Posts Tagged ‘CHANGE’
The world is constantly changing but not like in the past few hundred years. Technological advancements are forcing the environment to change in a way that is not at all desirable to human-kind. Though technology has made our lives comfortable to a great extent the same factors of comfort are contributing to making the world a difficult and uncomfortable place to live in.
The machines that cool or heat our homes and offices contribute to global warming that is causing disastrous changes to the climate and the environment as a whole. The climatic changes all around the globe is leading to environmental disasters in almost every country and this should be sounding alarm bells in every home of the world. However, we are still taking things easy hoping for the governments of the world to do something about putting a climate change emergency program in place.
People should learn from the devastating earthquakes, typhoons and tsunamis that are wrecking havoc around the world. The first point in an emergency program should be to educate the people as to the factors that lead to such environmental disasters and how to detect or predict the possible occurrence of one. Then the next step should include lessons on how to prepare for such contingencies.
Knowledge on how to act in times of environmental emergencies will help people improve their chances of surviving and coming out of such a situation with the least amount of damage.
Evidence is pointing to the fact that nature is going to hold man-kind responsible for the degradation of nature and the onslaught of natural disasters is inevitable. Mankind should be prepared to face these disasters if not do something to avert them – if it is not too late already. Greenhouse gases are not just government propaganda. It is a fierce reality and is the main contributing factor to global warming a phenomenon that is likely result in half the globe being submerged under the seas due to the melting of the ice caps at the poles of the globe.
It is believed that no matter what man does now there is no way of averting warming of the globe, it can only be delayed. What is of prime importance now is that man should understand the problems of climate change and how to react in such times. When climate change brings about a rise in the levels of the seas and oceans, forest fires and other disasters man must know the best measures to be taken.
It is important that the governments of every country should set up a contingency plan and a training program to educate the people as to how they should react in the event of an emergency brought on by climate changes. This will contribute to millions of people being in a better position to safe guard their lives and property and will lessen the impact of the environmental disaster.
With the present knowledge acquired by scientists around he world we now have a better chance of surviving –we also have a better choice.
Lord Nicholas Stern, economist and author of the acclaimed and much-discussed Stern Review of 2006, spoke recently at the Royal Geographical Society about the world’s major problems and his suggested solutions to them. This, in summary, is what he said.
The two great issues of the 21st century – poverty and climate change – are interdependent: they succeed or fail together. The economic crisis we are now experiencing is a shorter, shallower problem.
WHO CAUSES THE CLIMATE CHANGE?
There is no doubt that climate change is caused by human activity. People produce greenhouse gases, not all of which are absorbed by the atmosphere. Hence we have a stock of gases in the atmosphere trapping other chemicals: this is what we call ‘the greenhouse effect’. The impact is felt mainly through water – melting glaciers and ice-caps, reduction of ice in the polar regions, tsunamis, rising sea levels.
Early economists misunderstood the impact of climate change because they didn’t recognise the size and uncertainty of the problem, which is global, long-term and very big. The changes that are happening are not marginal like those in economics. Moreover, the problem is growing all the time, so delay worsens it.
Governments and other interested bodies need to consider ‘externalities’ – the effects of one person’s actions on others – and hence the interconnectedness of all aspects of climate change.
WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM?
About two-thirds of emissions of greenhouse gases are accounted for by only six or seven countries. Poor countries will figure large in emissions in the next years because there are more people in them, but rich countries account for more emissions overall, as their emissions per capita are higher. In the mid-19th century the rate of emission was 285ppm CO2e (carbon dioxide equivalent); now it is 430ppm and we are adding CO2e at the rate of more than 2.5ppm/year. If we continued as we are now – the ‘business as usual’ (BAU) scenario – we would reach a level of 750ppm by the end of the century, which would be nothing short of ruinous.
The challenge is to keep the rate of emissions under 500ppm, or, better still, 450ppm (which we will reach, under BAU, in six years). This would keep the increase in temperature to less than two degrees and would reduce emissions to about 50% of those of 1990-2000.
The trouble is that, although humans have been on earth for some 100,000 years, we don’t know what the effects of high levels of emissions will be. In the last Ice Age, 10-12,000 years ago, the temperature was only about five degrees lower than it is now.
What we do know is that temperature increase will force people from their existing settlements by rising sea levels or loss of suitable conditions for agriculture or survival by other means. Massive human movements are bound to lead to extended conflicts.
It takes a long time for reduced emissions to lead to reduced concentrations in the atmosphere. By 2050 there will be some 9 billion people on the planet. Overall our aim should be to reduce emissions to 2 tonnes per person and by 2050 to reduce emissions to 50% of their 1990 levels.
WHAT ARE WE TO DO?
There are three key areas to focus on:
energy efficiency developing and deploying low-carbon technologies – an attractive and long-term option whose effects promise to last several decades halting deforestation, which is the source of 15-20% of emissions.
The cost of reducing emissions is estimated at about $2 trillion. Sounds like a huge amount of money? In fact, it’s only about 1-2% of the world economy – and the cost is to put one-off new measures in place, not a long-lasting, continuous commitment.
