Posts Tagged ‘Greenhouse’
In February 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated in their Fourth Assessment Report that human actions are “very likely” (i.e. with 90% or greater probability) the cause of global warming, indicated by an increase of 0.75 degrees in average global temperatures over the last 100 years. This statement is the result of very tough discussions on a worldwide scale between thousands of climate researchers whether human activity is the main cause of global warming. The results of this discussion were presented to the public in many publications, for instance in Martin Durkin´s documentary “The Great Global Warming Swindle”, presented in March 2007 at UK´s Channel 4. The main message of this production was that man-made global warming is “a lie” and “the biggest scam of modern times.” Martin Durkin and coworkers argue that the scientific consensus on climate change is the product of “a multibillion-dollar worldwide industry, created by fanatically anti-industrial environmentalists, supported by scientists peddling scare stories to chase funding and propped up by complicit politicians and the media”. The documentary showcases scientists, politicians, economists, writers, and others who are sceptical of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic (or man-made) global warming. Some of the scientists, opposing the main stream of greenhouse gas theories, simply argue that it has not yet been ascertained whether humans are the primary cause of global warming or if there are other natural variations responsible for this phenomenon like increased solar activity, cosmic rays or variations in natural climatic cycles. There is also a series of scientists questioning the temperature records used in the databases as temperature differences attributed to the greenhouse effect are reasonable small (fractions of a ºC). The so-called “urban heat island” effect leads to a local warming in more populated areas, showing slightly higher temperatures due to to increased heat generated by cities, rather than a global temperature rise. Anyhow, this argument was confuted by the IPPC, indicating that the effect of the urban heat island on the global temperature trend is no more than 0.05 °C (0.09 °F) degrees through 1990.
Other facts presented by the film were shown to be incorrect or misinterpreted. The film asserts for instance that records of atmospheric CO2 levels since 1940 show a continuing increase, but during this period, global temperature decreased until 1975, and has increased since then. Anyhow, it is well recognized that this cooling was driven mostly by aerosols (i.e. pollution) in the atmosphere. There is nothing contradictory about this cooling when all sources of radiation changes are considered. A second argument that easily can be invalidated is the impact of the so-called “solar variation theory” on global warming. According to the authors, solar activity (and involving cosmic rays as well as heat from the sun aiding cloud formation) is currently at an extremely high level and directly linked to changes in global temperature. The film argues that solar activity is far more influential on global warming than any other anthropogenic or natural activity on Earth. What the film does not mention is that solar activity has declined over the last 30 years – at the same time as the major spike in global temperature.
But there are some statements related to the influence of the oceanic mass and water vapour on climate change which are more difficult to confute. Water vapour makes up about 98% of the greenhouse gases by volume and provides something between 40 to 80 percent of the natural greenhouse effect. It probably has the largest impact on the planet’s temperature and climatic conditions, much larger than CO2. Water particles in the form of clouds act to reflect incoming solar heat, but the film argues that the effects of clouds cannot be accurately simulated by scientists attempting to predict future weather patterns and their effects on global warming. This argument probably is correct and it is well recognized that water vapor is responsible for the natural warming up of the surface temperature to approximately 30-35ºC. Anthropogenic greenhouse effect, according to the film’s argumentation, is only about 2% of the total “natural” greenhouse effect, which corresponds to a 0.6-0.7 ºC increase in temperature. This estimate is somewhat smaller compared to the results of much more sophisticated simulations (0.9 – 2.7ºC), but there is undoubtedly an anthropogenic effect of CO2 increasing the average surface temperature.
One example of the complexity of climatic simulations is the prediction of future storm events considering global warming effects. According to a recently published study, published online by research meteorologist Tom Knutson in the journal Nature Geoscience and resumed in the New York Times (May 18, 2008), global warming isn’t to blame for the recent jump in hurricanes in the Atlantic. The study predicts that by the end of the century the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic will fall by 18 percent. In the past, Knutson has raised concerns about the effects of climate change on storms. His new paper has the potential to heat up a simmering debate among meteorologists about current and future effects of global warming in the Atlantic. And Knutson is not alone with this view. Another group of experts, those who study hurricanes and who are more often skeptical about global warming, also say there is no link between global warming and hurricane frequency. They attribute the recent increase to a natural multi-decade cycle. According to the prediction, the number of hurricanes touching land in the US and its neighbors will drop by about 30 percent because of wind factors. However, the biggest storms, those with winds of more than 110 mph, would only decrease in frequency by 8 percent. The biggest decrease is forecasted for storms with winds between 39 and 73 mph (normal tropical storms), who would decrease by 27 percent.
