• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

Global Warming: Time for action.


SPN

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
16,863
Even as Michael McDowell was arguing that efforts to address Global Warming must take second place to economic "Growth" on Sam Smyth's show today, news was arriving from Washington that the penny has finally dropped.

Bush 'prepares emissions U-turn'
http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article1604092.ece
President Bush is preparing an astonishing U-turn on global warming, senior Washington sources say.

After years of trying to sabotage agreements to tackle climate change he is drawing up plans to control emissions of carbon dioxide and rapidly boost the use of renewable energy sources.

.....

Over the past few days rumours swept the capital that the "Toxic Texan" would announce his conversion this week, in an attempt to reduce the impact of a major speech tomorrow by Al Gore on solutions to climate change.

The White House denied the timing, but did not deny that a change of policy was on its way. Sources say that the most likely moment is the President's State of the Union address in January.

For a little more background on the issue:

Inconvenient truths (for Al Gore and the rest of the planet)http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article1604091.ece
Suddenly global warming has come in from the cold. A potent combination of startling natural events, growing public pressure, and pioneering political commitments has brought it storming up the agenda.

Even many of the previously sceptical are now convinced. For example, who would have thought the leader of the Conservative Party would become Britain's most potent champion of radical action to combat climate change, or that he would share platforms with the leader of Friends of the Earth?

And who would have imagined Arnold Schwarzenegger - famous as for his devotion to the Humvee, the greatest of the gas guzzlers - would defy his party, as Governor of California, to drive through the world's most ambitious programme for cutting the pollution that causes global warming?

And as we report (right), even the "Toxic Texan" himself - President George W Bush, who set out to kill the Kyoto Protocol and all international attempts to tackle the problem - is laying the ground for a U-turn.
 

Eddiepops

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2006
Messages
106
SPN said:
Even as Michael McDowell was arguing that efforts to address Global Warming must take second place to economic "Growth" on Sam Smyth's show today, news was arriving from Washington that the penny has finally dropped.

Bush 'prepares emissions U-turn'
http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article1604092.ece
President Bush is preparing an astonishing U-turn on global warming, senior Washington sources say.

After years of trying to sabotage agreements to tackle climate change he is drawing up plans to control emissions of carbon dioxide and rapidly boost the use of renewable energy sources.

.....

Over the past few days rumours swept the capital that the "Toxic Texan" would announce his conversion this week, in an attempt to reduce the impact of a major speech tomorrow by Al Gore on solutions to climate change.

The White House denied the timing, but did not deny that a change of policy was on its way. Sources say that the most likely moment is the President's State of the Union address in January.

For a little more background on the issue:

Inconvenient truths (for Al Gore and the rest of the planet)http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article1604091.ece
[quote:3k6kvxci]Suddenly global warming has come in from the cold. A potent combination of startling natural events, growing public pressure, and pioneering political commitments has brought it storming up the agenda.

Even many of the previously sceptical are now convinced. For example, who would have thought the leader of the Conservative Party would become Britain's most potent champion of radical action to combat climate change, or that he would share platforms with the leader of Friends of the Earth?

And who would have imagined Arnold Schwarzenegger - famous as for his devotion to the Humvee, the greatest of the gas guzzlers - would defy his party, as Governor of California, to drive through the world's most ambitious programme for cutting the pollution that causes global warming?

And as we report (right), even the "Toxic Texan" himself - President George W Bush, who set out to kill the Kyoto Protocol and all international attempts to tackle the problem - is laying the ground for a U-turn.
[/quote:3k6kvxci]

Thank God, although I'd still be a little sceptical about Bush and co's committment. The Republicans know that the environment is a major vote loser for them and that its one of the things the Democrats consistently out-poll them on. I hope that this isnt' just a little sweetener in preparation for the November midterms.

As for Mr Gore, Im reading a book at the moment about the move towards Kyoto and his is a name that appeared from the very start. He's no new arrival to the battle against carbon issues and has been talking about it for over 20 years now, long before it was popular or beneficial to do so. He's the real deal, despite his inability to get much concrete committments made during his time as VP, but then that's due more to the lack of influence of that office than anything on his part.
 

ReformedSocialist

New member
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
2
Any opinions regarding China?

