dangers in the place of true problems that they can discover for themselves by becoming directly engaged in their workplace and by doing their own research and observations. It trains people to think lifestyle choices (in relation to CO2 emission) rather than to think activism in the sense of exerting an influence to change societal structures.” Rancourt believes that global warming “will not become humankind’s greatest threat until the sun has its next hiccup in a billion years or more in the very unlikely scenario that we are still around.” He also noted that even if CO2 emissions were a grave threat, “government action and political will cannot measurably or significantly ameliorate global climate in the present world.” Most significantly, however, Rancourt -- a committed left-wing activist and scientist -- believes environmentalists have been duped into promoting global warming as a crisis. Rancourt wrote: “I argue that by far the most destructive force on the planet is power-driven financiers and profit-driven corporations and their cartels backed by military might; and that the global warming myth is a red herring that contributes to hiding this truth. In my opinion, activists who, using any justification, feed the global warming myth have effectively been co-opted, or at best neutralized.” “Global warming is strictly an imaginary problem of the First World middleclass,” Rancourt added. < > Left-wing Professor David Noble of Canada’s York University has joined the growing chorus of disenchanted liberal activists. Noble now believes that the movement has “hyped the global climate issue into an obsession.” Noble wrote a May 8 essay entitled “The Corporate Climate Coup” which details how global warming has “hijacked” the environmental left and created a “corporate climate campaign” which has “diverted attention from the radical challenges of the global justice movement.”
Senator Inhofe on how the poor will pay for symbolic climate measures:
What few Americans realize is that the impact of these policies would not be evenly distributed. The Congressional Budget Office recently looked at the approach taken by most global warming proposals in Congress – known as cap and trade – that would place a cap on carbon emissions, allocate how much everyone could emit, and then let them trade those emissions. Let me quote from the CBO report: "Regardless of how the allowances were distributed, most of the cost of meeting a cap on CO2 emissions would be borne by consumers, who would face persistently higher prices for products such as electricity and gasoline. Those price increases would be regressive in that poorer households would bear a larger burden relative to their income than wealthier households would." Think about that. Even relatively modest bills would put enormous burdens on the poor. The poor already face energy costs much higher as a percentage of their income than wealthier Americans. While most Americans spend about 4 percent of their monthly budget on heating their homes or other energy needs, the poorest fifth of Americans spend 19 percent of their budget on energy. Why would we adopt policies which disproportionately force the poor and working class to shoulder the heaviest burdens through even higher energy costs?
Senator Inhofe on Kyoto style attempts to control global temperatures:
First, going on a carbon diet would do nothing to avert climate change. After the U.S. signed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, Al Gore’s own scientist, Tom Wigley of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, calculated that Kyoto would reduce emissions by only 0.07 degrees Celsius by the year 2050. That’s all. 0.07 degrees. And that’s if the United States had ratified Kyoto and the other signatories met their targets. But we didn’t and they won’t. Of the 15 original EU countries, only two are on track to meet their targets. And even one of those, Britain, has started increasing its emissions again, not decreasing. Similar calculations have been done to estimate other climate bills. The Climate Change Stewardship Act that was defeated 38-60 last year would have only reduced temperatures by 0.029 degrees Celsius, and another bill modeled on the National Commission on Energy Policy (NCEP) report would have only reduced temperatures by 0.008 degrees Celsius. That’s right – 0.008 degrees Celsius, or less than one percent of one degree.
Senator Inhofe on new scientific developments:
We have witnessed Antarctic ice GROW to record levels since satellite monitoring began in the 1970’s. We have witnessed NASA temperature data errors that have made 1934 -- not 1998 -- the hottest year on record in the U.S. We have seen global averages temperatures flat line since 1998 and the Southern Hemisphere cool in recent years.” (…) Current temperatures in Greenland -- a poster boy for climate alarmists – are COOLER than the temperatures there in the 1930’s and 1940’s, according to multiple peer-reviewed studies. Yes, you heard me correctly. Greenland has COOLED since the 1940’s! A fact the media and global warming activists conceal. Greenland reached its highest temperatures in 1941, according to a peer-reviewed study published in the June 2006 issue of the Journal of Geophysical Research. And, keep in mind that 80% of man-made CO2 came AFTER these high temperatures. How inconvenient that the two poster children of alarmism – Greenland and Antarctica -- trumpeted by Al Gore and the climate fear mongers, have decided not to cooperate with computer model driven fears.
