The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
FAQ    Search

Board index » Word on the Street » News & Debate




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 388 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 20  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Thu April 09, 2015 2:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Site Admin
 Profile

Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm
Posts: 6494
It's nice to see that environmentalists themselves are conflicted on fracking, as it confirms my own conflicts. I'd like to make the debate closer to moot with nuclear power, but that's another topic altogether.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Fri April 10, 2015 3:53 am 
Offline
Future Drummer
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 3:41 am
Posts: 2165
Green Habit wrote:
It's nice to see that environmentalists themselves are conflicted on fracking, as it confirms my own conflicts. I'd like to make the debate closer to moot with nuclear power, but that's another topic altogether.


I don't know if there was a follow up, but if the allegations are at all accurate it makes anti-fracking protests even more fun: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/01/world/russian-money-suspected-behind-fracking-protests.html?_r=0

The real issue with fracking is the waste water produced and what to do with it (as opposed to the overblown fear of contaminating local aquifers). Disposal wells are an option, but are pricey. Hopefully someone can figure out how to economically treat the produced and flowback water.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Thu April 16, 2015 10:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:41 am
Posts: 5659
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Watch California Dry Up Right Before Your Eyes In 6 Jaw-Dropping GIFs

_________________
"I'll hold your wallet while you go fuck yourself"-David Letterman


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Fri April 17, 2015 4:38 am 
Offline
Future Drummer
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 3:41 am
Posts: 2165
Stickman wrote:


My vote is to give everything south of Santa Barbara back to Mexico, in some three way trade for water from Canada. Maybe they would get taco trucks or something, I'm not sure.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Fri April 17, 2015 1:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Site Admin
 Profile

Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm
Posts: 6494
simple schoolboy wrote:
Stickman wrote:


My vote is to give everything south of Santa Barbara back to Mexico, in some three way trade for water from Canada. Maybe they would get taco trucks or something, I'm not sure.
You've already raided the Colorado River. Just stay away from the Snake/Columbia system!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Sat April 18, 2015 3:51 am 
Offline
User avatar
Site Admin
 Profile

Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm
Posts: 6494
Green Habit wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
Stickman wrote:
My vote is to give everything south of Santa Barbara back to Mexico, in some three way trade for water from Canada. Maybe they would get taco trucks or something, I'm not sure.
You've already raided the Colorado River. Just stay away from the Snake/Columbia system!
That goes to you too, William Shatner. :shake:

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/exclusive-wi ... 89084.html

William Shatner wrote:
California’s in the midst of a 4-year-old drought,” he said. “They tell us there’s a year’s supply of water left. If it doesn’t rain next year, what do 20 million people in the breadbasket of the world do? In a place that’s the fifth-largest GDP — if California were a country, it’d be fifth in line — we’re about to be arid! What do you do about it?

So I’m starting a Kickstarter campaign. I want $30 billion … to build a pipeline like the Alaska pipeline. Say, from Seattle — a place where there’s a lot of water. There’s too much water. How bad would it be to get a large, 4-foot pipeline, keep it aboveground — because if it leaks, you’re irrigating!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Sat April 18, 2015 4:22 am 
Offline
User avatar
An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
Posts: 42226
Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.
If we don't send Californians the water, the Californians will come here. Does anyone really want that?

_________________
verily, if life had no sense, and had I to choose nonsense, this would be the most desirable nonsense for me also.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Sat April 18, 2015 4:50 am 
Offline
User avatar
Site Admin
 Profile

Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm
Posts: 6494
BurtReynolds wrote:
If we don't send Californians the water, the Californians will come here. Does anyone really want that?
That's already happened. I can remember the "Don't Californicate Idaho" bumper stickers from my childhood, and I'm sure Washington/Oregon/Montana/Colorado/Utah/Arizona/etc. all had their own versions.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Sat April 18, 2015 6:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:41 am
Posts: 5659
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada

_________________
"I'll hold your wallet while you go fuck yourself"-David Letterman


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Sun April 19, 2015 9:18 am 
Offline
Future Drummer
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 3:41 am
Posts: 2165
Green Habit wrote:
BurtReynolds wrote:
If we don't send Californians the water, the Californians will come here. Does anyone really want that?
That's already happened. I can remember the "Don't Californicate Idaho" bumper stickers from my childhood, and I'm sure Washington/Oregon/Montana/Colorado/Utah/Arizona/etc. all had their own versions.