Have they signed up for Kyoto?
 

david

Active member
Joined
Feb 6, 2003
Messages
190
More Bushit. I do not trust that man one jot. He has a good spin team around him and that's all it's gonna be. I'm often wrong but I wish I could be wrong on that.
 

david

Active member
Joined
Feb 6, 2003
Messages
190
Profiteering from the ice thaw is an article in Spiegel Online about how oil companies are rubbing their hands at the prospect of oil under the arctic, the thawing of which has, of course, been brought about by the burning of their products.

So, we carrying on burning at an ever-faster rate the stuff we've found and accessed that's destroying this planet; then we uncover a veritable treasure trove of the stuff. What happens then? Cripes.

There's also the following, for which I can't find a link at present:

Melting ice pack 'now allows ship to reach North Pole'
By Roger Highfield Sc473 words
21 September 2006
The Daily Telegraph

(c) 2006 Telegraph Group Limited, London
ARCTIC ice cover has melted so much that a ship could have sailed unhindered from northern Europe to the North Pole itself a few weeks ago, according to images released yesterday by scientists.

Satellite images acquired from Aug 23-25 have shown for the first time dramatic openings - larger than the size of the British Isles - in the Arctic's year-round sea ice pack north of Svalbard, and extending into the Russian Arctic all the way to the North Pole.

The images were acquired by instruments aboard Envisat and EOS Aqua, two satellites operated by the European Space Agency (ESA).

"This situation is unlike anything observed in previous record low-ice seasons,'' said Mark Drinkwater, of ESA's Oceans/Ice Unit. "It is highly imaginable that a ship could have passed from Spitzbergen or Northern Siberia through what is normally pack ice to reach the North Pole without difficulty.''

Mr Drinkwater added: "If this anomaly continues, the Northeast Passage, or 'Northern Sea Route' between Europe and Asia will be open over longer intervals, and it is conceivable we might see attempts at sailing around the world directly across the summer Arctic Ocean within 10 to 20 years.''

Regular satellite monitoring over the past 25 years shows that the northern polar ice cover has shrunk and thinned as global temperatures have risen. But this year's images are unprecedented, and fierce storms that fragmented and scattered already thin pack ice may be to blame, the scientists believe.

The data were gathered by Envisat's Advanced Synthetic Aperture Radar instrument and the AMSR-E instrument aboard the EOS Aqua satellite and revealed around five to 10 per cent of the Arctic's perennial sea ice, which had survived the summer melt season, has been fragmented by late summer storms.

Satellites have witnessed reductions in the minimum ice extent - the lowest amount of ice recorded in the area annually - at the end of summer from around eight million square kilometres in the early 1980s to less than 5.5 million square kilometres in 2005, changes widely viewed as a consequence of greenhouse warming.

Data gathered by Nasa satellites and published today in Nature show that Greenland continued to lose ice mass at a significant rate during April, and the rate is accelerating.

The University of Colorado study indicates that from April 2004 to April 2006, Greenland was shedding ice at about two-and-a-half times the rate of the previous two years.

Scientists believe that large amounts of fresh water purged from Greenland's eastern coast could help to weaken the counter clockwise flow of the North Atlantic Current, lowering water and wind temperatures and potentially triggering abrupt cooling events in northern Europe.
...each of which articles come across as demonstrating either the wanton and irredeemable stupidity of humans and/or their nihilistic nonchalance.

Of the people who care about this world and its inhabitants, none can do much to prevent such events. The people who can, won't. Their salaries depend upon not doing anything.

Sometimes, I'm ashamed to be a member of this species.
 

hiker

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
1,961
david said:
Of the people who care about this world and its inhabitants, none can do much to prevent such events. The people who can, won't. Their salaries depend upon not doing anything.

Sometimes, I'm ashamed to be a member of this species.
Never stop fighting. We can do nothing about other jurisdictions but our own. We can turn Ireland into a shining example of how to maximise the use of wind and wave.
In how to reduce and reuse and recycle.
How to encourage the use of hybrid cars and bio-fuels.

