The real questions here is when we will crushed coal power plants be eliminated globally, when will the first nuclear power plant on US soil in 30 years break ground, and how fast can we ramp up solar? All of these things require your utility bills to go up . . to all you capitalists out there that means a planned economy. To all of you Republicans that means the “market” isn’t going to take care of energy needs in an orderly fashion unless you think a global depression is orderly.

Comment by Patrick — June 2, 2006 @ 4:35 pm

Facts please Paddy old sock, show me the studies. You can’t because they are not there, however funnily, the Business Council of Australia has conducted their economic study to realise that indeed Australia can easily meet our Kyoto obligations (if Australia were to ratify) and still grow our economy at the current rate Australia is enjoying now. Unfortunately you are suffering the delusion that you are an economist if you can make the sweeping statement “every economic study … disasterous for America” in all honesty.

One argument by warming skeptics is that the Kyoto Protocol would 1. do nothing to stop warming and 2. would utterly obliterate the US economy.

To answer point 1, Kyoto alone would not do enough, but it would be a good s……

Comment by troll — May 30, 2006 @ 10:34 am
——————————————————

So, then, care to detail why we should caer what you have to say?

Take a map of the whole world. Measure the surface of all the rivers, lakes and the like. Also, the one of the ice caps. Then, compare its surface to the one of the seas and oceans. The percentage of rivers, etc. compared to the one of the seas and oceans is very little, isn’t? Well, we haven’t considered the depth of the rivers and the like and oceans and the like, but we know very well that oceans and seas are far deeper. So there is an even biggest share of water in oceans and the like than in rivers and the like.

Well, oceans and the like are salty water repositories. And the rivers and the like are the sweet water repositories. So, one of the most evident problems of Global Warming is the losing of sweet water mass to salty water mass. A lot of billions of gallons. That means less sweet water for humans, crops, cattle and industry.

If you can’t see a problem in the rise of the sea level, maybe you will find it in the decay of sweet water available.

But I don’t have any faith. You are undeterred by facts.

TNC sees its mission, publicized in its quarterly magazine, Nature Conservancy, as “conserving plants, animals and natural communities that represent the diversity of life by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive.” To accomplish this goal, TNC purchases private lands and thereafter either maintains ownership of the property or sells it, at greatly inflated rates, to the federal government or a state government. TNC claims that as of September 2003 it had “protected,” in this manner, 15 million acres in the United States and an additional 102 million acres worldwide. Most of this land was purchased and then resold to the government at prices far exceeding market value. Typical was TNC’s approach to 14,200 acres of swampland in Georgia. After acquiring the land, valued at around $7 million, in 2002, TNC proceeded to sell it to the state of Georgia for $20 million. This modus operandi has prompted TNC to dub itself “Nature’s real estate agent.” Its ultimate objective is to decrease private property ownership and maximize the nationalization of property.

As noted above, The Nature Conservancy does maintain ownership of some of its purchased land. Today TNC manages the world’s largest private nature preserve system, consisting of some 1,177,000 acres on 1,340 preserves that TNC owns or has under conservation easement.

In November 2004, TNC joined forces with the Sierra Club to oppose an Oregon ballot measure that would have provided compensation to property owners whose land was devalued by regulations prohibiting development—regulations endorsed by TNC. In August 2005 TNC President Steven McCormick acknowledged, in an interview with The Boston Globe, that his organization saw a greatly expanded role for the federal government as essential to its cause. “Regulation and buying land alone probably won’t be sufficient for conservation to take hold on a really large scale,” said McCormick.

TNC has identified 5 major “conservation initiatives” on its agenda:

(a) The Global Marine Initiative “links innovative land and sea conservation strategies to improve survival of our coasts and oceans.”

(b) The Sustainable Waters Program “helps protect freshwater ecosystems by advancing water policies and conservation approaches so that human needs for water can be met while sustaining healthy freshwater ecosystems.”

(c) The Global Climate Change Initiative seeks to develop “achievable solutions to slow the rate of global warming and finding viable options for the Earth’s natural diversity, human communities and economic investments to survive its inevitable impacts.”

(d) The Global Fire Initiative “develops solutions that allow fire to play a role in places where it benefits nature, and keep fire out of places where it is destructive.”

(e) The Invasive Species Initiative “aims to abate the threat to Earth’s diversity posed by invasive non-native plants, animals, and diseases through a combination of prevention, early detection, eradication, restoration, research and outreach.”

TNC warns that global warming — which it views largely as a consequence of industrial activity in capitalist countries like the United States — presents a major threat to the environment and to the survival of human and animal life. “Research shows that the world has now become hotter than at any time during the past 1,000 years. … Evidence is mounting almost daily of the dangers posed by global warming.” In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, which battered the Gulf Coast in the summer of 2005, TNC lamented the purportedly “growing number of severe weather events linked to global change.”