I can get behind this. Californians should at the very least have to pass some sort of test to settle in another state. "Are you now, or have you ever been or stand to be a beneficiary of Calpers?" That doesn't encompass all questionable Californians, but it's a start.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Mon April 20, 2015 11:25 am 
Offline
User avatar
I've been POOSSTTIiiEEnngeeaahh
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:53 pm
Posts: 11192
Image


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Fri April 24, 2015 3:24 am 
Offline
User avatar
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 4:18 am
Posts: 22013
bada wrote:
Image

:)


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2015 1:11 am 
Offline
User avatar
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am
Posts: 20149
Fracking Chemicals Detected in Pennsylvania Drinking Water

http://www.chromatographytoday.com/news ... ter/34579/
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/05/scien ... .html?_r=0

Fracking ‘Most Likely’ Responsible for Dallas-Area Earthquakes: Report

http://ktla.com/2015/05/09/fracking-mos ... es-report/
http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/09/us/texas- ... g-studies/

_________________
(patriotic choking noises)


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Sat July 11, 2015 9:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Wed February 06, 2013 2:47 am
Posts: 22615
Location: Scooby Doo
Wind power generates 140% of Denmark's electricity demand
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/10/denmark-wind-windfarm-power-exceed-electricity-demand?CMP=share_btn_tw


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Wed August 05, 2015 7:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:41 am
Posts: 5659
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
The Point of No Return: Climate Change Nightmares Are Already Here
The worst predicted impacts of climate change are starting to happen — and much faster than climate scientists expected
Image
By Eric Holthaus

Walruses, like these in Alaska, are being forced ashore in record numbers.

Historians may look to 2015 as the year when shit really started hitting the fan. Some snapshots: In just the past few months, record-setting heat waves in Pakistan and India each killed more than 1,000 people. In Washington state's Olympic National Park, the rainforest caught fire for the first time in living memory. London reached 98 degrees Fahrenheit during the hottest July day ever recorded in the U.K.; The Guardian briefly had to pause its live blog of the heat wave because its computer servers overheated. In California, suffering from its worst drought in a millennium, a 50-acre brush fire swelled seventyfold in a matter of hours, jumping across the I-15 freeway during rush-hour traffic. Then, a few days later, the region was pounded by intense, virtually unheard-of summer rains. Puerto Rico is under its strictest water rationing in history as a monster El Niño forms in the tropical Pacific Ocean, shifting weather patterns worldwide.

On July 20th, James Hansen, the former NASA climatologist who brought climate change to the public's attention in the summer of 1988, issued a bombshell: He and a team of climate scientists had identified a newly important feedback mechanism off the coast of Antarctica that suggests mean sea levels could rise 10 times faster than previously predicted: 10 feet by 2065. The authors included this chilling warning: If emissions aren't cut, "We conclude that multi-meter sea-level rise would become practically unavoidable. Social disruption and economic consequences of such large sea-level rise could be devastating. It is not difficult to imagine that conflicts arising from forced migrations and economic collapse might make the planet ungovernable, threatening the fabric of civilization."

Eric Rignot, a climate scientist at NASA and the University of California-Irvine and a co-author on Hansen's study, said their new research doesn't necessarily change the worst-case scenario on sea-level rise, it just makes it much more pressing to think about and discuss, especially among world leaders. In particular, says Rignot, the new research shows a two-degree Celsius rise in global temperature — the previously agreed upon "safe" level of climate change — "would be a catastrophe for sea-level rise."