Prices, taxes and regulation are necessary too, and individual preferences have to be managed. People need to be made to understand the consequences of their actions. Remember the introduction of the breathalyser? Many people were outraged at the alleged infringement of personal liberty, yet now the practice is not only commonplace but fully accepted as right.
WHAT SHOULD BE THE GLOBAL DEAL?
Action has to be taken internationally. Here is what the global ‘deal’ we need would look like:
1. Global emissions targets for rich countries.
2. Developing countries to take on targets too (as some already have, e.g. Brazil, India and China).
3. Emissions trading should be encouraged.
4. There must be a halt to deforestation and investment in agriculture, an initiative driven by developing countries.
5. Employ technology. Some 50% of our energy currently comes from coal. Carbon capture and storage could give us solids to use as fuel.
6. Adaptation: we need to remember that development in a more hostile climate is more expensive.
These principles need to be firmly established before the next Climate Conference in Copenhagen in December, when it is hoped this deal will be drafted.
There are two points to note about any economic crisis. One is that the longer the risks are ignored, the worse the consequences. The second is that action to get out of the present crisis must not sow the seeds of the next one. But the current downturn creates an opportunity: materials, for insulating homes, for example, are cheaper; and now is a good time to invest in energy efficiency, new technologies and low-carbon growth.
“2009 is a year when political leadership, pressure and decision are vital,” says Lord Stern. “The prize from success is great; the risks from failure are immense.”
Save at least $30 by changing your oil yourself every time. When it comes time to change the oil of your Ford Tempo, doing it yourself could save you up to $30 or more. How do you know when to change your oil?
Change your oil every 3000 miles or about every 3 months, whichever comes first. SAE 5W-30 motor oil is the preferred motor oil to use for all weathering conditions, but if you are like me and live in moderate to hot temperatures then SAE 10W-30 motor oil is also acceptable.
Never change your engine oil while the engine is hot. This should be common sense. If your engine is hot, wait 2 hours. You could suffer terrible burns from your car’s engine or oil drainage. We don’t want any hospital bills over here.
Locate your car’s oil pan drain plug. Place an oil pan underneath the plug so you don’t spill any oil on the ground. Unscrew the drain plug and let the oil drain out for about 20 minutes to ensure all oil has poured out. Screw the plug back in. If you start pouring oil in without the plug tightly fastened then you are in for a greasy mess.
Locate the oil filter, unscrew it, and take it off. The oil filter is the piece that is shaped like half a cylinder. Be careful because oil will want to leak out of it after you unscrew it so keep it upside down. Then screw the new oil filter in.
Pour the correct amount of oil in for your vehicle. For a 2.3L engine, the oil amount should be 5 quarts. If you have a 2.3L engine, make sure the oil filter says FL-300. For 3.0L Tempo engines, you will want to put only 4.5 quarts of oil in, and make sure the oil filter says FL-400A.
If your car has a lot of miles on it (lets say +80,000), it might be a good idea to use oil that is specifically designed for cars with high mileage. I use Valvoline High Mileage and it seems to work pretty good for my 1993 Tempo (+120,000 mi).
A quick auto maintenance tip to keep in mind is to periodically check the ground underneath your parked vehicle. Look for any liquids that look like they are new. If it looks like fresh liquid, there could be a chance that it is coming from your car. Be sure to keep an eye the next time your car is parked for a while to confirm any suspicious liquid.
Just for reference, reddish liquid will be power steering fluid, brownish liquid will probably be oil, and if it is a bluish liquid it is most likely radiator coolant.
Check your oil level every couple of weeks. Make sure your oil level is within the regulated guidelines located at the bottom of your oil dip stick. Your dip stick is the stick with a round, usually colored ring at the top. All you do is pull it out, wipe off excess oil with a rag, stick it back in, pull it out again, hold it level, and decipher where the oil line stops.
Don’t be an idiot. Always properly dispose of any used oil. Local auto parts stores and service stations usually have a receptacle in the back of their store where you can recycle any used oil. Start recycling now before we jack Earth up anymore and there is nothing left to protect.
United Nations Conference on Climate Change is the largest intergovernmental conference on climate control that was ever held throughout the history of humanity. Aside from explicit achievements, the largest accomplishment of the Conference is the acknowledgement of the emerging changes in the world arena. Globalization of markets and, as a consequence, global governance in both trade and services, privatization of the energy sector alongside with increasing role of private sector have forever changed the context in which environmental issues should be viewed.
Kyoto Accord or Kyoto Protocol is an amendment to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that was negotiated in Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997 and was brought into force 90 days after Russian ratification. The amendment represents a new generation of environmental international relations and treaties adopted in the light of globalization. The major aim of Kyoto Accord is to impose control on economic activities related to energy production and foreign investment and in such way minimize the risks for environment. Under this agreement, countries are to reduce emission of greenhouse gases by 5.2%, whereas the long-term perspective is as much as 29% by 2010. The limits are imposed on 6 greenhouse gases: CO2, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride. The economic effects of Kyoto Accord have been an issue of prime concern within the last years and neither one of the parties is able to provide a definite solution as well as outline the potential results of implementation of the amendment. There are three mechanisms in Kyoto Accord that allow for worldwide implementation and are aimed at the environmental goals established by United Nations Conference on Climate Change. The mechanisms are also known as Kyoto Flexible Mechanisms: the Clean Development Mechanism, the Joint Implementation Mechanism, and the greenhouse gas emission trading.
