Open Thread Plus Holiday Clean Air Cartoon

30 Responses to Open Thread Plus Holiday Clean Air Cartoon

1. David Stockbridge Smith says:

   January 7, 2012 at 9:20 am

   If one were to forget about AGW and politics for a minute and look at the two competing energy enterprises (fossil fuels vs. clean alternatives) there is only one choice and it’s implementation is inevitable.

   Option A: Fossil fuel generated energy is a finite system that operates on a 40,000,000 (a guess) year cycle; the sun shines, life happens, living things die, accumulation on the surface over millions of years provide pressure of whatever is necessary to create the raw material, millions and millions of years go by, human technology was developed allowing the resource to be developed, we drive our cars and charge our laptops. Then I guess we die in our time and become a part of this cycle. This system is completely out of our control, is finite and takes a really, really long time to occur. (I am leaving out the part where, if we are not careful mass extinction of life on earth will result.)

   Option B: The developing system, the so-called “alternate” goes something like this; The sun shines, 8 minutes pass and whatever it is hits the Earth surface, warms the air causing wind, heats a prepared surface and either heats it or causes electrons to flow, instantly lights and laptops and whatever start to operate. Sometimes it is stored for a brief period before consumption. This all occurs in the first step of the fossil fuel cycle in the previous paragraph. The pollution source is 93m miles away. It is a 10 minute cycle. In our time frame, it is an infinite source (again a guess) measured in useful life of billions of years.

   Again, forget about AGW. Which approach makes more sense, option A or option B? I do not believe that a rational person, without financial interest, could select option A as a close second. Once option B is on the table, Option A is no longer viable except by force of manipulation and politics. It is technologically obsolete and dangerous to us all.

   The purveyors of Option A are horse traders in the early 1800 arguing that the automobile is the work of the devil and trying to stop the spread of paved roads or maybe cave men with stones trying to stop the use of fire as a tool.

   Once you add in AGW, option a becomes a death wish.
   • Ernest says:

     January 7, 2012 at 5:09 pm

     The folks in the fossil fuel industry who many even believe in AGW would like to extend the fossil fuel period as long as possible before transitioning to renewables, since they already have financial skin in that game and most of the current infrastructure is built around oil. Additionally, they would argue that technology is also improving for recovering unconventional oil, tar sands, shale gas, maybe to last another 100 years. (And who knows, maybe even before then, someone may develop the technology to extract the vast amounts of methane hydrates from the ocean floor, somewhere from 350 to 3500 year’s worth of supply. http://www.ornl.gov/info/reporter/no16/methane.htm . Yeah, even if finite, lots of fossil fuel, but we’ll be cooked.)
     -
     The main argument for renewables is AGW. If one goes the route of “peak oil” (peak fossil fuel), this may never happen.
   • Speedy says:

     January 9, 2012 at 8:48 am

     Option C: Nuclear – Safe, clean and reliable.
     Nuclear is the safest energy source we have (in terms of fatalities per TWh produced).
     It uses far less material for the same energy output compared to wind and solar. The vaste stream is quite small and easily mananged (technically, sadly it’s difficult politically).

     Most important, it’s reliable. Unlike wind and solar you can depend on it being there. There’s no need for massive storage, which remains an unsolved problem at the scale needed for large penetration, or backup using dirty and dangerous fossil fuels.

     That said, I wouldn’t object to a world powerd by wind and solar, I just think it’s wildly unrealistic, and that nuclear has a lower overall environmental impact.
2. prokaryotes says:

   January 7, 2012 at 9:20 am

   lol great cartoon! So true :)
3. Spike says:

   January 7, 2012 at 9:37 am

   Warmer oceans appear to be deleterious to reef fish according to a new study

   http://planetearth.nerc.ac.uk/news/story.aspx?id=896
   • Spike says:

     January 7, 2012 at 9:46 am

     Apologies – not so new but something I hadn’t seen before!
4. Spike says:

   January 7, 2012 at 9:41 am

   A new paper looks at a range of studies on climate change and species extinctions and finds it acts in synergy with habitat loss

   http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02593.x/abstract
5. Spike says:

   January 7, 2012 at 9:51 am

   Carbon dioxide removed from effluent air by a new discovery in materials science

   http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120104115100.htm
   • catman306 says:

     January 7, 2012 at 11:11 am

     Burying charcoal underground or ground up and mixed with mulch does the same thing. Using this low tech solution would mean people everywhere, of all means, could work together to get this carbon back into the ground.
6. Spike says:

   January 7, 2012 at 9:57 am

   And another paper suggests species extinctions due to climate change may have been underestimated due to interactions between species

   http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2012/01/03/rspb.2011.2367
7. Jeff H says:

   January 7, 2012 at 12:08 pm

   Getting Clear Regarding Strategy?

   Now that the New Year is well underway, I’d like to understand what’s being proposed in terms of the movements’ “strategy”. I’ve missed quite a few posts in recent weeks, so forgive me if I’ve missed the posts that examine, critique, and attempt to improve upon our approaches to date.

   So, may I ask, is the movement’s strategy for 2012 still this? …

   * Vote for President Obama no matter what he does or doesn’t do, and no matter how much more we fail to actually do much of anything to address climate change. (This is the stated strategy on the part of some, but the implied strategy on the part of many others, and still others refuse to reconsider this strategy or even to discuss a possible change to it.)

   * Believe candidate Obama’s promises about what he thinks about climate change and what he’ll do about it, then allow him to adopt the “make me do it” stance beginning the day after he’s elected (if he is).

   * Call on the people who have been attending once- or twice-a-year events for years to attend a few more of them — events that essentially ask the President to do what he had promised to do, long ago.

   * Write articles, blogs, and books.

   * Play defense in order to defend against the elimination of the very small amount of progress made so far, when it’s attacked.

   * Put a favorable light on whatever happens (hardly anything) and doesn’t happen at the annual COP bureaucratic bash, whenever it takes place.

   * Watch and complain as another round of record oil company profits is announced.

   * Continue to largely view climate change through an economic lens — that is, continue most of the dialogue as if economics (in the narrow sense) is what matters. While periodically discussing climate change as an ethical issue here, defer to (and largely accept) President Obama’s framing of the issue as one of economics and jobs, and to an extent, national security.

   Did I miss anything substantial about the strategy being proposed for this year?

   Thanks,

   Jeff
   • frank -- Decoding SwiftHack says:

     January 7, 2012 at 3:32 pm

     Jeff H, the type of protest movement you’re looking for is not here. The type of protest movement exists in the camps of Occupy Wall Street and in Glenn Greenwald’s column.

     And I don’t know what the strategy of either this “movement” or that “movement” is, but I think my current strategy is this:

     (1) Solve SwiftHack.

     (2) Broadcast the truth about SwiftHack.

     (3) …OK, this part needs to be worked out, but it’ll have something to do with justice and punishment.

     Ah well.

     – frank
   • Brian R Smith says:

     January 7, 2012 at 4:35 pm

     “Did I miss anything substantial about the strategy being proposed for this year?”

     Strategy.. good. Cynical laundry list of perceived ineffective measures.. not so helpful.

     I too am an armchair strategist, wishing I had magical influence to inspire those with standing, who have it in their power… to move more quickly to collaborate, to grab the public stage with a vengeance, deal a final blow to climate disinformation and charge into the 2012 election with climate and clean energy as a lead issue and Obama at the pulpit, renewed by the infusion of demonstrable public support for climate/energy/economic leadership. Who among us would not like to see this?

     I’ve read a number of your comments calling for Joe, CP and others to jack up the effort, network more effectively with the science community, etc. But you seem to ignore the evidence that, while there is no Central Command in the climate fight, there is only an increase in the efforts of scientists, economists, business leaders and political activists to collaborate on solutions. It’s a work in progress and may or may not lead to a national climate coalition with teeth. I hope it does, and soon. But to imply that climate leaders and the rest of us are somehow not aware of the need for accelerated political strategy (that’s how I read you), or that there IS a coherent movement you can attribute fault to, or that readers here are all well- characterized by your list, is a bit naive.