Hansen's new study also shows how complicated and unpredictable climate change can be. Even as global ocean temperatures rise to their highest levels in recorded history, some parts of the ocean, near where ice is melting exceptionally fast, are actually cooling, slowing ocean circulation currents and sending weather patterns into a frenzy. Sure enough, a persistently cold patch of ocean is starting to show up just south of Greenland, exactly where previous experimental predictions of a sudden surge of freshwater from melting ice expected it to be. Michael Mann, another prominent climate scientist, recently said of the unexpectedly sudden Atlantic slowdown, "This is yet another example of where observations suggest that climate model predictions may be too conservative when it comes to the pace at which certain aspects of climate change are proceeding."

Since storm systems and jet streams in the United States and Europe partially draw their energy from the difference in ocean temperatures, the implication of one patch of ocean cooling while the rest of the ocean warms is profound. Storms will get stronger, and sea-level rise will accelerate. Scientists like Hansen only expect extreme weather to get worse in the years to come, though Mann said it was still "unclear" whether recent severe winters on the East Coast are connected to the phenomenon.

And yet, these aren't even the most disturbing changes happening to the Earth's biosphere that climate scientists are discovering this year. For that, you have to look not at the rising sea levels but to what is actually happening within the oceans themselves.

Water temperatures this year in the North Pacific have never been this high for this long over such a large area — and it is already having a profound effect on marine life.

Eighty-year-old Roger Thomas runs whale-watching trips out of San Francisco. On an excursion earlier this year, Thomas spotted 25 humpbacks and three blue whales. During a survey on July 4th, federal officials spotted 115 whales in a single hour near the Farallon Islands — enough to issue a boating warning. Humpbacks are occasionally seen offshore in California, but rarely so close to the coast or in such numbers. Why are they coming so close to shore? Exceptionally warm water has concentrated the krill and anchovies they feed on into a narrow band of relatively cool coastal water. The whales are having a heyday. "It's unbelievable," Thomas told a local paper. "Whales are all over
the place."

Last fall, in northern Alaska, in the same part of the Arctic where Shell is planning to drill for oil, federal scientists discovered 35,000 walruses congregating on a single beach. It was the largest-ever documented "haul out" of walruses, and a sign that sea ice, their favored habitat, is becoming harder and harder to find.

Marine life is moving north, adapting in real time to the warming ocean. Great white sharks have been sighted breeding near Monterey Bay, California, the farthest north that's ever been known to occur. A blue marlin was caught last summer near Catalina Island — 1,000 miles north of its typical range. Across California, there have been sightings of non-native animals moving north, such as Mexican red crabs.

Image
Salmon on the brink of dying out.

No species may be as uniquely endangered as the one most associated with the Pacific Northwest, the salmon. Every two weeks, Bill Peterson, an oceanographer and senior scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Northwest Fisheries Science Center in Oregon, takes to the sea to collect data he uses to forecast the return of salmon. What he's been seeing this year is deeply troubling.

Salmon are crucial to their coastal ecosystem like perhaps few other species on the planet. A significant portion of the nitrogen in West Coast forests has been traced back to salmon, which can travel hundreds of miles upstream to lay their eggs. The largest trees on Earth simply wouldn't exist without salmon.

But their situation is precarious. This year, officials in California are bringing salmon downstream in convoys of trucks, because river levels are too low and the temperatures too warm for them to have a reasonable chance of surviving. One species, the winter-run Chinook salmon, is at a particularly increased risk of decline in the next few years, should the warm water persist offshore.

"You talk to fishermen, and they all say: 'We've never seen anything like this before,' " says Peterson. "So when you have no experience with something like this, it gets like, 'What the hell's going on?' "

Atmospheric scientists increasingly believe that the exceptionally warm waters over the past months are the early indications of a phase shift in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, a cyclical warming of the North Pacific that happens a few times each century. Positive phases of the PDO have been known to last for 15 to 20 years, during which global warming can increase at double the rate as during negative phases of the PDO. It also makes big El Niños, like this year's, more likely. The nature of PDO phase shifts is unpredictable — climate scientists simply haven't yet figured out precisely what's behind them and why they happen when they do. It's not a permanent change — the ocean's temperature will likely drop from these record highs, at least temporarily, some time over the next few years — but the impact on marine species will be lasting, and scientists have pointed to the PDO as a global-warming preview.

