Last week Nature published a study, “Greenhouse gas mitigation can reduce sea-ice loss and increase polar bear persistence” (subs. req’d).  The journal had a pretty sensational cover, with a polar bear and the compelling headline, “Staying Alive:  Cut greenhouse-gas emissions now we can still save the polar bear.”

If you missed Nature, you probably saw the headlines:

• Arctic icecap safe from runaway melting: study (AFP)
• Polar Bears: On Thin Ice? Extinction Can Be Averted, Scientists Say (NSF press release)
  

I really wish any of that were realistic, not so much because the polar bear is a critical linchpin species, but because the loss of Arctic ice in the summer may well trigger even more rapid warming (see “Tundra 4: Permafrost loss linked to Arctic sea ice loss” and below).  But in fact a much more reasonable AFP headline would be “Arctic ice cap on verge of runaway melting:  study.”  The NSF release should read, “Polar bear extinction now likely.”

I understand that journalists typically don’t read studies closely, but Nature ought to know better.    Perhaps, as we will see, it is just a matter of climate scientists of being utterly divorced from the reality of our energy and political systems.   Still, in reading the study and its supplementary information, I am puzzled why Nature published the article as written and especially why it chose to sensationalize it on the cover.

Let’s set aside, for now, the fact that the study focuses on sea ice area, not volume.  This is key figure in the paper:

Read more

(C) The Dalai Lama argued that the political agenda should be sidelined for five to ten years and the international community should shift its focus to climate change on the Tibetan plateau. Melting glaciers, deforestation, and increasingly polluted water from mining projects were problems that “cannot wait.” The Dalai Lama criticized China’s energy policy, alleging that dam construction in Kham and Amdo have displaced thousands of Tibetans and left temples and monasteries underwater. He recommended the PRC compensate Tibetans for disrupting their nomadic lifestyle with vocational training, such as weaving.

WikiLeaks cables: Dalai Lama called for focus on climate, not politics, in Tibet

Exiled Buddhist leader told US ambassador to India that ‘political agenda should be sidelined’ in favour of climate issues

Read more

A diplomatic cable published by WikiLeaks reveals that hackers launched a sophisticated attack against United States climate negotiators about the same time the Climategate hacking of scientists happened last year.  Brad Johnson has the story.

The attack, a “spear phishing” attempt to gain control of Department of State (DoS) computers, took place in the months before the Copenhagen climate talks of December, 2009. The June 19, 2009, cable warned that these kinds of “socially engineered” attacks, trying to trick people into running malicious software, were likely to be repeated:

Read more

These folks have:

The Climate Science Rapid Response Team (CSRRT) is a match-making service between top scientists and members of the media and office holders and their staffs from various levels of government.

I’m doing another post on them because repetition is the sincerest form of messaging — and because they have amped up their website (click here), which explains:

Read more

Scientists, Expert Judgment, and Public Policy: What is Our Proper Role?

1. The truth is bad enough
2. Integrity should never be compromised
3. Don’t be afraid to use metaphors
4. Distinguish when speaking about your values (as a member of the human race) and when speaking as scientist
5. Don’t let fear (of deniers) keep you from working on the most important problems facing society

One of the climate scientist I have learned the most from is Michael Oppenheimer the Albert G. Milbank Professor of Geosciences and International Affairs at Princeton University, and Director of the Program in Science, Technology and Environmental Policy (STEP).

He gave the first “Stephen Schneider Global Change Lecture” at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union last week.  The 5 points above are from the end, where   asks Steve’s wife and colleague, Terry Root, “what Steve would have advised if he were giving this speech.”

Read more

A diplomatic cable published by WikiLeaks reveals that hackers launched a sophisticated attack against United States climate negotiators about the same time the Climategate hacking of scientists happened last year. The attack, a “spear phishing” attempt to gain control of Department of State (DoS) computers, took place in the months before the Copenhagen climate talks of December, 2009. The June 19, 2009, cable warned that these kinds of “socially engineered” attacks, trying to trick people into running malicious software, were likely to be repeated:

DoS personnel have been targeted with socially engineered climate change-related e-mail. It is probable that receipt of climate change-themed socially engineered messages will persist as negotiations continue.