I think we will turn the corner on cleaner everything within the next couple of decades.
If the French and Japanese can make that fussion yoke work we might well see a much brighter future.
 

cjryan

New member
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
1
Hybrid and Bio-fuel cars should only be considered as a temporary solution until safe and efficient hydrogen fuel cells come on line.
 

david

Active member
Joined
Feb 6, 2003
Messages
190
hiker said:
Never stop fighting. We can do nothing about other jurisdictions but our own. We can turn Ireland into a shining example of how to maximise the use of wind and wave.
And the chances of this happening? Come on, H, be realistic. The desperation to privatise the ESB means net metering and micro-generation are buried. Nimbys abound anyway.

hiker said:
In how to reduce and reuse and recycle.
The need to maintain 'growth' only sees the waste problem getting bigger and bigger. Roche being in bed with Indaver means reduction is off the table, reuse means, well, taking MNCs and local companines on, something this government is ideologically incapable of and recycle will be impossible when these incinerators come on stream. We'll be fined for minimising waste.

hiker said:
How to encourage the use of hybrid cars and bio-fuels.
No. You are wrong. Hybrids for a start have poor mileage and anyway are a sticking plaster. And, so long as it is perfectly legal - indeed, encouraged - for any private vehicle to do under 50 miles to the gallon, we're all just ignoring the elephant in the room. Fewer cars, of any sort, is part of the answer. There's not enough land for bio-fuels. Forget it. Walk, get a horse, a bike, use the train and bus. But cars? One of the most inefficient methods of transporting a body ever. You take yourself and at least a ton of metal out to get the paper. Gah.

hiker said:
I think we will turn the corner on cleaner everything within the next couple of decades.
I'm an optimist as well, H. Even though I see huge sheds being put up to worship Tesco, Homebase, Currys, the 'car villages', all grossly inefficient in terms of heating and lighting, all dedicated to pushing more stuff onto us, I am still (just) an optimist. When I see someone with a trophy house put up a solar panel (running on ESB juice) whilst a couple of suvs in the front are illuminated by 400 watt floodlights, I am still (only just) an optimist.

hiker said:
If the French and Japanese can make that fussion yoke work we might well see a much brighter future.
Oh no...
 

SPN

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
16,863
cjryan said:
Hybrid and Bio-fuel cars should only be considered as a temporary solution until safe and efficient hydrogen fuel cells come on line.
That won't be for another 30 years.

Bicycles are another, and more likely, interim solution! :wink:
 

david

Active member
Joined
Feb 6, 2003
Messages
190
SPN said:
cjryan said:
Hybrid and Bio-fuel cars should only be considered as a temporary solution until safe and efficient hydrogen fuel cells come on line.
That won't be for another 30 years.

Bicycles are another, and more likely, interim solution! :wink:
This is a suggested preferred personal transport policy:

  • 1 Don't make the journey
    2 Walk
    3 Horse
    4 Cycle
    5 Train
    6 Bus
    7 Don't make the journey
 

ryano

Active member
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
173
david said:
This is a suggested preferred personal transport policy:

  • 1 Don't make the journey
    2 Walk
    3 Horse
    4 Cycle
    5 Train
    6 Bus
    7 Don't make the journey
Are these in order of preference? If so, I think cycle should be above both walk and horse. Cycling burns fewer calories than walking the same distance, and while carbon is emitted in the manufacture of your bicycle, you don't need to maintain a plot of grazing land in order to keep it.
 

david

Active member
Joined
Feb 6, 2003
Messages
190
Ah, but a horse is much more useful than a bike. And lifespan?

OK, point taken, for transport, cycling is the mass transit item.

But give me a horse any day.
 

Pax

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2004
Messages
265
SPN said:
For a little more background on the issue:

Inconvenient truths (for Al Gore and the rest of the planet)http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article1604091.ece
Suddenly global warming has come in from the cold. A potent combination of startling natural events, growing public pressure, and pioneering political commitments has brought it storming up the agenda.

Even many of the previously sceptical are now convinced. For example, who would have thought the leader of the Conservative Party would become Britain's most potent champion of radical action to combat climate change, or that he would share platforms with the leader of Friends of the Earth?

And who would have imagined Arnold Schwarzenegger - famous as for his devotion to the Humvee, the greatest of the gas guzzlers - would defy his party, as Governor of California, to drive through the world's most ambitious programme for cutting the pollution that causes global warming?

And as we report (right), even the "Toxic Texan" himself - President George W Bush, who set out to kill the Kyoto Protocol and all international attempts to tackle the problem - is laying the ground for a U-turn.
Woah that excerpt is even more super-packed full O' greenwash shytery than is the norm. I mean the leader of the Conservative Party is Britain's most potent champion of radical action to combat climate change? FFS!