The idea of emission trading is rooted in the concept of unity between countries with Kyoto targets. While every country will be assigned a certain limit within the period from 2008 until 2012, those who do not meet the established quota can sell the leftover amount to countries who emit too much of greenhouse gas. European Union went further; it established specific quotas on CO2 emissions for as much as 11,500 energy intensive plants that are located on the territory of members of EU.
The remaining two mechanisms, Clean Development and Joint Implementation, are aimed to reduce emission of greenhouse gases in other countries. Industrialized countries as part of their long-term plan to achieve reduction in emission of greenhouse gases are to run projects abroad, whereas the results are counted towards their own reduction achievements. While Joint Implementation allow for project implementation on the territory of countries with Kyoto targets, Clean Development is aimed at reductions on the territories of developing countries. By implementing two mechanisms United Nations stimulates reduction in gas emission by transferring technologies to developing countries and developing unity between countries with Kyoto targets. While Joint Implementation will be put in force only in 2008, the Clean Development Mechanism is already successfully functioning since 2000.
The Montreal meeting of the United Nations on Climate Change in 2005 finalized the details of Kyoto Protocol. The 11th Conference on Climate Change was held from 28 November to 9 December. During the Conference 40 decisions regarding long-term cooperative actions and detailed guidance for countries with Kyoto targets have been adopted. Marrakech Accords that is generally referred to as the “Kyoto Rulebook” is considered to be one of the most important accomplishments. The “Rulebook” allows the formal implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. While industrialized countries have started a cooperative action to address the climate change, all members have agreed to proceed with an open dialogue. Basically, on the Montreal Conference implementation of the Kyoto Protocol was ensured. There also were held parallel events touching the following major themes: understanding and preparation for the change, showcasing solutions and sharing best practices, raising awareness and cultural events
Gandhi, Globalization and Climate Change
Dr. Ashok Kumar Panigrahi, Balasore.
Decades ago Mahatma Gandhi said, “ the earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s need, but not any one’s greed.” Gandhiji, a known critique of total mechanization, said, “ what I object to is the craze for machinery, not machinery as such. The craze is for what they call labour saving machinery. Men go on saving labour till thousands are without work and thrown on the open streets to die of starvation…. I want the concentration of wealth, not in
the hands of a few but in the hands of all. Today machinery only helps a few to ride on the backs of millions. The impetus behind it all is not the philanthropy to save labour, but greed”. Gandhiji was a champion of village based cottage industries for ‘they make the village self sufficient and provide adequate employment and products to one and all.’
After two centuries of industrialisation and two decades of economic
globalisation.
? Poverty alleviation not in sight, people continue to die of hunger.
? Drastic climate change, global warming, polar ice caps and glaciers melting, sea level rise, devastating natural disasters causing habitat loss and mass migrations.
? Prolonged debilitating drought, excessive unseasonal rain and flood owing to highly modified El Nino-La Nina .
? Massive food shortage and huge fresh water shortage.
? Direct threat to species and biodiversity.
? 80% of the global population living in the developing countries paying dearly for the luxury and whims of just 20% of the global population in the industrialised countries as far as GhG emissions are concerned.
? Southern rain forests, the Amazonian rainforest, systematically
destroyed for the northern consumers for exotic timber, arable
land for the soy crop and pasture land for raising cattle to provide beef
for the northern hamburgers.
? International treaties, including Kyoto, failed to recognise the importance of tropical forests both as carbon sinks and as stabilizers of our weather systems.
? Multinational corporations moving their operations to developing countries to avoid stricter environmental laws of their own countries.
? Free trade agreements under the WTO regime restrict the capacity of the national governments to frame and adopt new environmental legislations.
? Such actions of the independent nations help modify the El Nino – La Nina impacts, the basics of the changes in the global weather patterns resulting in enhanced sea borne disasters and forest fires.
2 pieces of publications those need be looked in to:-
? Herbert Girardet’s new book; “Surviving the century: Facing climate chaos and other Global challenges.”
It reads,” at root, climate change not a technical or scientific
problem. The main impediment to tackling global warming is
that many of the powerful institutions of the world, which control
the world’s allocation of capital are resistant to radically changing
the way we operate the world economy. The poor, whose share of world
income is certainly not growing are unable to successfully demand
that policies be developed to protect them from climate change or other
environmental or economic disasters.”
The book also mentions, “Large companies are threatened by
actions to reduce emissions. The oil and gas industry will suffer if the
world moves to renewable energy. Monsanto’s profits will fall if we
switch from industrial agriculture back to low input farming methods.