Senator Inhofe on the challenges of controlling emissions:
Many times I have heard that America is the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide and thus is the problem. But that is no longer true. Earlier this year, China surpassed the United States as the world’s largest emitter of carbon. Only 6 years ago, it was estimated that China’s emissions would still lag those of the United States in 2040. China’s emissions growth is explosive and climbing upward. Just to put things in perspective, the United States did not build a single new coal-fired power plant in the last 15 years up to 2006, although there are now some efforts underway to change that. In comparison, according to the New York Times, “China last year built 117 government-approved coal-fired power plants – a rate of roughly one every three days, according to official figures.” We won’t complete that many in the next decade. India’s emission increases are not far behind China, and Brazil is not far behind them. The fact is that if these countries do not curb their rapidly accelerating emissions growth, then embracing a carbon diet and sluggish economic growth by developed countries will accomplish nothing. Moreover, many of the carbon reductions achieved through lost manufacturing jobs in developed countries are simply emitted elsewhere as jobs are created to make the same product in countries that do not ration energy. The U.S. emissions as a measure of productivity are far lower than China’s. Cement manufacturing is a perfect example. Every job sent there will increase emissions, not lower them.
Senator Inhofe on the path forward:
So what’s the path forward? I categorically will oppose legislation or initiatives that will devastate our economy as well as those that will cost jobs simply to make symbolic gestures purely to start us down the ruinous economic path of energy rationing. I believe such measures will be defeated because the approach is politically unsustainable. We are seeing the first signs of that in Europe right now. Even if the alarmists were right on the science – which they are not – their command-and-control approaches sow the seeds of their own failure. As long as their policies put national economies in the cross-hairs, they will stoke the fires of opposition and eventually collapse of their own weight. Stabilizing emissions can not happen in 20, 40, or even 60 years because our world’s infrastructure is built on fossil fuels and it will continue to be so for a long time to come – the power plants and other facilities being built now and in the future will emit carbon for a half century after they’re completed. Quite simply, the technology does not exist to cost-effectively power the world without emitting carbon dioxide. And I and many others who reject climate alarmism or ineffective yet expensive solutions will block efforts to implement mandatory carbon restrictions. I find it unfortunate that so many politicians and climate advocates focus on trying to resurrect a mandatory carbon cap policy in the face of its demonstrated failure in practice in the countries that have adopted it. In the process, they are ignoring the best path forward. There is only one approach so far that I know of that will work – it is the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. Why? Because this approach serves multiple purposes – it will reduce air pollution, expand our energy supply, increase trade, and along with these other goals, reduce greenhouse gases as a byproduct. Others might put this list together differently in terms of priority, but my point is that the Asia-Pacific Partnership meets the criteria for success – it is a politically and economically sustainable path forward that addresses multiple issues in the context of their relation to other issues. Perhaps other approaches in the future will meet these criteria as well, but the APP is currently the only one that does.
Senator Inhofe on how scientific studies reveal climate changes on Earth lie well within the bounds of natural climate variability:
“A June 29, 2007 paper by Gerd Burger of Berlin’s Institute of Meteorology in the peer-reviewed Science Magazine challenged a 2006 study that claimed the 20th century had been unusually warm. Ivy League geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack, the chair of Department of Earth and Environmental Science at the University of Pennsylvania, noted in May 2007 that extremely long geologic timescales reveal that "only about 5% of that time has been characterized by conditions on Earth that were so cold that the poles could support masses of permanent ice." Giegengack added: “For most of Earth’s history, the globe has been warmer than it has been for the last 200 years. It has rarely been cooler.”
Inhofe on how fear is being driven by unproven and un-testable computer model fears of the future:
Even the New York Times has been forced to acknowledge the overwhelming evidence that the Earth is currently well within natural climate variation. This inconvenient reality means that all the warming doomsayers have to back up their climate fears are unproven computer models predicting future doom. Of course, you can't prove a prediction of the climate in 2100 wrong today, which reduces the models to speculating on what ‘could’ ‘might’ ‘may’ happen 50 or 100 years from now. But prominent UN scientists have publicly questioned the reliability of climate models. In a candid statement, IPCC scientist Dr. Jim Renwick—a lead author of the IPCC 4th Assessment Report—publicly admitted that climate models may not be so reliable after all. Renwick stated in June: "Half of the variability in the climate system is not predictable, so we don't expect to do terrifically well." Let me repeat: a UN scientist admitted, "Half of the variability in the climate system is not predictable." Also in June, another high-profile UN IPCC lead author, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, echoed Renwick’s sentiments about climate models by referring to them as nothing more than “story lines.” A leading scientific skeptic, Meteorologist Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, a scientific pioneer in the development of numerical weather prediction and former director of research at The Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute, recently took the critique of climate computer models one step further. Tennekes said in February 2007, "I am of the opinion that most scientists engaged in the design, development, and tuning of climate models are in fact software engineers. They are unlicensed, hence unqualified to sell their products to society."