Could anyone tell us what would be the actual real world policies that the conservatives have hidden up their sleaves beyond pretending to cycle to Westminister and photoshoots alongside melting glaciers ? (attending simpering Cameron natch)

These are the same radical championyes of, to use E.K Hunt's phraseology, the neverending "malevolent invisible foot" (that keeps kicking us to produce more of some things, and less of others than is socially and environmentally efficient.(in other words, the gift that just keeps on kicking)) of the market ensuring each person pursues only his own good so as to most efficiently do his part in maximizing the general public misery. Not at all efficient when one enters those externalities into the equation... I can't help but feel that there's a conflict of interest there somehow :?

"share platforms with the leader of Friends of the Earth?"

This bits interesting after all it is the fashion to, Bono and Geldof style, ineffectually simper up to those that're the cause of the problem. More specifically however, many groups within the green movement fail to see how poorly the corporate media (media owned by corporations reporting on the activities of corporations..) portray them and proposed effectual policies. It's easier to understand this when one reads the comments of executive director of foe uk below.


SILENCE IS GREEN; The Green Movement And The Corporate Mass Media

…. It is false to suggest that reporting on climate change is significantly better in Britain than in the United States. There is substantial reporting of the mounting scientific evidence in Britain, but close to zero analysis of the key extent of big business opposition to action on the climate.

The failure of Greenpeace to acknowledge or address the fact that the media are themselves an integral part of the corporate problem largely responsible for environmental collapse is astonishing.

Tony Juniper, executive director of Friends of the Earth in the UK, also replied. We had already gleaned an idea of his views on the media from his praising of the traditional standard-bearers of liberal reporting in Britain:

"The Guardian is certainly considered the voice of progressive and sound environmental thinking both in the UK and in Europe."
(Juniper, quoted, Ian Mayes, 'Flying in the face of the facts. The readers' editor on ... promotion, pollution and the Guardian's environment policies', The Guardian, January 24, 2004)

This of a newspaper that forever pushes mass consumer advertising of the most destructive kind - '2 for 1' transatlantic flight offers being a particular favourite. Readers of Media Lens will be aware of the "progressive" and "environmental" credentials of the Guardian Media Group, owners of publications such as Auto Trader, Bike Trader, Truck Trader and the UK's busiest automotive web site, www.autotrader.co.uk.

In his reply to us, Juniper noted that British journalism has "a reputation for accuracy, quality and depth" that "is not always deserved". He observed that "the corporate controlled media is reluctant to engage with an agenda that apparently speaks against its interests".

As we have often pointed out, the media is not in fact "corporate controlled", it is made up of corporations. It would be absurd to suggest that Shell, for example, was +controlled+ by corporations. Given that corporations are legally bound to generate profit for their shareholders (with some 75% of revenues earned from advertisers), it is false to suggest that the media are merely "reluctant" to engage critically with those interests. Juniper compounds this error when he writes of FoE "embrac[ing] the role of corporations in delivering sustainable development." He added:


"Friends of the Earth's response is not to abandon the mainstream media" but to "debate both with it and the corporate interests that lay behind it [sic], for example through our work on corporate accountability."


In reality, corporate "accountability" and "social responsibility" are the latest versions of "green consumerism" and "corporate responsibility" - cynical public relations campaigns that have successfully duped the public for two decades while big business has sent global consumption through the roof.

Juniper does, however, point to some welcome initiatives in grassroots power:


"We are also engaged in parallel with efforts to gain greater access to official information [the new Freedom of Information act that came into effect in January 2005] so that we can either publish previously hidden information ourselves, for example though the internet, or ensure that it is in the right hands to make a difference in local struggles. We are also investing in building our networks so to be able to work with people directly."


We invited Juniper to talk about the obvious problem that the mass media is corporate in nature, and is therefore structurally tied into stock markets, maximised profits and hell-for-leather devastation of the planet. This he was apparently unwilling to do.…..

As regards the Arnie stuff. Is this the same chap who, prior to getting elected, met with power corporation reps (including Enron's Ken Lay) to ensure that the almost bankrupted state of California would not receive the $9 billion owed to it from the same 'power pirates' thanks to deregulation?