"The climate [change] models predict this gentle, slow increase in temperature," says Peterson, "but the main problem we've had for the last few years is the variability is so high. As scientists, we can't keep up with it, and neither can the animals." Peterson likens it to a boxer getting pummeled round after round: "At some point, you knock them down, and the fight is over."

Image
Pavement-melting heat waves in India.

Attendant with this weird wildlife behavior is a stunning drop in the number of plankton — the basis of the ocean's food chain. In July, another major study concluded that acidifying oceans are likely to have a "quite traumatic" impact on plankton diversity, with some species dying out while others flourish. As the oceans absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, it's converted into carbonic acid — and the pH of seawater declines. According to lead author Stephanie Dutkiewicz of MIT, that trend means "the whole food chain is going to be different."

The Hansen study may have gotten more attention, but the Dutkiewicz study, and others like it, could have even more dire implications for our future. The rapid changes Dutkiewicz and her colleagues are observing have shocked some of their fellow scientists into thinking that yes, actually, we're heading toward the worst-case scenario. Unlike a prediction of massive sea-level rise just decades away, the warming and acidifying oceans represent a problem that seems to have kick-started a mass extinction on the same time scale.

Jacquelyn Gill is a paleoecologist at the University of Maine. She knows a lot about extinction, and her work is more relevant than ever. Essentially, she's trying to save the species that are alive right now by learning more about what killed off the ones that aren't. The ancient data she studies shows "really compelling evidence that there can be events of abrupt climate change that can happen well within human life spans. We're talking less than a decade."

For the past year or two, a persistent change in winds over the North Pacific has given rise to what meteorologists and oceanographers are calling "the blob" — a highly anomalous patch of warm water between Hawaii, Alaska and Baja California that's thrown the marine ecosystem into a tailspin. Amid warmer temperatures, plankton numbers have plummeted, and the myriad species that depend on them have migrated or seen their own numbers dwindle.

Significant northward surges of warm water have happened before, even frequently. El Niño, for example, does this on a predictable basis. But what's happening this year appears to be something new. Some climate scientists think that the wind shift is linked to the rapid decline in Arctic sea ice over the past few years, which separate research has shown makes weather patterns more likely to get stuck.

A similar shift in the behavior of the jet stream has also contributed to the California drought and severe polar vortex winters in the Northeast over the past two years. An amplified jet-stream pattern has produced an unusual doldrum off the West Coast that's persisted for most of the past 18 months. Daniel Swain, a Stanford University meteorologist, has called it the "Ridiculously Resilient Ridge" — weather patterns just aren't supposed to last this long.

What's increasingly uncontroversial among scientists is that in many ecosystems, the impacts of the current off-the-charts temperatures in the North Pacific will linger for years, or longer. The largest ocean on Earth, the Pacific is exhibiting cyclical variability to greater extremes than other ocean basins. While the North Pacific is currently the most dramatic area of change in the world's oceans, it's not alone: Globally, 2014 was a record-setting year for ocean temperatures, and 2015 is on pace to beat it soundly, boosted by the El Niño in the Pacific. Six percent of the world's reefs could disappear before the end of the decade, perhaps permanently, thanks to warming waters.

Since warmer oceans expand in volume, it's also leading to a surge in sea-level rise. One recent study showed a slowdown in Atlantic Ocean currents, perhaps linked to glacial melt from Greenland, that caused a four-inch rise in sea levels along the Northeast coast in just two years, from 2009 to 2010. To be sure, it seems like this sudden and unpredicted surge was only temporary, but scientists who studied the surge estimated it to be a 1-in-850-year event, and it's been blamed on accelerated beach erosion "almost as significant as some hurricane events."

Image
Biblical floods in Turkey.