The Brazilian government will lose elections if it resists attempts to
turn more of the rain forest to soy farms and cattle ranches…….
Aggressive action on climate change threatens this power, and is being resisted at every turn.”
? Naomi Klein ( a Canadian Journalist)’s latest book titled; “ Shock Doctrine – The rise of Disaster capitalism.”
It reads, “barely seven months ago the Boxing day tsunami had
devastated Sri Lanka. But once the rubble was cleared away, what was
left, was what the tourism industry had been coveting all along
ocean front property, perfect for plush resorts. It was land grab. The
fisher folk found themselves pushed into inland camps in the name
of safety and security. But these new resorts were exempted from the
buffer zone restrictions as long as they classified their constructions as
‘repair’.”
It further reads, “ The US government was pushing that the tsunami
was an opportunity for Sri Lanka to really launch its high-end
tourism market. The world bank was very aggressive in pushing the
government to adopt these policies in exchange for giving aid.”
Two decades of economic globalisation has converted the earth to a single village with free trade.
? Food could no longer be recognised as a right since the right to food would interfere in free trade of food commodities, declared US Secretary of State at the last world food summit.
? The world produces more food than ever before, enough, to feed twice the global population, yet, more people than ever suffer from hunger and their numbers are rising.
? Thus, “ free trade” is the cause of global hunger.
Economic globalisation has dramatically changed the face of agriculture the world over.
? Diminishing agricultural holdings – agricultural land converted to SEZ, etc. resulting in farmer uprisings as is seen
in Singur, Nandigram in West Bengal, Kalinga Nagar in Orissa,
Mann in Maharashtra and elsewhere.
? Small farmers, direct farmers and small traders driven to bankruptcy, suicides and displacements.
? Most farm inputs including seeds were managed religiously by the farmers themselves.
? Farmers used innovative methods for soil fertility and pest control using local biodiversity. Thus they produced enough good food.
? The green revolution practices and industrial agriculture replaced internal inputs including seeds by purchased inputs, thus raising the production cost.
? Agriculture thus changed from biodiversity and animal dependence to chemical and machine dependence.
? These two exotic concepts between them eliminated the vast agro biodiversity, and the principle of mixed cropping. In Orissa, as in many parts of south – east Asia, the principal crop is Kharif (rain) paddy. Once there were, more than 5 thousand varieties, suitable for varied eco- climatic conditions giving farmers enough options to select the varieties for every crop, for taste and need.
? Farmers in Orissa now grow just one paddy variety during kharif (rain) and two/three, during rabi (winter summer), all green revolution varieties, dwarf and chemical soaking on ever diminishing agricultural
land and rural population.
? The main cause of this is that millers purchase these varieties paying much higher costs over the natives.
? Yet, there are farmers who for different ostensible reasons save and cultivate dozens of native paddy varieties in their fields, but they are diminishing.
? Navdanya Orissa Biodiversity Farm near Balasore has saved nearly 600 of the Native / nativised paddy varieties and there is a Central Seed Bank from which desired seeds are provided to farmers for cultivation.
? Orissa has its own and unique vegetable varieties in Radish, Brinjal, Tomato, Sweet gourd , Bottle gourd, Ash gourd, Bitter gourd, Cow pea, Sour okra, Taro and Yam.
? Their weak point is that they are highly seasonal.
? The green revolution varieties have pushed most of their cultivations to the back seat but some of them are still there, although not known when the last vestige will also vanish.
? Navdanya – Orissa Biodiversity Farm proposes to conserve these varieties from this year.
? As far as pulses are concerned Orissa has some unique varieties of Pigeon pea (kandula) in KBK, Green gram (specifically ‘suna muga’) cultivated on the raised boundaries of the paddy fields) and Bengal gram in Khurda – Nayagarh districts. Traditional farmers have conserved these varieties for their tastes, liked by some consumers.
? Traditionally seeds were saved by the farmers from the last harvest and exchanged freely with other farmers and relations far and away. Thus, two needs were met, obtain new seeds and enhance the crop yield. Hence, each farmer is a seed saver or conserver. Seed saving and seed exchange has been the basis of agriculture since ages. But, now toeing the new IPR regime, there is a law which threatens this practice, the right of the farmers. Although some of the farmers are aware of the dangers associated with genetic modifications in crop varieties, many illiterate farmers don’t know that the cultivations of GE or patented seeds may wipe out the natives, the precious varieties developed since ages by the combined actions of Darwin’s natural selection and artificial selection.
? Experts say that it is the export agriculture which is the third major contributor (after energy and transport) to global warming because it involves huge inputs of petroleum.
? It takes 100 gallons of oil to grow just one acre of US corn.
? It requires a massive global transportation infrastructure. In many places 4 0- 50 percent of truck traffic is for hauling food over long distances. The food that could be grown locally is today trucked, shipped or flown half way round the planet.
? In the US, the average bite of food travels 1,300 miles from farm to fork.
? Trade rules have so distorted agricultural markets that the imported food costs less than the locally grown food.
? The system has become so wasteful that many countries import the very same food that they export; as for example, last year the US exported and also imported around 9 lakh tons of beef.