TNC demands immediate action to address the allegedly looming global warming crisis. An avid supporter of the Kyoto protocol (which was defeated in the Senate in 2003 because of the burdensome regulatory costs it would have imposed on American industries, most notably in the energy and manufacturing sectors), TNC now lobbies on behalf of the Climate Stewardship Act, a slightly diluted version of the Kyoto treaty, proposed by Senators John McCain and Joseph Lieberman.

TNC has long demanded that the U.S. military establish “buffer zones” around those of its bases that are surrounded by “critical wildlife habitat.” “Encroaching development can create conflicts between training activities and local residents,” TNC explains. “In addition, development reduces habitat for key species.”

Between 2001 and 2004, TNC received more than 1,200 grants from scores of charitable foundations, including the Ford Foundation, the Bank of America Charitable Foundation, the Blue Moon Fund, the ChevronTexaco Foundation, the Columbia Foundation, the Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation, the Educational Foundation of America, the Foundation for Deep Ecology, the Vira I. Heinz Endowment, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Joyce Foundation, the J.M. Kaplan Fund, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Minneapolis Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Prospect Hill Foundation, the Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Simons Foundation, the Surdna Foundation, and the Turner Foundation.

Additional TNC revenues are derived from the organization’s annual membership fees, which range from $25 to $50 per person. TNC is also a popular destination for the contributions of affluent donors—64 percent of its funding comes from individuals—including celebrities like David Letterman and actor/activist Paul Newman.

Moreover, TNC has benefited from the patronage of the federal government. Contrary to the anti-Bush rhetoric of TNC and most other environmentalist groups, such federal munificence has greatly expanded under the Bush administration. Whereas in 1999 TNC collected just over $19 million from federal agencies like the EPA and the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Interior, and Transportation, in 2004 its share of the federal dole had spiked to nearly $39 million.

Corporations, too, have given generously to TNC. In 2002, the Capital Research Center named TNC as one of the top ten nonprofit recipients of corporate contributions, taking in nearly $1.5 million in corporate donations. As of 2003, TNC had more than 1,900 corporate sponsors.

In the summer of 2003, the Washington Post ran a series of investigative articles spotlighting one particular TNC fundraising program. “Under the program,” explained the Post, “the charity buys raw land, attaches some development restrictions and then resells the properties to supporters at greatly reduced prices. Buyers give the Conservancy cash payments for roughly the amount of the discount, a sum that is then written off the buyers’ federal income taxes.” In one of several cases detailed by the Post, TNC helped a trustee purchase a 146-acre parcel of land in Kentucky for the purpose of building a horse farm and two houses. TNC acquired the property, valued at $368,000, under a conservation easement prohibiting industrial development, and then resold the land to the trustee for $252,000, who then made up the remaining cost with a charitable donation to TNC—a $130,000 tax-deduction. In response to the revelations, the IRS conduct an exhaustive audit of TNC in 2004 and ruled to disallow inappropriate tax deductible donations to charitable organizations in exchange for real estate.

The Post further noted that TNC had sold its logo to be used for consumer items manufactured by corporations whose directors, including executives from General Motors and other companies traditionally impugned as polluters by TNC, sat on TNC’s advisory governing board and leadership council. The paper also reported that TNC had extended a $1.55 million home loan to its President, Steven McCormick, at a discounted interest rate, which it misreported. (McCormick repaid the loan in full following the disclosure.)

Perhaps most damagingly for TNC’s reputation, the Post reported that the organization, even as it professed its commitment to “saving the last great places on Earth,” had drilled for oil and natural gas on a wildlife preserve in Texas City, Texas, a breeding ground for an endangered species of grouse. TNC had been awarded the land from the Mobil oil company with the understanding that it would safeguard the property. Following the embarrassing disclosure, TNC hastily announced its suspension of what it called “resource extraction activities.”

Plus Bush gets the optics of picking a Wall Street guy, just like Clinton did. Hmmm little Bushie. Trying to save yourself by copying Clinton because your own gig has proven to be a big fat failure? This is no Texas guy you picked Bushie. This is a New York City Investment Banker. Eat it you Republicanos.

I also did the math, and in order to raise the ocean level worldwide by 0.8mm is about 7.608 x 10e15 gallons. written out that is 7,608,000,000,000,000. I think that is a significant amount of water.

Well, why not use the lower number of 0.3mm? What the hell, let’s use the high number. That’s what Al Gore “The Exaggerator” would do. 0.8mm/year increases the volume of the ocean by…ready?

0.0000018% over 80 plus years. So you increase it by another millimeter for the last 15 years. Since you’re exaggerating the numbers, why not?

Wow, GS, that is significant!!!!!

Although, we really don’t know since we have “very few” data points.

Now why the hell isn’t it getting any warmer in Homer, AK?

Could it be they are just inept in general and fail to vett everyone( or anyone for that matter)?

Or is it a ploy to get an Alito-type candidate through?

Regardless, he’ll have tough time getting confirmed, it being a very nasty election year and all.