     If you really think that writing “articles, blogs & books” is a fools errand, and that climate solutions have little to do with economics, and economic arguments still in the making, then,yes, you have missed something.
   • Ernest says:

     January 7, 2012 at 5:29 pm

     As the Keystone XL protests have shown, keeping the pressure on does make a difference with Obama. (I don’t know if the results would’ve been the same with a GOP president.)
     -
     Yes, it’s a “strategy”, but is it a “winning strategy” to fundamentally solve the climate issue? On the second issue, I don’t know what is the solution, short of a massive collective agreement in this nation and throughout the world to deal with the issue in a serious way.
   • 6thextinction says:

     January 7, 2012 at 11:07 pm

     i very much appreciate your post, jeff.

     i don’t have a science background and appreciate the knowledge of posters to open thread, but am frustrated by so much exchange of climate change knowledge and so few ideas of what to do to change the status quo.

     our knowledge is not the answer. 70% of americans acknowledge climate change. everyday enviros will write lots of checks to “green” non-profits, but are not activists. without massive pressure from the populace, gov’t will do little to nothing. don’t bother writing letters or signing petitions. we need to join the occupiers, which is the first sign of a real movement here in a long time. tar sands action had 1200 protesters pre occupiers and 12,000 after.

     if there’s not an occupier group near you, start one.
8. Colorado Bob says:

   January 7, 2012 at 12:42 pm

   Record air pollution hammers Calif’s ag heartland

   FRESNO, Calif.—This is the time of year when residents who often live with the nation’s worst pollution often can draw a breath of fresh air. But this winter has not been kind to people who want to play outside in California’s Central Valley.

   A dry December and January has stagnated air across California, but nowhere is the situation more serious than between Modesto and Bakersfield, where nearly every day dirty air has exceeded federal health standards.

   It’s the worst air quality recorded in a dozen years, and it’s the unhealthiest kind– microscopic, chemical-laden particles that can get into lungs and absorbed into the bloodstream to create health risks in everyone, not just the young and infirm.

   http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2012/01/07/record_air_pollution_hammers_califs_ag_heartland/
9. Lionel A says:

   January 7, 2012 at 12:46 pm

   Serial dis-informer Michaels is at it again in Forbes as pointed out over at SkepticalScience .
10. prokaryotes says:

    January 7, 2012 at 7:09 pm

    I’m going to watch this pretty soon, thought i share this here with you all :)

    Bobby Fischer Against the World

    Immediately after beating Spassky, Fischer began his life of seclusion. It may have been even sadder that he also effectively stopped playing chess at the same time, at age 29. All of us are familiar with Fischer’s increasingly bizarre post-Reykjavik antics. Sometimes attributed to eccentricity, Garbus makes no secret that she believes Bobby’s behaviour was a product of mental illness. Through the images and words of her film, she leaves no other way to label Bobby’s paranoia and psychotic pronouncements. She puts the proof right there, in the flickering of a projector, for all to see. We wish it weren’t so. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1777551/
    • prokaryotes says:

      January 7, 2012 at 7:14 pm

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Fischer
11. prokaryotes says:

    January 7, 2012 at 11:22 pm

    Monopoly is an Old Game http://imgur.com/r/funny/un4ME
12. Spike says:

    January 8, 2012 at 4:32 am

    More on US drought in the future here

    http://blastmagazine.com/the-magazine/technology/earth/global-warming-and-water-shortages/
13. Spike says:

    January 8, 2012 at 4:35 am

    And the drought map will be familiar to readers of this Blog

    http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/watersustainability/index.asp
14. Colorado Bob says:

    January 8, 2012 at 12:54 pm

    QUEENSLAND flood victims are being hit with massive insurance premium increases as they struggle to rebuild their homes and lives a year after the devastating natural disaster.

    One Ipswich car dealer was stunned when its longtime insurer quoted an “astronomical” 1000 per cent increase, which the company’s broker initially thought was a typing error.
    Bellbowrie’s Brendan and Kathy Edwards, homeless for the past 12 months, have seen their bill more than double, and face paying more than $7200 a year to protect a home that suffered $350,000 in damage.