Five officials within the State Department’s Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern’s office received an email about “China and Climate Change” designed to look like it came from a National Journal columnist, with a PDF attachment that harbored malicious code. If the attack had been successful, the hackers could have gotten “nearly complete control” over the computer systems. However, State’s Cyber Threat Analysis Division detected the attack and the users’ software was kept up to date, preventing harm:

CTAD’s Technical Analysis/Special Operations monitoring detected a malicious e-mail massage targeting five DoS individuals employed within the Division of Ocean Affairs, Office of the Special Envoy for Climate Change. The socially engineered message had the subject line “China and Climate Change” and was spoofed to appear as if it were from a legitimate international economics columnist at the National Journal. In addition, the body of the e-mail contained comments designed to appeal to the recipients as it was specifically aligned with their job function, and a signature block with contact information for the spoofed sender was present. Attached to the message was a PDF file, also titled “China and Climate Change,” which harbored malicious code designed to exploit the Adobe Collab getIcon(), JavaScript vulnerability (CVE-2009-0927). This vulnerability, if executed successfully, would have allowed malicious actors to remotely execute arbitrary code on a victim computer. The PDF document also contained the Poison Ivy Remote Administration Tool — a malicious software program that provides a remote user with nearly complete control over a comprised system. However, since the DoS users targeted in this intrusion attempt were operating with currently patched versions of Adobe software, there was neither compromise nor data lost as a result of this incident (for technical information about the incident, see CTAD Report TR-09-034).

China and the U.S. had just ended three days of negotiations in Beijing in early June. The cable gave no indication of who initiated the attack:

Though the incident has not been attributed to any known hostile actor, the event appears to be a targeted spear-phishing attempt and may be indicative of efforts to gather intelligence on the U.S.’s position on climate change issues.

Five months later, hackers uploaded an archive of thousands of emails stolen from England’s University of East Anglia’s servers of correspondence between climate scientists, as part of a campaign to derail the Copenhagen climate talks and cripple political action on global warming in the United States. Hackers and burglars also targeted climate scientists at the University of Victoria in Canada. No one has yet been charged in these crimes.

(HT Plains Justice Blog)

Semper Viridis?

… what could save America’s energy future “” at a time when a fraudulent, anti-science campaign funded largely by Big Oil and Big Coal has blocked Congress from passing any clean energy/climate bill “” is the fact that the Navy and Marine Corps just didn’t get the word.

God bless them: “The Few. The Proud. The Green.” Semper Fi.

Spearheaded by Ray Mabus, President Obama’s secretary of the Navy and the former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, the Navy and Marines are building a strategy for “out-greening” Al Qaeda, “out-greening” the Taliban and “out-greening” the world’s petro-dictators. Their efforts are based in part on a recent study from 2007 data that found that the U.S. military loses one person, killed or wounded, for every 24 fuel convoys it runs in Afghanistan. Today, there are hundreds and hundreds of these convoys needed to truck fuel “” to run air-conditioners and power diesel generators “” to remote bases all over Afghanistan.

Two years ago, I sat on the Defense Science Board Task Force on DoD Energy Strategy, which took testimony and wrote a report, More Fight “” Less Fuel, on how energy efficiency and renewables makes sense “” and can save lives “” for the military. The findings are here.

Efficiency and renewables are finally getting the serious attention of even the most conservative Pentagon planner, which is not surprising given these stark military realities:
Read more

This last Thursday, California regulators voted to approve the basic fundamentals of the cap and trade system that will implement the state’s landmark 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32).  Under the law, the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) is to develop a set of regulations to implement the law itself.

These regulations are the more detail-oriented, “where the rubber meets the road” rules for industry to follow beginning in 2012.  CAP’s Araceli Ruano has the story.

Read more