? Agribusiness has acquired unprecedented control over the world’s farmers and food supply.
? However, the realities of climate change, resource depletion, crop failure and human sufferings owing to spurious industrial food have led more people and policy makers to have a new look into the links between food, environment and social justice.
? Round the globe voices are being raised on food sovereignty and peoples right to control their own food systems which include the American consumers also.
? For the religious Indian communities- more so in Orissa – food is linked to culture and celebrations. There is a saying in Oriya, “ Bara masare tera parva,” meaning 13 festivals (mostly agriculture related) in 12 months; although all oriya festivities put together will exceed 30.
? Oriyas do have unique palates and also the ways to soothe them, hence, there are over 20 typical oriya cuisines, each one specific for the particular occasion, all with mostly rice as the principal ingredient. For example for Raja – Rice poda pitha (rice cake) ; for Bakula Amavasya– Gainthagudi pitha; for Chitalagi Amavasya – Chitou pitha, for Saptapuri Amavasya- Sapthapheni pitha, for Nuakhai – new rice and so on.
? This is the reason why there were so many rice varieties in Orissa. In addition to this, there was the Mogul influence and this added ‘Biriyani’ (all not non veg. type) each prepared with a specifically aromatic rice variety. There is one vegetarian Biriyani, called ‘Kathal Biriyani’ prepared with immature jackfruit and a specific rice variety, ‘ Mugajai’, that smells like fried ‘muga’ (moong or green gram).
Above all Oriyas always like special sweet dishes on all occasions and
that is ‘kheeri’ (rice + milk +sugar) and for this they have a wide range
of aromatic rice varieties. ‘Pimpudibasa’ is the most used variety in
‘Kheeri’ preparation. For ‘Polao’ (sweetened rice) other aromatic rice
varieties from ‘Laxmikajal’ to ‘Kalajiri’ are used.
With the changing situation and modified cultivation practices,
farmers by and large adopting the green revolution varieties, Oriyas
may soon be forced to forget the palate during these festivities.
However, long ago Gandhiji said,“ this (industrial) civilization is such
that one has only to be patient and it will be self destroyed.”
Now we find dozens of reports and articles stating that globalization has
failed and is receding. The causes cited are –
? The case for globalization was oversold.
? The bulk of the production and sales of products are limited to the
country of origin.
? Third world countries have evolved novel methods to thwart globalization. Ecuador has decided to keep its fuel reserves in the ground rather than exploiting it. Hugo Chavez has launched a plan for regional integration- better known as ‘Bolivian Alternative for
the Americas (ALBA), based on genuine economic cooperation instead of free trade, there by not involving the MNCs which Chavez called, ‘logic beyond capitalism’.
The above text is the speech delivered delivered by the author in power point at the International Workshop organized jointly by the Navdanya Trust of New Delhi and The World Future Council, on 5 – 6 February, 2008, at the India International Centre, New Delhi.
—————————————————————————————————-
Addendum
Radical proposal to inject sulphur particles in to the Earth’s atmosphere in order to cool it down and battle global warming could instead badly damage the ozone layer, reports an US study. Simone Tilmes of the US National Centre for Atmospheric Research reported that trying to artificially cool off the planet could have perilous side effects. Computer simulations showed that large amounts of sulphur injections onto the Earth’s atmosphere would likely destroy between 25 to 75 percent of the ozone layer above the Arctic, leading to devastating effects on the northern hemisphere. The expected recovery time of the existing ozone hole over the Antarctic would be further delayed by 30 to 70 years, warned the report published in the Science Express on 24 April,2008.
—- o —-
The UK government is under attack by debt campaigners as well as developing countries, for their plan to give £800 million to poorer countries in preparation for climate change, as a great bulk of the money would be in the form of loans, not grants, and would be sent via the World Bank instead of the UN.
Martin Khor, director of Third World Network, a grouping of international development agencies based in Malaysia believes; “The decision to deliver climate aid in the form of loans and not grants contradicts internationally agreed principles”
These principles clearly define that developed countries should take the main responsibility for fighting climate change, due to their massive role in creating the pollution that is being blamed for it’s occurance, as well as their more advanced technological and economic capabilities.
Khor also felt the money had to be sent through that UN as:
“Developing countries have repeatedly argued that any proposed funds for climate change, particularly in such significant amounts, should come under the direction of the state parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Martin Khor, director of Third World Network, a grouping of international development agencies based in Malaysia believes; “The decision to deliver climate aid in the form of loans and not grants contradicts internationally agreed principles”
“The World Bank’s climate investment funds could undermine the UN’s negotiations for climate change aid,” Khor argued. “It creates parallel structures for financing climate change adaptation and mitigation outside the existing multilateral structures and within a process dominated by the G8 countries.”
The unproven theory of man-made global warming and its related issues presented by both those who believe in this theory – the Scaremongers - and those who don’t – the Idealists – are the subject of much international controversy. Looking at the Scaremonger’s position the question needs to be asked: are they scientifically ignorant, or are they engaged in deception?