Possibly worse than rising ocean temperatures is the acidification of the waters. Acidification has a direct effect on mollusks and other marine animals with hard outer bodies: A striking study last year showed that, along the West Coast, the shells of tiny snails are already dissolving, with as-yet-unknown consequences on the ecosystem. One of the study's authors, Nina Bednaršek, told Science magazine that the snails' shells, pitted by the acidifying ocean, resembled "cauliflower" or "sandpaper." A similarly striking study by more than a dozen of the world's top ocean scientists this July said that the current pace of increasing carbon emissions would force an "effectively irreversible" change on ocean ecosystems during this century. In as little as a decade, the study suggested, chemical changes will rise significantly above background levels in nearly half of the world's oceans.

"I used to think it was kind of hard to make things in the ocean go extinct," James Barry of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute in California told the Seattle Times in 2013. "But this change we're seeing is happening so fast it's almost instantaneous."

Thanks to the pressure we're putting on the planet's ecosystem — warming, acidification and good old-fashioned pollution — the oceans are set up for several decades of rapid change. Here's what could happen next.

The combination of excessive nutrients from agricultural runoff, abnormal wind patterns and the warming oceans is already creating seasonal dead zones in coastal regions when algae blooms suck up most of the available oxygen. The appearance of low-oxygen regions has doubled in frequency every 10 years since 1960 and should continue to grow over the coming decades at an even greater rate.

So far, dead zones have remained mostly close to the coasts, but in the 21st century, deep-ocean dead zones could become common. These low-oxygen regions could gradually expand in size — potentially thousands of miles across — which would force fish, whales, pretty much everything upward. If this were to occur, large sections of the temperate deep oceans would suffer should the oxygen-free layer grow so pronounced that it stratifies, pushing surface ocean warming into overdrive and hindering upwelling of cooler, nutrient-rich deeper water.

Enhanced evaporation from the warmer oceans will create heavier downpours, perhaps destabilizing the root systems of forests, and accelerated runoff will pour more excess nutrients into coastal areas, further enhancing dead zones. In the past year, downpours have broken records in Long Island, Phoenix, Detroit, Baltimore, Houston and Pensacola, Florida.

Evidence for the above scenario comes in large part from our best understanding of what happened 250 million years ago, during the "Great Dying," when more than 90 percent of all oceanic species perished after a pulse of carbon dioxide and methane from land-based sources began a period of profound climate change. The conditions that triggered "Great Dying" took hundreds of thousands of years to develop. But humans have been emitting carbon dioxide at a much quicker rate, so the current mass extinction only took 100 years or so to kick-start.

With all these stressors working against it, a hypoxic feedback loop could wind up destroying some of the oceans' most species-rich ecosystems within our lifetime. A recent study by Sarah Moffitt of the University of California-Davis said it could take the ocean thousands of years to recover. "Looking forward for my kid, people in the future are not going to have the same ocean that I have today," Moffitt said.

As you might expect, having tickets to the front row of a global environmental catastrophe is taking an increasingly emotional toll on scientists, and in some cases pushing them toward advocacy. Of the two dozen or so scientists I interviewed for this piece, virtually all drifted into apocalyptic language at some point.

For Simone Alin, an oceanographer focusing on ocean acidification at NOAA's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle, the changes she's seeing hit close to home. The Puget Sound is a natural laboratory for the coming decades of rapid change because its waters are naturally more acidified than most of the world's marine ecosystems.

The local oyster industry here is already seeing serious impacts from acidifying waters and is going to great lengths to avoid a total collapse. Alin calls oysters, which are non-native, the canary in the coal mine for the Puget Sound: "A canary is also not native to a coal mine, but that doesn't mean it's not a good indicator of change."

Though she works on fundamental oceanic changes every day, the Dutkiewicz study on the impending large-scale changes to plankton caught her off-guard: "This was alarming to me because if the basis of the food web changes, then . . . everything could change, right?"

Alin's frank discussion of the looming oceanic apocalypse is perhaps a product of studying unfathomable change every day. But four years ago, the birth of her twins "heightened the whole issue," she says. "I was worried enough about these problems before having kids that I maybe wondered whether it was a good idea. Now, it just makes me feel crushed."