    Their former $3500-a-year platinum insurance policy paid out a $12,500 “compassionate” payment.

    http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/rates-up-as-flood-victims-struggle/story-e6freoof-1226239409414
15. prokaryotes says:

    January 8, 2012 at 2:10 pm

    Archean to Anthropocene: The past is the key to the future http://climateforce.wordpress.com/2012/01/08/archean-to-anthropocene-the-past-is-the-key-to-the-future/
16. Colorado Bob says:

    January 8, 2012 at 2:29 pm

    Amazing Video – 800,000 Years Of CO2 In 3 Minutes

    http://drich13.newsvine.com/_news/2012/01/08/10050309-amazing-video-800000-years-of-co2-in-3-minutes
17. prokaryotes says:

    January 8, 2012 at 4:47 pm

    An Arctic methane worst-case scenario

    Let’s suppose that the Arctic started to degas methane 100 times faster than it is today. I just made that number up trying to come up with a blow-the-doors-off surprise, something like the ozone hole. We ran the numbers to get an idea of how the climate impact of an Arctic Methane Nasty Surprise would stack up to that from Business-as-Usual rising CO2

    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2012/01/an-arctic-methane-worst-case-scenario/

    It is possible that a factor increase would be hold confident to prevent panic.
    • prokaryotes says:

      January 9, 2012 at 5:53 am

      Notice, i can no longer support RealClimate due to poor articles and what i call strange moderation were denier and downcaster types of comments are published and honest sincere input is deleted without any explanation.
18. Colorado Bob says:

    January 9, 2012 at 12:32 am

    Climate change is altering mountain vegetation at large scale

    Climate change is having a more profound effect on alpine vegetation than at first anticipated, according to a study carried out by an international group of researchers and published in Nature Climate Change. The first ever pan-European study of changing mountain vegetation has found that some alpine meadows could disappear within the next few decades.

    Led by researchers from the Austrian Academy of Sciences and the University of Vienna, biologists from 13 different countries in Europe analysed 867 vegetation samples from 60 different summits sited in all major European mountain systems, first in 2001 and then again just seven years later in 2008. They found strong indications that, at a continental scale, cold-loving plants traditionally found in alpine regions are being pushed out of many habitats by warm-loving plants.

    http://www.sciencecodex.com/read/climate_change_is_altering_mountain_vegetation_at_large_scale-83994
19. Colorado Bob says:

    January 9, 2012 at 12:35 am

    Boreal ducks threatened by climate change
    Ducks doomed by earlier snow melts brought on by global warming, study finds

    Spring starting earlier

    The team suspected the ducks’ boreal wetland habitats were changing, so they examined snow cover data. That was when they made a startling discovery.

    “We found that over a 35-year period, that spring comes on average about 11 days earlier,” Slattery said.

    Slattery said that is a massive change. Low snow cover is directly linked with the drop in the ducks’ survival.

    Slattery said the world’s warming trend interferes with a delicate timing in nature.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2012/01/08/mb-boreal-ducks-climate-change.html
20. Colorado Bob says:

    January 9, 2012 at 1:02 am

    Dozens of people were stranded in 2010 when ice roads thawed early. So far this winter they have yet to be constructed, cutting off needed supplies to remote First Nations.

    A good 30,000 people who reside in 20 remote communities that are only road-accessible during winter depend on this connection, according to the Winnipeg Free Press. The alternative is prohibitively expensive fly-in delivery.

    Current temperatures in and around Winnipeg were reaching 7 degrees Centigrade, or 44 degrees Fahrenheit, on January 5, and Environment Canada said such highs were likely to last for a few more weeks. The previous high was 4.3C, or 40F, in 1984, CBC News said. This time last year it was Nunavut and its capital, Iqaluit, that were dealing with a heat wave.

    In Berens River First Nation the high temperatures have created a health emergency, CBC News reported on January 5. The community had run out of gasoline and could not fuel its ambulances. Chief George Kemp told CBC News that health workers were unable to reach home-care patients and said that 30 residents may have to evacuate.

    Read more:http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/01/06/manitoba-aboriginals-roadless-on-thin-ice-as-temps-soar-70864 http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/01/06/manitoba-aboriginals-roadless-on-thin-ice-as-temps-soar-70864#ixzz1iwEK5Qvh