The whole position and argument put forward by the ‘Yes’ case to support their position comes from data collected over the past 50 years. This data is then compared with data collected since the 1890s – when world-wide climatic data first became of interest to scientists – and from the changes a wholly unrealistic assumption is made.
There are two major issues with this:
Firstly, the instruments and equipment used today to measure such factors as air temperature, sea temperature etc. are considerably more accurate than those in use 50 years ago, let alone 110 years ago. So that raises the question – how accurate is any data collected more than 10 years ago? The ‘Yes’ case needs to clarify this point.
The second issue concerns the number of years over which the current data has been collected. 110 years may provide a start, but it’s nowhere near long enough from which to predict the future . Realistically though, 110 years in comparison to the scientifically recognized age of the earth - 4.5 billion years – is meaningless.
To get a valid and significant understanding of the recent changes in the worlds’ temperature – if indeed there has been any abnormal changes - and to try to determine future trends in the area of climate change, the absolute minimum period from which such data is collected should be no less than a thousand years.
Of course this is not possible, but it doesn’t give the ‘Yes’ case the right to give credibility to the limited data they have by suggesting something that can’t be proven. All this approach does is give ammunition to the emotionally immature.
Whilst all of this may point to an incorrect and highly contentious interpretation of the available facts, the role of the UN could be considered as blatant deception.
Recent reports issued by the UN’s committee on man-made climate change laid the blame for this perceived problem clearly at the feet of the industrial western world. Two reports presented in early 2007 pointed to the damage being caused by the burning of fossil fuels leading to an increase in greenhouse gases, and an imbalance between the CO2 and oxygen in the worlds’ atmosphere. The UN said quite clearly that this problem was caused by the ever-increasing expansion of industrial activity by the established western nations and the emerging industrial countries, notably China and India.
The other factors that could be responsible for this atmospheric imbalance – factors that could have a profound influence – were not mentioned at all or were given little attention.
Firstly no mention was made of the practice prevalent in third world countries of mass deforestation by burning thus emitting carbon dioxide into the air. Trees and plants emit oxygen and take in CO2 and therefore play a critical role in helping to keep in balance the relationship between these two gases.
The other factor the UN failed to mention was the explosion in the worlds’ population over the past 50 years. In that time world population has grown from 2 billion to over 6 billion and third world countries have been responsible for the greater part of this.
If the increase in greenhouse gases has been caused by man’s activities then all of man’s actions should be taken into account. The UN do themselves no justice by highlighting only the actions of the industrialized and emerging nations. If the UN is to enjoy any credibility on this issue, then it must mention that deforestation and an unregulated population explosion may also be to blame.
The Scaremongers insist that their proof is strong and convincing. That’s what they insist on, but closer examination shows otherwise. Most of the ‘proof’ they offer is weak and totally unconvincing.
Why do they continually repeat the lie that of the ten hottest years on record, six have occurred within the past 10 years? This has been seen to be false – it’s recently been reported that the 10 hottest years occurred before 1950, with the hottest decade being the 30s.
But what’s so important about the last 110 years, the number of years that climatic data has been collected? Now if those years had been the hottest in the last 1000 years, then that would have greater importance.
Why does the ‘Yes’ case refuse to ignore the one question that would give their theory credibility – what caused climate change in the 12 previous occasions it’s occurred during the life of the earth?
After 12 periods of climate change caused by Nature, why should the activities of man be responsible for present events?
And this last point raises a very interesting question – what gives the ‘Yes’ case the right to think they can reverse the work of Nature or God? What gives Al Gore and his like the right to think they can undo God’s work?
And why are the worlds’ religious leaders saying nothing about this?
This is a look at the international controversy concerning the cause of climate change, and an attempt to put some balance into the argument.
An article in the Washington Times recently discussed how skeptics of global warming are ‘treated like a pariah’. The article begins, ‘Scientists skeptical of climate-change theories say they are increasingly coming under attack – treatment that may make other analysts less likely to present contrarian views about global warming.’ The article cites an example of this by mentioning how a climatologist in Oregon might be stripped of his position by the governor for speaking out against the origins of climate change.
Most skeptics don’t claim that climate change is not occurring, they just disagree with what is causing it, and yet they are treated like traitors. A NASA funded study in 2004 found that, ‘Changes in the solar cycle – and solar output – are known to cause short-term climate change on Earth.’
In a storm of scientists speaking out against Al Gore’s movie, an New Zealand professor of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory has publicly stated, “Gore’s circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention.” In response to the use of images in Gore’s movie of glaciers breaking off, Dr. James Roebuck, a professor on marine geology and former marine researcher at the Geological Survey of Sweden, said that, ‘The breaking glacier wall is a normally occurring phenomenon which is due to the normal advance of a glacier.’
Makes sense, especially since history tells us that glaciers move, after all, that’s what helped form our valleys and reshaped mountain ranges at the end of the last ice age about 10,000 years ago. Maybe my memory isn’t very good, but I don’t think people were driving SUVs 10,000 years ago. Another clever use of images to manipulate facts that Gore has in his movie is that of a polar bear seemingly stranded on a piece of a broken off ice berg, stating that polar bears are becoming extinct because of global warming.