Image
Katharine Hayhoe speaks about climate change to students and faculty at Wayland Baptist University in 2011.

Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist and evangelical Christian, moved from Canada to Texas with her husband, a pastor, precisely because of its vulnerability to climate change. There, she engages with the evangelical community on science — almost as a missionary would. But she's already planning her exit strategy: "If we continue on our current pathway, Canada will be home for us long term. But the majority of people don't have an exit strategy. . . . So that's who I'm here trying to help."

James Hansen, the dean of climate scientists, retired from NASA in 2013 to become a climate activist. But for all the gloom of the report he just put his name to, Hansen is actually somewhat hopeful. That's because he knows that climate change has a straightforward solution: End fossil-fuel use as quickly as possible. If tomorrow, the leaders of the United States and China would agree to a sufficiently strong, coordinated carbon tax that's also applied to imports, the rest of the world would have no choice but to sign up. This idea has already been pitched to Congress several times, with tepid bipartisan support. Even though a carbon tax is probably a long shot, for Hansen, even the slim possibility that bold action like this might happen is enough for him to devote the rest of his life to working to achieve it. On a conference call with reporters in July, Hansen said a potential joint U.S.-China carbon tax is more important than whatever happens at the United Nations climate talks in Paris.

One group Hansen is helping is Our Children's Trust, a legal advocacy organization that's filed a number of novel challenges on behalf of minors under the idea that climate change is a violation of intergenerational equity — children, the group argues, are lawfully entitled to inherit a healthy planet.

A separate challenge to U.S. law is being brought by a former EPA scientist arguing that carbon dioxide isn't just a pollutant (which, under the Clean Air Act, can dissipate on its own), it's also a toxic substance. In general, these substances have exceptionally long life spans in the environment, cause an unreasonable risk, and therefore require remediation. In this case, remediation may involve planting vast numbers of trees or restoring wetlands to bury excess carbon underground.

Even if these novel challenges succeed, it will take years before a bend in the curve is noticeable. But maybe that's enough. When all feels lost, saving a few species will feel like a triumph.

_________________
"I'll hold your wallet while you go fuck yourself"-David Letterman


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Fri August 21, 2015 2:40 am 
Offline
User avatar
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:41 am
Posts: 5659
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Climate change: July was Earth's hottest month on record

_________________
"I'll hold your wallet while you go fuck yourself"-David Letterman


Last edited by Stickman on Fri August 21, 2015 11:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Fri August 21, 2015 10:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Champion of RM
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 11:19 pm
Posts: 11752
Location: Northeastern Pennsylvania
I think you B'd yourself. That's a rarity.

_________________
emanon wrote:
I think I either need to drink less to become more alert, or more so as not to care.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Sat August 22, 2015 12:00 am 
Offline
User avatar
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:41 am
Posts: 5659
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
CopperTom wrote:
I think you B'd yourself. That's a rarity.


not sure how that happened. Fixed.

_________________
"I'll hold your wallet while you go fuck yourself"-David Letterman


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Tue September 29, 2015 11:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:41 am
Posts: 5659
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Is the fossil fuel industry, like the tobacco industry, guilty of racketeering?

Journalists investigated Exxon’s rejection of its own science to deceive the public. Scientists call for the Justice Department to investigate

Image

ExxonMobil has become infamous for its secretive anti-climate science campaign, having spent $30 million funding groups denying the scientific evidence and consensus on human-caused global warming.

Last week, after an eight-month investigation, InsideClimate News revealed that from the late-1970s to the mid-1980s, scientists at Exxon were in fact at the cutting edge of climate science research.


Exxon documents show that top corporate managers were aware of their scientists’ early conclusions about carbon dioxide’s impact on the climate. They reveal that scientists warned management that policy changes to address climate change might affect profitability. After a decade of frank internal discussions on global warming and conducting unbiased studies on it, Exxon changed direction in 1989 and spent more than 20 years discrediting the research its own scientists had once confirmed.

In an internal September 1982 document, Exxon scientists summarized the expert consensus on human-caused global warming, and the consistency of their own research with that expert consensus.