See below, What Arnold Says About Energy....What ArnoldWatch see
http://www.arnoldwatch.org/energy/index.php

See below, for What Arnold says about the Environment....What ArnoldWatch sees
http://www.arnoldwatch.org/environment/index.php
 

ryano

Active member
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
173
david said:
Ah, but a horse is much more useful than a bike. And lifespan?
I suppose it depends on what you want to do. I don't have much use for a horse myself. Maybe to keep the lawn down. As for lifespan, most bicycle frames these days are rated for a 15-year lifespan, but in practice will last a lot longer. It's probably not a good idea to ride around on a 30-year-old bike, but I wouldn't ride on a 30-year-old horse either. Also bicycles have replaceable parts.

I know you've conceded the point, but I can't resist eulogising the bicycle further:
Wikipedia said:
In both biological and mechanical terms, the bicycle is extraordinarily efficient. In terms of the amount of energy a person must expend to travel a given distance, investigators have calculated it to be the most efficient self-powered means of transportation.[6] From a mechanical viewpoint, up to 99% of the energy delivered by the rider into the pedals is transmitted to the wheels, although the use of gearing mechanisms may reduce this by 10-15%.[7][3] In terms of the ratio of cargo weight a bicycle can carry to total weight, it is also a most efficient means of cargo transportation.

A human being travelling on a bicycle at low to medium speeds of around 10-15 mph (16-24 km/h), using only the energy required to walk, is the most energy-efficient means of transport generally available. Air drag, which increases with the square of speed, requires increasingly higher power outputs relative to speed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle
 

david

Active member
Joined
Feb 6, 2003
Messages
190
ryano said:
david said:
Ah, but a horse is much more useful than a bike. And lifespan?
I suppose it depends on what you want to do. I don't have much use for a horse myself. Maybe to keep the lawn down. As for lifespan, most bicycle frames these days are rated for a 15-year lifespan, but in practice will last a lot longer. It's probably not a good idea to ride around on a 30-year-old bike, but I wouldn't ride on a 30-year-old horse either. Also bicycles have replaceable parts.

I know you've conceded the point, but I can't resist eulogising the bicycle further:
Wikipedia said:
In both biological and mechanical terms, the bicycle is extraordinarily efficient. In terms of the amount of energy a person must expend to travel a given distance, investigators have calculated it to be the most efficient self-powered means of transportation.[6] From a mechanical viewpoint, up to 99% of the energy delivered by the rider into the pedals is transmitted to the wheels, although the use of gearing mechanisms may reduce this by 10-15%.[7][3] In terms of the ratio of cargo weight a bicycle can carry to total weight, it is also a most efficient means of cargo transportation.

A human being travelling on a bicycle at low to medium speeds of around 10-15 mph (16-24 km/h), using only the energy required to walk, is the most energy-efficient means of transport generally available. Air drag, which increases with the square of speed, requires increasingly higher power outputs relative to speed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle
I don't talk to my bike either.

I agree a bike's efficient. Too efficient, I don't get enough exercise! Cold is the real problem. Rain, well, you have to just get wet and make sure you have a change of clothes at your destination.

Cold is a pain, esp. on the face. I cycle five miles to work (and back) and weather conspires against me more often than I'd wish. Cold, rain and wind together...aaargh.

I do wish more people would cycle, though. I feel so alone sometimes...
 

oddcia

Member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
6
Well.... According to the neo-libs in the business post yesterday its all rubbish.. the normal output from these dudes!! Full Pager Basically Al Gore talking through his ass and climate change, well maybe but not in our life times

Really I know we have to respect diverisity in opinion but this is a bit much!
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2005
Messages
1
Website
www.younggreens.ie
the environment issue is a thorny one, and the issue of oil reserves and the greenhouse effect will, in the next few years, be the block upon which we fall down or else oer'come.
 

SPN

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
16,863
oddcia said:
Well.... According to the neo-libs in the business post yesterday its all rubbish.. the normal output from these dudes!! Full Pager Basically Al Gore talking through his ass and climate change, well maybe but not in our life times

Really I know we have to respect diverisity in opinion but this is a bit much!
Ha ha!

Read the last line of the "article".

It is a spoof article by those crazy, wacky guys in the Politics.ie Crechehttp://www.thefi.org/

The new subject they want to be wrong on is Energy.

This is sure to provide us with much mirth, hilarity, and downright lies as they get into their stride.
 
Top