Senator Inhofe debunks “More CO2 = A Warmer World” simplicity:
Scientists and peer-reviewed studies are increasingly revealing that catastrophic climate fears of rising CO2 are simply unsustainable. In May 2007, the “father of meteorology” Dr. Reid Bryson, the founding chairman of the Department of Meteorology at University of Wisconsin, dismissed fears of rising CO2 bluntly saying: “You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.” Bryson has been identified by the British Institute of Geographers as the most frequently cited climatologist in the world. Climatologist Dr. Ball recently explained that one of the reasons climate models are failing is because they overestimate the warming effect of CO2 in the atmosphere. Ball described how CO2’s warming impact diminishes. “Even if CO2 concentration doubles or triples, the effect on temperature would be minimal. The relationship between temperature and CO2 is like painting a window black to block sunlight. The first coat blocks most of the light. Second and third coats reduce very little more. Current CO2 levels are like the first coat of black paint,” Ball explained in June 2007. Environmental economist Dennis Avery, co-author with climate scientist Dr. Fred Singer of the new book "Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years," explained how much impact CO2 has had on temperatures. "The earth has warmed only a net 0.2 degrees C of net warming since 1940. Human-emitted CO2 gets the blame for only half of that—or 0.1 degree C of warming over 65 years! We've had no warming at all since 1998. Remember, too, that each added unit of CO2 has less impact on the climate. The first 40 parts per million (ppm) of human-emitted CO2 added to the atmosphere in the 1940s had as much climate impact as the next 360 ppm,” Avery wrote in August. Avery and Singer’s book details how solar activity is linked to Earth's natural temperature cycles. < > [Dr. Robert] Giegengack said: “[Gore] claims that temperature increases solely because more CO2 in the atmosphere traps the sun’s heat. That’s just wrong … It’s a natural interplay.” He continued, “It’s hard for us to say that CO2 drives temperature. It’s easier to say temperature drives CO2.” "The driving mechanism is exactly the opposite of what Al Gore claims, both in his film and in that book. It's the temperature that, through those 650,000 years, controlled the CO2; not the CO2 that controlled the temperature," he added.
Senator Inhofe debunks the so-called “consensus”:
The notion of a “consensus” is carefully manufactured for political, financial and ideological purposes. < > Key components of the manufactured “consensus” fade under scrutiny. We often hear how the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the American Meteorological Society (AMS) issued statements endorsing the so-called "consensus" view that man is driving global warming. But what you don't hear is that both the NAS and AMS never allowed member scientists to directly vote on these climate statements. Essentially, only two dozen or so members on the governing boards of these institutions produced the "consensus" statements. It appears that the governing boards of these organizations caved in to pressure from those promoting the politically correct view of UN and Gore-inspired science. The Canadian Academy of Sciences reportedly endorsed a “consensus” global warming statement that was never even approved by its governing board. Rank-and-file scientists are now openly rebelling. James Spann, a certified meteorologist with the AMS, openly defied the organization when he said in January that he does "not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype." < > There are frequently claims that the UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers is the voice of hundreds or even thousands of the world's top scientists. But such claims do not hold up to even the lightest scrutiny. According to the Associated Press, during the IPCC Summary for Policymakers meeting in April 2007, only 52 scientists participated. The April 9, 2007 AP article by Seth Borenstein reported: “Diplomats from 115 countries and 52 scientists hashed out the most comprehensive and gloomiest warning yet about the possible effects of global warming, from increased flooding, hunger, drought and diseases to the extinction of species.” Many of the so-called "hundreds" of scientists who have been affiliated with the UN as "expert reviewers" are in fact climate skeptics. Skeptics like Virginia State Climatologist Dr. Patrick Michaels, Alabama State Climatologist Dr. John Christy, New Zealand climate researcher Dr. Vincent Gray, former head of the Geological Museum at the University of Oslo, Tom V. Segalstad, and MIT’s Dr. Richard Lindzen have served as IPCC "expert reviewers" but were not involved in writing the alarmist Summary for Policymakers.