However, there are a few things wrong with this assessment, first of all, that according to a paper published by University of Alaska professor Franklin Kane, ‘the region of the Arctic where rising temperature is supposedly endangering polar bears showed fluctuations since 1940 but no overall temperature rise.’ Secondly, if the polar bear is in such danger according to Al Gore, then why does a recent government survey in Canada show that they are not declining, but rather rising in numbers?
Thirdly, the very idea of a polar bear ’stranded’ on a small block of ice is in itself misleading for Gore’s argument, as polar bears are excellent swimmers and according to Sea World, ‘They can swim for several hours at a time over long distances [and] they’ve been tracked swimming continuously for 100 km (62 miles)’ Professor Kane, speaking about Gore and his personal crusade, said, ‘The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science.’
Even if Al Gore was telling the truth about the causes of global warming, or climate change, which most evidence points to the fact that he is not, but even if he was, he would still be a hypocrite. It was recently revealed that Al Gore doesn’t exactly practice what he preaches, such as what he said in his Academy Award acceptance speech, ‘People all over the world, we need to solve the climate crisis. It’s not a political issue; it’s a moral issue.’
Well, in that case, why is it that a recent study by the Tennessee Center for Policy Research found that one of Al Gore’s mansions uses 20 times the amount of electricity that the average American does. It was also reported that Al Gore consumes twice as much the electricity in one month that the average American consumes in one year.
In examining that there is more evidence to prove the basis for a conclusion that changes in climate are more related to an increase in the temperature of the Sun rather than influence of people, we must examine why efforts to expose this myth are stifled and those who speak out are attacked. In fact, there are reported cases of scientists who speak out against the man-made theory as having received death threats. There has even been talk of relating those who speak out against the currently held theory on global warming as being equal to those who deny the Holocaust.
In a recent op-ed piece in the Boston Herald commenting on the report issued by the UN, Eileen Goodrich wrote, ‘Let’s just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers, though one denies the past and the other denies the present and future.’ This is a very disturbing comment, not only because there is reason to scientifically doubt the man-made theory, but also because this is a scathing attack on freedom of speech, the most vital and important of all rights and freedoms.
With the UN Panel’s judgment in, western politicians are quick to declare that the debate is over, and action must be taken immediately. What is this action that they are planning on taking? The Chancellor of the Exchequer in the UK, Alistair Darling, has publicly called for a ‘new world order’ to combat the threat of climate change. So let’s have a look at this New World Order that’s being implemented to combat the threat of global warming.
One major thing being pushed through with little, cancel that, no debate, is a UN recommendation that we impose ‘a global tax on greenhouse gas emissions’. Most people will hear this and think, ‘Good, polluters need to be taxed’. Well, this means people who drive cars will be taxed, because according to Al Gore, when you drive your car, you’re causing global warming. This is no joke, as an article in the UK’s Guardian Newspaper reported that, ‘The government is throwing its weight behind a revolutionary plan that would force motorists to pay 1.30 pounds sterling a mile to drive on Britain’s busiest roads’. That is approximately $3.00 per mile.
A study conducted by an expert in transportation and infrastructure found that, ‘a Birmingham commuter might end up paying about 1,500 pounds sterling a year for driving 19,000 miles.’ That’s equal to about $3,000 per year. I don’t know about you, but I don’t know many people who can afford that. In the European Union, plans are being made to impose an increase of taxes on diesel. The European Commission recently proposed to ‘raise the minimum tax on commercial diesel fuel by nearly 20% over the next seven years’. This, they claim, is to help protect the environment because it will act as a deterrent for people to drive.
This is just excellent news, because as anyone who has driven in the past two years knows, gas prices are just too low. Another concern arising out of the concept of taxing people for how far they drive is how it is done. According to the Transport Secretary in the UK, ‘Every vehicle would have a black box to allow a satellite system to track their journey’. This has been raising concerns in the UK of an increase in Big Brother technology and government programs. Proposals currently being made in Canada recommend that, ‘Canadians would pay an extra 10 cents per litre at the gas pumps’, mirroring plans in the European Union.
The majority of the scientific community agrees. Man is adversely affecting the environment and accelerating global warming. Greenhouse gases created by our modern lifestyles are blanketing the Earth in a warming cocoon and causing an ugly metamorphosis – a planet riddled with severe weather, animal species extinctions, and an inhospitable environment for future generations.
Governments and industries are not reacting quickly. In our lifetime, the world as we know it may no longer exist. It is up to everyone to start making changes NOW, working together towards a common goal: the preservation of this glorious, beautiful world in which we live.
Quit overstuffing yourself at the table.
Huh? That is a strange statement! How can your eating habits have an effect on greenhouse gases?
There are a growing number of overweight and obese people in the so-called affluent countries. Have you ever considered where all those hamburgers, hot dogs, and chicken nuggets come from? Producers use prime agricultural land to cultivate grass and grain crops for feeding animals in the human food chain.