The consensus is that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 from its pre-industrial revolution value would result in an average global temperature rise of (3.0 ± 1.5)°C … There is unanimous agreement in the scientific community that a temperature increase of this magnitude would bring about significant changes in the earth’s climate, including rainfall distribution and alterations in the biosphere … the results of our research are in accord with the scientific consensus on the effect of increased atmospheric CO2 on climate.

It’s ironic that 33 years ago, the world’s largest oil company accepted and concurred with the scientific consensus on human-caused global warming that many people continue to deny to this day.

In another internal company document in November 1982, Exxon scientists illustrated the rapid global warming they expected to occur over the following century due to rising carbon pollution from burning fossil fuels. A year earlier, Exxon scientists were discussing the distinct possibility that the consequences of climate change could become catastrophic in the near future.

Image
Exxon’s 1982 projections of how human carbon pollution would cause global temperatures to rise.

Climate scientists call for investigation of the fossil fuel industry

Coinciding with the InsideClimate News revelations, a group of climate scientists sent a letter to President Obama, his science advisor John Holdren, and Attorney General Lynch, calling for an investigation “of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change.”

In 1999, the Justice Department filed a civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) lawsuit against the major tobacco companies and their associated industry groups. In 2006, US District Court Judge Gladys Kessler ruled that the tobacco industry’s campaign to “maximize industry profits by preserving and expanding the market for cigarettes through a scheme to deceive the public” about the health hazards of smoking amounted to a racketeering enterprise.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) has noted that the fossil fuel industry’s efforts to cast doubt on climate science closely mirror those by the tobacco industry. As Senator Whitehouse said in May 2015,


Imagine what a little discovery into the beast would reveal about the schemes and mischief of the climate denial apparatus—about what they’re telling each other in private while they scheme to deceive the public. The truth will eventually come to light. It always does.

Indeed, as the InsideClimate News investigation subsequently revealed, Exxon’s own scientists were warning of the dangers of human-caused climate change nearly 40 years ago. The parallels to the tobacco industry’s public deception are striking. It appears that many climate scientists have become fed up, and are encouraging the government to embark on a similar RICO investigation into fossil fuel industry efforts to mislead the public.

Senator Whitehouse and 11 colleagues also sent a letter to 108 CEOs of all member companies of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors asking about their positions on the Chamber’s efforts to undermine the Obama Administration’s Clean Power Plan. The New York Times reported that the Chamber of Commerce was holding meetings with a group of about 30 corporate lawyers, coal lobbyists and Republican political strategists to devise a plan to dismantle the Clean Power Plan, months before it was even introduced.

Some Republicans are showing climate leadership

There is also some good news in recent American reactions to climate change. Pope Francis spoke on the south lawn of the White House last week and called for urgent action on climate change. The pope hailed the Clean Power Plan as “encouraging that you are proposing an initiative for reducing air pollution” at a “crucial moment in history.” An increasing number of Republican thought leaders are calling for the party to lead on climate change through a free market carbon pollution pricing solution.

Recently, 11 House Republicans broke ranks with their party leadership to call for action against climate change. Thus far, dependency on fossil fuel industry campaign donations has played a major role in the Republican Party’s efforts to obstruct national and international climate policies. However, with these investigations into the fossil fuel industry efforts to mislead the public, mirroring those of the tobacco industry, perhaps its grip over Republican lawmakers will weaken.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/sep/29/is-the-fossil-fuel-industry-like-the-tobacco-industry-guilty-of-racketeering

_________________
"I'll hold your wallet while you go fuck yourself"-David Letterman


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Environment Thread
PostPosted: Sun November 29, 2015 11:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Misplaced My Sponge
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:41 am
Posts: 5659
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/11/29/art-truth-cop-pct/

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

_________________
"I'll hold your wallet while you go fuck yourself"-David Letterman


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 388 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 20  Next

Board index » Word on the Street » News & Debate


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 96583UP and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
It is currently Sun September 27, 2020 2:02 am