Senator Inhofe on the UN IPCC process:
The UN allowed a Greenpeace activist to co-author a key economic report in 2007. Left unreported by most of the media was the fact that Bill Hare, an advisor to Greenpeace, was a lead co- author of a key economic report in the IPCC’s 4th Assessment. Not surprisingly, the Greenpeace co-authored report predicted a gloomy future for our planet unless we follow the UN’s policy prescriptions. The UN IPCC’s own guidelines explicitly state that the scientific reports have to be “change[d]” to “ensure consistency with” the politically motivated Summary for Policymakers. In addition, the IPCC more closely resembles a political party’s convention platform battle - not a scientific process. During an IPCC Summary for Policymakers process, political delegates and international bureaucrats squabble over the specific wording of a phase or assertion. Alabama State Climatologist Dr. John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, served as a UN IPCC lead author in 2001 for the 3rd assessment report and detailed how he personally witnessed UN scientists attempting to distort the science for political purposes. “I was at the table with three Europeans, and we were having lunch. And they were talking about their role as lead authors. And they were talking about how they were trying to make the report so dramatic that the United States would just have to sign that Kyoto Protocol,” Christy told CNN on May 2, 2007. Former Colorado State Climatologist Roger Pielke Sr. also detailed the corruption of the UN IPCC process on September 1, 2007: “The same individuals who are doing primary research in the role of humans on the climate system are then permitted to lead the [IPCC] assessment! There should be an outcry on this obvious conflict of interest, but to date either few recognize this conflict, or see that since the recommendations of the IPCC fit their policy and political agenda, they chose to ignore this conflict. In either case, scientific rigor has been sacrificed and poor policy and political decisions will inevitably follow,” Pielke explained. He added: “We need recognition among the scientific community, the media, and policymakers that the IPCC process is obviously a real conflict of interest, and this has resulted in a significantly flawed report.” Politics appears to be the fuel that runs the UN IPCC process from the scientists to the bureaucrats to the delegates and all the way to many of the world leaders involved in it. And another key to the motivation of the UN was explained by former French President Jacques Chirac in 2000: Chirac said Kyoto represents “the first component of an authentic global governance.”
Senator Inhofe on Polar Bears:
The Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that the polar bear population is currently at 20,000 to 25,000 bears, whereas in the 1950s and 1960s, estimates were as low as 5,000-10,000 bears. We currently have an estimated four or five times more polar bears than 50 years ago. A 2002 U.S. Geological Survey of wildlife in the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain noted that the polar bear populations ‘may now be near historic highs.’ Top biologists and wildlife experts are dismissing unproven computer model concerns for polar bears. In 2006, Canadian biologist Dr. Mitchell Taylor, the director of wildlife research with the Arctic government of Nunavut, dismissed these fears with evidence based data on Canada’s polar bear populations. “Of the 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear to be affected at present,” Taylor said, noting that Canada is home to two-thirds of the world's polar bears. He added: “It is just silly to predict the demise of polar bears in 25 years based on media-assisted hysteria.” In September, Taylor further debunked the latest report hyping fears of future polar bear extinctions. "I think it's naive and presumptuous," Taylor said, referring to a recent report by the U.S. government warning that computer models predict a dire future for the bears due to projected ice loss. Taylor also debunked the notion that less sea ice means less polar bears by pointing out that southern regions of the bears' home with low levels of ice are seeing booming bear populations. He noted that in the warmer southern Canadian region of the Davis Strait with lower levels of ice, a new survey will reveal that bear populations have grown from an estimated 850 bears to an estimated 3000 bears. And, despite the lower levels of ice, some of the bears measured in this region are among the biggest ever on record. “Davis Strait is crawling with polar bears. It's not safe to camp there. They're fat. The mothers have cubs. The cubs are in good shape,” he said, according to a September 14, 2007 article. He added: "That's not theory. That's not based on a model. That's observation of reality.” Other biologists are equally dismissive of these computer model based fears. Biologist Josef Reichholf, who heads the Vertebrates Department at the National Zoological Collection in Munich, rejected climate fears and asserted any potential global warming may be beneficial to both humans and animals. In a May 8, 2007 interview, Reichholf asked: “How did the polar bear survive the last warm period?”
Reichholf also debunked the entire notion that a warmer world will lead to mass species extinctions. “Warming temperatures promote biodiversity,” Reichholf explained. “The number of species increases exponentially from the regions near the poles across the moderate latitudes and to the equator. To put it succinctly, the warmer a region is, the more diverse are its species,” he added.
Posted by Paul at 02:40 AM | Comments (58) | TrackBack
October 26, 2007
Drought-Proofing Australia
As we have seen over the past year, drought can take an emotional, as well as financial toll on farmers, placing individuals, families and local communities under extraordinary stress.
Helping people cope under such pressure is essential but the challenges of a changing climate demand a visionary new approach in the way Australia deals with drought.
Read the rest of the ABC News article, 'Drought: secure today, but prepare for tomorrow.'
Thanks to Luke Walker for this article.
Posted by Paul at 10:20 PM | Comments (16) | TrackBack
The Pharmacy Under the Sea
The Spanish company Pharmamar explores the depths of the oceans in search of marine products for the treatment of cancer. Their first success, a drug for the treatment of soft tissue sarcomas, has just got European-wide approval.
The oceans hold 34 of the 36 phyla of life, some of them (i.e. Ctenophora, Echinodermata, Porifera, Phoronidea, Brachiopoda and Chaetognata) are restricted to the oceans. In addition, due to the special ecological conditions they have to cope with, marine organisms display multiple exclusive physiological processes and a complete collection of biochemical novelties.