A single cow needs about five acres of pasture in order to thrive. During its lifetime, a cow can create truckloads of manure – manure that creates a considerable amount of methane (a greenhouse gas). The agricultural land required to raise one cow would feed humans more efficiently when devoted to crops like wheat and soybeans.
The meat we consume goes through several processing stages using a variety of materials – including paper, plastic, Styrofoam, and cardboard. Transportation to the slaughterhouse, processing plant, retail store, and then to the kitchen burns up energy and creates toxic greenhouse emissions.
All that extra food ultimately creates methane gas when it ends up in the sewer. In addition, each extra pound of fat on the body requires more oxygen to maintain, depleting a resource that plant life must replenish.
Give back some of the oxygen you breathe!
Plant life consumes carbon dioxide (a greenhouse gas) and produces life-giving oxygen. However, man clears forests and prime agricultural land to erect ever-higher skyscrapers. If we were to spend more time building down into the ground instead of up into the air or sprawling into the countryside, we would leave more surface area for agriculture and nature. Until architects embrace this concept, we can help replenish a bit of the Earth’s oxygen by filling our lives with greenery.
Surround yourself with houseplants. Every balcony can have flowerboxes filled with beautiful oxygen-producing blooms. Apartments with flat roofs can have rooftop gardens. Business people can fill office buildings and retail establishments with live trees, hanging plant baskets, and exotic flowers. Even people with a ‘brown thumb’ can find easy-to-grow plants like philodendrons, cacti, spider plants, ivies, and African violets.
Reduce the impact of your trash.
Most landfills produce huge amounts of methane. Garbage produces methane gas when it decays in an anaerobic (oxygen-free) environment. Most landfills crush garbage and place it into a plastic-lined pit, then layer the trash with dirt and more garbage.
You can help prevent landfill methane production by composting as much as possible. Just about anything organic is compostable – potato peelings, coffee grounds, unsalted pasta water, moldy baked goods, etc. Avoid large items like whole potatoes and corncobs. You should chop them into smaller pieces before adding them to your compost bin. Avoid meat, oily or fatty substances, or anything prepared with appreciable amounts of salt.
Add finished compost to your houseplants and garden, or use it for lawn top-dressing to create lusciously healthy growth. You can purchase a commercial compost bin at your local department, hardware, or garden supply store. Alternatively, search the Internet for ‘plans compost bin construction’ if you would like to try building a bin from scratch.
You can add many unusual items to your compost:
100% cotton clothing (no buttons or zippers)
100% wool sweaters or socks
brown paper bags
burnt toast, cakes, potatoes
corked or soured wine
crushed eggshells
dryer lint
feathers and fur
hair clippings
junk mail (no plastic or metal)
leather goods (metal and plastic pieces removed)
pasta, cooked or uncooked (without the sauce)
shells from almonds, peanuts, and walnuts
shredded paper
small pieces of cardboard
small quantities of expired dairy products
tea bags and coffee filters
toenail and fingernail clippings
vacuum cleaner bags and contents
wooden skewers (broken into small pieces)
wooden toothpicks
You can locate a more comprehensive list if you search the Net for ‘things to add to compost’.
These tips are just a start. Keep watching for further informational articles in the days to come.
(c) Copyright Kathy Steinemann: This article is free to publish only if this copyright notice, the byline, and the author’s note below (with active links) are included.
Executive search and staffing firm Sequence Systems LLC has launched new, cutting edge initiatives aimed at supporting their client’s efforts in providing innovation and excellence in environmental consulting.
The science behind climate change and global warming has presented a compelling case that emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are inducing changes in the climate throughout the world.
Like Al Gore’s The Climate Project, Sequence is helping to raise the awareness of our clients and fellow citizens about this crisis and informing them about potential solutions so that all of us, together, can preserve the climate balance on which our planet depends.
To ensure a sustainable future, there is a great need to understand climate change and to manage greenhouse gas emissions in ways that protects the planet from further degradation and change while promoting economic growth, he added.
As the climate change debate and private sector market solutions have been evolving,
Sequence has already been on the forefront working with clients throughout the country to expand their staff expertise in this arena, and to provide strategic advice and implementation support for programs that protect the stratospheric ozone layer, as required under the Montreal Protocol.
We understand the vital need today for highly trained personnel who can prepare innovative climate change technical and policy analyses, in identifying viable market solutions and the capability to build real world management tools to effectively combat climate change and global warming.
Sequence is leading the way with initiatives such as searching and placing personnel to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the latest scientific, technical and socio-economic literature related to the understanding of the risk of human-induced climate change, its observed and projected impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation. Today, they are actively recruiting candidates for these vital jobs and resumes may be submitted online: www.sequencestaffing.com.
Sequence, a premier executive search and staffing firm for the environmental, construction and light industrial industries, is dedicated to supporting the core industries responsible for building and maintaining the nation’s infrastructure, natural resources and environment by recruiting and placing field, management and executive-level personnel in temporary, temp-to-permanent and direct-hire positions. For more information, go to: www.sequencestaffing.com.