In 1986 Spain was joining the European Union and Jose María Fernández decided that his company would require some original and innovative projects to face this new and challenging scenario. He was a biochemist with some previous experience in biotechnology. This was the background that led him to create Pharmamar, a biotech company aimed at the discovery and development of novel marine-derived drugs for the treatment. Last July, Pharmamar got its first important success. At last, its leading drug Yondelis got approval from the European Agency of cancer. Yondelis is an isoquinolone alkaloid originally isolated from the Caribbean colonial tunicate Ecteinascidia turbinata. Its approval is a milestone in the history of this company and the first serious reward for 20 years of work, €400 million of investment and not a single euro of revenue yet. Hopefully, it also opens the gate to further future development.
Today many other companies and research institutes around the world are exploring the pharmacological potential of the sea. Hundreds of new marine therapeutic entities are described every year and there are even some specialized journals periodically publishing findings in this field.
Read more by saving the pdfs of pages 50, 51 and 52 from the Lab Times article,
'20,000 Leagues under the Sea.'
Posted by Paul at 09:07 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
UN's 'State of the Planet' Report
The UN has released it's 'Global Environment Outlook' or 'GEO4' report.
It can be downloaded via the BBC News website. It's 22MB so you may have a bit of a wait.
Also on the BBC website is the 'State of the planet, in graphics:'
Globally human populations are growing, trade is increasing, and living standards are rising for many. But, according to the UN's latest Global Environment Outlook report, long-term problems including climate change, pollution, access to clean water, and the threat of mass extinctions are being met with "a remarkable lack of urgency".
Posted by Paul at 06:32 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Gore Invited to Engage in Civil Disobedience Against the Construction of New Coal-Fired Power Plants
Rainforest Action Network issued the invitation to the former Vice President, according to RAN executive director Michael Brune. The San Francisco-based group has a twenty-year history of protesting against destructive logging practices and other causes of climate change; it specializes in targeting corporations as much as governments.
Read the rest of the article, 'If Gore Were Arrested... '
Posted by Paul at 06:07 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Estimating Climate Sensitivity to CO2: As Good as it Gets
Collectively, the current IPCC computer modelled scenarios for the iconic doubling of atmospheric CO2 range from 1.1C to 6.4C, with a 'most likely' range of 2C to 4.5C. Higher estimates have a much lower probability of being accurate.
In this week's Science magazine there are two related papers that discuss climate sensitivity:
Why Is Climate Sensitivity So Unpredictable?
Gerard H. Roe* and Marcia B. Baker
Uncertainties in projections of future climate change have not lessened substantially in past decades. Both models and observations yield broad probability distributions for long-term increases in global mean temperature expected from the doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide, with small but finite probabilities of very large increases. We show that the shape of these probability distributions is an inevitable and general consequence of the nature of the climate system, and we derive a simple analytic form for the shape that fits recent published distributions very well. We show that the breadth of the distribution and, in particular, the probability of large temperature increases are relatively insensitive to decreases in uncertainties associated with the underlying climate processes.
Myles R. Allen and David J. Frame
Over the past 30 years, the climate research community has made valiant efforts to answer the "climate sensitivity" question: What is the long-term equilibrium warming response to a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide? Earlier this year, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1) concluded that this sensitivity is likely to be in the range of 2° to 4.5°C, with a 1-in-3 chance that it is outside that range. The lower bound of 2°C is slightly higher than the 1.6°C proposed in the 1970s (2); progress on the upper bound has been minimal.
In a nut shell, the limits have been reached for model estimations of the upper bound and therefore even more complex models will be unable to resolve the greater uncertainty of higher bound estimates, so it's time to "call off the search."
New Scientist's take is:
Climate is too complex for accurate predictions
Excerpt: "This finding reinforces not only that climate policies will necessarily be made in the face of deep, irreducible uncertainties," says Roger Pielke, a climate policy expert at the University of Colorado at Boulder, US. "But also the uncomfortable reality – for climate modellers – that finite research dollars invested in ever more sophisticated climate models offer very little marginal benefit to decision makers."
Personally, I disagree with the statement made in Science magazine that "This persistent, high-temperature tail of low probability has been one impediment to political action, as policy-makers have been reluctant to formulate policies to address climate change when the range of uncertainty is so large." If this is true, then I haven't noticed.
Posted by Paul at 04:57 PM | Comments (11) | TrackBack
Buff-breasted Paradise Kingfisher
Any day now, the rainforests of the Daintree will resound of the arrival of the Buff-breasted Paradise Kingfisher Tanysiptera sylvia.
They are very punctual, arriving in the last week of October, first week of November, each year. The males industriously excavate upwardly climbing tunnels into terrestrial termite mounds and upon breaching the internal cavity, rely upon the resident colony of termites to congeal the inner wall of the would-be incubating chamber. The female kingfisher will reject the proposal unless the termites have played their part.
As we walk past these mounds over the summer months, kingfisher chicks can be heard inside calling for food. When they ultimately fledge, the parent birds return to PNG, leaving the abandoned juveniles in a state of distress. For about three weeks they hang around the nesting site, before heading off to New Guinea on their own; having never been before.
Posted by neil at 07:04 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
October 25, 2007
California Fires: Opportunism, Arson and a Lack of Hurricanes
Climate alarmists never miss an opportunity to capitilise on other people's misery in order to fuel the global warming gravy train. Hurricane Katrina was a prime example, and now the California fires are an opportunity not to be missed. CNN are leading the way with their 'Planet in Peril' special that may well try to make a link between the fires and global warming. The rest of the mainstream media aren't far behind.
Meanwhile, the FBI have shot dead a suspected arsonist and confirmed that a huge fire in the town of Santiago in Orange County that destroyed 10 homes was started on purpose in two different places. Furthermore, Northern Hemisphere Tropical Cyclone Activity is on course to match the record low of 1977. This could at least partly explain the lack of moisture/drought in the US Southwest. Remember, global warming was supposed to increase hurricane intensity and frequency, and in 2005 alarmists were suggesting a new category 6 classification would be needed for hurricanes.
It seems that global warming has become a ubiquitous explanation for every natural weather event. Shame on you!
Posted by Paul at 09:21 PM | Comments (25) | TrackBack
The Kyoto Protocol has Failed - Time for a New Approach
Climate policy after 2012, when the Kyoto treaty expires, needs a radical rethink. More of the same won't do, argue Gwyn Prins and Steve Rayner.
The Kyoto Protocol is a symbolically important expression of governments' concern about climate change. But as an instrument for achieving emissions reductions, it has failed. It has produced no demonstrable reductions in emissions or even in anticipated emissions growth. And it pays no more than token attention to the needs of societies to adapt to existing climate change. The impending United Nations Climate Change Conference being held in Bali in December — to decide international policy after 2012 — needs to radically rethink climate policy.
Read Time to ditch Kyoto in this week's Nature News (no subscription required).
Posted by Paul at 05:50 AM | Comments (59) | TrackBack
Global Warming and Mass Extinctions: New Research Paper
Another 'field day' for the press as a new research paper, entitled 'A long-term association between global temperature and biodiversity, origination and extinction in the fossil record', is published in the journal Proceedings of The Royal Society (Biological Sciences).
The abstract says:
The past relationship between global temperature and levels of biological diversity is of increasing concern
due to anthropogenic climate warming. However, no consistent link between these variables has yet been
demonstrated. We analysed the fossil record for the last 520 Myr against estimates of low latitude sea
surface temperature for the same period. We found that global biodiversity (the richness of families and
genera) is related to temperature and has been relatively low during warm ‘greenhouse’ phases, while
during the same phases extinction and origination rates of taxonomic lineages have been relatively high.
These findings are consistent for terrestrial and marine environments and are robust to a number of
alternative assumptions and potential biases. Our results provide the first clear evidence that global climate
may explain substantial variation in the fossil record in a simple and consistent manner. Our findings may
have implications for extinction and biodiversity change under future climate warming.
Of course, the press don't have time to read it and the authors qualify the findings of the study in the text:
"A first qualification is that our results relate to the effects of residuals from the long-term trend. An increase in global temperature may therefore cause an increase in extinction rate but not necessarily an absolute decrease in biodiversity because the underlying trend is for biodiversity to increase over time."
"A second qualification is that the coarse time scale of our data does not allow us to make short-term predictions,
although short-term effects also cannot be excluded."
"Finally, although we have shown an association between temperature and both biodiversity and taxonomic rates, this association may not be causative. Deducing causation from correlation is, of course, difficult. The lags shown in some of our analyses suggest that temperature is affecting biodiversity and evolutionary rates, but well known links between organisms and geophysical processes suggest we should not yet rule out the opposite direction of causation (Rothman 2001)."
CO2 gets a mention:
"When atmospheric CO2 concentrations were included as an explanatory variable in our analyses, temperature
always remained significant, and CO2 was normally not significant. CO2 was significant for both marine genus origination and extinction rate, and in the latter case was a stronger predictor than temperature. Overall, temperature was the better predictor of diversity and taxonomic rates."
The BBC News website goes with Climate threat to biodiversity
"Global temperatures predicted for the coming centuries could trigger a mass extinction, UK scientists have warned."
Australia's ABC News gets rather carried away and headlines with Global warming to cause mass extinction: report
"Researchers in Britain say in the long term, global warming could lead to a mass extinction of animals and plants."
Whilst we are on the subject of climate warming and cooling, how has man fared specifically in the UK over the past 700,000 years?
If we turn the clock back 12 months, we have this report on the BBC News website with a nice graphic:
Britain's human history revealed
Eight times humans came to try to live in Britain and on at least seven occasions they failed - beaten back by freezing conditions. Scientists think they can now write a reasonably comprehensive history of the occupation of these isles. It stretches from 700,000 years ago and the first known settlers at Pakefield in Suffolk, through to the most recent incomers just 12,000 years or so ago (the end of the last great ice age). The evidence comes from the Ancient Human Occupation of Britain Project.
"Australian aboriginals have been in Australia longer, continuously than the British people have been in Britain. There were probably people in the Americas before 12,000 years ago," Professor Stringer explained.
So there you have it - in the cold we die, in warm intergalcials we thrive.
Posted by Paul at 02:44 AM | Comments (19) | TrackBack
October 24, 2007
Save Polar Bears - Turn Up Your Fridge in Queensland
I'm referring to Queensland's 'Cool it by Degrees' campaign.
"Polar bears are among the most threatened species as a result of changes in our temperature and changes in our climate," Ms Bligh told reporters.
"If we had every Queenslander change the temperature of their fridge by one degree, it would be the equivalent of taking 11,000 cars off the road.
Several assumptions here including: people keep their fridges below 4C, Polar Bears need saving, and climate change is driven by CO2.
Story from The Sydney Morning Herald:
Qld has cool idea for climate change
Posted by Paul at 06:04 PM | Comments (12) | TrackBack
UK MPs Question EU Emissions Trading Scheme
MPs have asked the government to provide evidence that the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) is helping cut the UK's greenhouse gas emissions.
The Environmental Audit Committee has sought reassurances that the reduction in CO2 emissions are a result of the EU ETS and not "merely coincidental".
MPs voiced concern over how the emission cuts were calculated
Read the rest of the article on the BBC News website:
MPs' concerns over UK carbon plan
Posted by Paul at 05:27 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
A 'Sooty' Tawny Owl: A Note from Ann Novek
This Eurasian Tawny Owl (Strix aluco) fell into a chimney, that is why it's all black with soot. Note, the closed eyes, this is actually a sign of distress in owls. The owl was cleaned and later released.
The species is resident in Europe and southern Russian and naturally occurs in two colours rufous brown and greyish brown with all intermediate forms.
Their territorial calls are the classic hoo-hoo-hoo-hoo..
They nest in holes in trees.
[from Ann Novek in Sweden]
Posted by jennifer at 05:02 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack
Climate Hysteria in Australia's Media
A new scientific paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), claims that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing faster than expected. The study entitled 'Global and regional drivers of accelerating CO2 emissions' is co-authored by Josep G. Canadell of Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO).
The paper's abstract says:
CO2 emissions from fossil-fuel burning and industrial processes have been accelerating at a global scale, with their growth rate increasing from 1.1% y–1 for 1990–1999 to >3% y–1 for 2000–2004. The emissions growth rate since 2000 was greater than for the most fossil-fuel intensive of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change emissions scenarios developed in the late 1990s. Global emissions growth since 2000 was driven by a cessation or reversal of earlier declining trends in the energy intensity of gross domestic product (GDP) (energy/GDP) and the carbon intensity of energy (emissions/energy), coupled with continuing increases in population and per-capita GDP. Nearly constant or slightly increasing trends in the carbon intensity of energy have been recently observed in both developed and developing regions. No region is decarbonizing its energy supply. The growth rate in emissions is strongest in rapidly developing economies, particularly China. Together, the developing and least-developed economies (forming 80% of the world's population) accounted for 73% of global emissions growth in 2004 but only 41% of global emissions and only 23% of global cumulative emissions since the mid-18th century. The results have implications for global equity.
'Decline in uptake of carbon emissions confirmed' was the headline for the CSIRO press release.
The award for the most hysterical reporting of the study's findings goes to the Herald Sun with the headline 'Air poison rise stuns analysts'
In the US, the Associated Press article had a more restrained headline: 'Carbon Dioxide in Atmosphere Increasing'
In the UK, the BBC News website went with 'Unexpected growth' in CO2 found
Comparing 1990 with 2006 could be described as cherry-picking. Scientists who are sceptical about a man-made CO2 driven climate catastrophe have pointed out that rising CO2 emissions are not being matched by rises in the global average temperature. El Nino driven 1998 remains the warmest year on record. Ocean warming has also flat-lined during the past 5 years. Furthermore, as pointed out on this blog yesterday, the airborne fraction of man-made CO2 remains at about 55 per cent, suggesting that uptake by CO2 sinks has not diminished. It is also worth noting that global Methane emissions have actually declined.
H. L. Mencken's hobgoblins are alive and well in Australia:
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
Paul Biggs
Posted by Paul at 01:45 AM | Comments (40) | TrackBack
October 23, 2007
UK to Abandon Renewable Energy Targets?
Earlier this year, ex-prime minister Tony Blair signed up to the EU target of 20 per cent of all European energy to come from renewable sources by 2020. New prime minister Gordon Brown is now likeky to be advised that the target is too expensive and difficult to meet. The UK government will hope that it will be able to work with 'climate sceptic' governments such as Poland and the Czech Republic in order to try and persuade German chancellor Angela Merkel to set lower binding targets, which are due to be agreed in December.
Blair had a habit of signing any document the EU put in front of him, often without thinking through the implications.
The Guardian newspaper is alarmed:
Labour's plan to abandon renewable energy targets
Leaked documents detail strategy for climate change U-turn
Posted by Paul at 06:09 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
UK Government's Chief Scientist Urges Badger Cull
The UK government's chief scientist has advised ministers that badgers should be killed to prevent the spread of TB among cattle.
Sir David King says culling could be effective in areas that are contained, for example, by the sea or motorways.
His report follows a previous study that said culling badgers would be ineffective.
Read the rest of the article on the BBC website:
Science chief urges badger cull
Posted by Paul at 05:24 PM | Comments (18) | TrackBack
Greenhouse 2007 Presentations Now Online
The Greenhouse 2007 presentations, papers and panel sessions are now available online:
I can't wait to view Sir David King's presentation to see how his plans for us all moving to the Antarctic are shaping up. Sir David is also a Bovine TB and Badger 'expert' - he plans to cull 80 per cent of the UK's Badgers in some areas - I may post on that.
Sadly, Tim Flannery's presentation isn't available. X-rated perhaps?
Enjoy! Thanks to Luke Walker for alerting me to 'Gloomhouse' 2007.
Posted by Paul at 05:02 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Mimicry & the Snub-nosed Katydid
The outer-wing coverings (tegmina) of the Snub-nosed Katydid (Mastigaphoides sp.) are remarkably leaf-like, even to the extent of the centrally prominent vein and subordinate branches. They blend splendidly within rainforest foliage and are found most easily at night, after summer rains, when singing.
Such a marvellous design, but to what extent do we over-interpret the convergence of design with the character of that which provides the design-benefit, as an expression of either evolutionary adaptation or just as readily by the gracious glory of God?
I must confess that neither explanation deepens my understanding of the process that leads to mimicry and both are ever-increasingly incredible, when it is implicit that the outcome is pre-ordained.
Or is it? Perhaps the mimicry only seems to be pre-ordained; an inadvertent piece of genetic good fortune that resonates with competitiveness.
Of course there is coincidence, when two or more separate evolutionary trails randomly converge, to which we often over-attribute an awesome unlikelihood. But perhaps there is less freedom than we might imagine.
For instance, to what extent do genetic variations and mutations remain constrained by internal chemical mechanisms? Do these constraints dramatically reduce the possibility of outcomes to those that have previously overcome similar competitive hardships? And what of the prescriptive inducements of external chemical overtures; pheromones, for example, wafting across the sensitivities of a menagerie of adaptable interests?
Other examples of mimicry have been previously considered at The evolutionary power of persuasion, Unidentified (Spider) and Lichen Spiders.
Posted by neil at 03:23 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Orphaned Baby Hedgehogs: A Note from Ann Novek
Orphaned baby hedgehogs need feeding by hand every two hours day and night for the first two weeks of their life. Then every four hours for the next two weeks until they can lap on their own.
They are fed with a milk substitute, called Espilac (a dog milk substitute), which is the closest thing to natural hedgehog milk.
Photograph from Catastrophe Aid for Birds and Wildlife, Sweden
Older hedgehogs can be fed suitable dog food and herring.
Photograph from Catastrophe Aid for Birds and Wildlife, Sweden
Read more from my colleague Angelica on wildlife rehabilitation in Sweden: http://www.iwrc-online.org/magazine/2006/winter/RehabilitationinSweden.htm
Ann Novek
Sweden
Posted by jennifer at 02:38 PM | Comments (15) | TrackBack
Southern California Burning, Again
Bush fires are threatening suburbs in Southern California. ...several homes in Los Angeles and Ventura counties were evacuated. Seven-hundred fire-fighters battled the blazes, the largest covered 2,800 hectares. The fires were whipped by high winds of up to 70 km/h. Some homes were destroyed and flames and smoke were visible for several kilometres.
Read more here: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2005/09/29/california_fires20050929.html
And that article is a couple of years old. Yesterday CBC was reporting:
Firefighters in Southern California are battling more than a dozen wildfires that have destroyed 16,000 hectares of land and forced the evacuation of more than 250,000 people from their homes in the area. ...Arnold Schwarzenegger, who declared a state of emergency late Sunday in seven counties where fires have killed one person and injured d