It’s not all good news from Knutson’s study, however. His computer model also forecasts that “hurricanes and tropical storms will be wetter and fiercer. Rainfall within 30 miles of a hurricane should jump by 37 percent and wind strength should increase by about 2 percent”, Knutson’s study says.
There are already critical reactions on this new publication. MIT hurricane meteorologist Kerry Emanuel claims that the computer model used by Knutson is not adequate enough to look at storms and according to Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., Knutson’s computer model is poor at assessing tropical weather and ”fail to replicate storms with any kind of fidelity.” It also does not considering well enough the intensity, duration and size of the storm events, as not only the number of hurricanes is important to evaluate.
Positive feedback comes from NOAA hurricane meteorologist Chris Landsea , who wasn’t part of this study, praised Knutson’s work as ”very consistent with what’s being said all along.” ”I think global warming is a big concern, but when it comes to hurricanes the evidence for changes is pretty darn tiny,” Landsea said.
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.
The Greenhouse Effect maybe the most important natural phenomena and may lead to major changes in our lifestyles within our lifetime. Today, whenever there is a natural disaster, the Greenhouse Effect seems to be on the agenda. It wasn’t so long ago that scientists were dismissive of the Greenhouse Effect and there are some still that do not believe it exists, just like there are still people out there that think the world is still flat and the Holocaust never existed. So what is the Greenhouse Effect?
What is the Greenhouse Effect?
The Greenhouse Effect is the culmination of various Greenhouse gases that have been trapped in the Earth’s stratosphere that is leading to the changing of the word’s climate.
• Under the influence of the sun’s rays, the earth’s temperature varies from 0 to about 50oC with an average through night and day, winter and summer, of about 15o C
• The warming is done by rays from the sun, including the very shortest, ultraviolet (UV) rays and the longest infra-red (IR) rays which give you that warm feeling when you walk out into the sunshine, much like an electric radiator warms you when you turn it on and get close to it.
• Some of the incoming rays are reflected back by the clouds in the sky and others by the sea and land, particularly deserts and snowfields.
• Not all those reflected rays go back into space, instead, the atmosphere re-radiates many of the IR rays towards the earth making it warmer still. It is this ability of the atmosphere to re-radiate warm rays which creates the Greenhouse Effect.
• Water vapour, carbon dioxide and certain other trace gases, absorb some of this radiation and prevent it being sent back into space. This “blanket effect” keeps the earth warm. History of the Greenhouse Effect It is not a new phenomena or concept. The term “Greenhouse gas” was first used in the Nineteen Century, by Irish born scientist John Tyndall in a paper he wrote in London’s Philosophical Magazine in 1863. It wasn’t until the 1960’s that Professor Bert Bolin of Stockholm University worked on the phenomenon. When he discussed it with fellow scientists they said “This is science fiction. We don’t believe it”. However by the mid 1970’s things were starting to change rapidly as scientists were starting to accept he was right.
How do we know the Greenhouse Effect exists? What is the evidence?
1. Scientists have analysed climates on planets like Venus and our moon. Venus which is covered by a very dense atmosphere of carbon dioxide. Its surface temperature is around 500 deg C. Whilst the moon which has no atmosphere has an average temperature of approximately -18 deg C. Our atmosphere keeps the surface of our earth, with an average of 15 deg C, some 33 deg C warmer and thus habitable. Evidence of ice cores Over the past 160,000 years carbon dioxide and methane levels trapped in ice cores have varied with global temperature. Scientists have been able to drill out ice cores from the Arctic and Antarctic and measure the levels of carbon dioxide and methane.
Increase in surface temperature of approximately 0.5 deg C over 100 years as carbon dioxide levels increase Studies conducted by scientists have concluded that the earth’s temperature remained fairly constant until the start of the Industrial Revolution. Indeed it did not change much until the start of the twentieth century. From 1880 to 1940 there was a warming of just a quarter of a degree. Most of it was lost between 1940 and 1970. From 1950 to 1980 the average surface temperature was 15 deg C. Between 1970 and 1980 the temperature average went up by three-tenths of a degree C. 1987 and 1988 were the warmest years on record and since then temperatures have been increasing. In 2009, Victoria Australia, experienced the hottest two days on record- 46 deg C, and one of the days (February 6th) leading to Australia’s worst natural disaster in which over 170 people died as a result of bushfires.
4. Sea levels are rising and small glaciers are melting.
Scientists using satellite and imaging technology have been able to monitor the melting of polar ice caps and glaciers.
What are the results of the Greenhouse Effect?
By using very sophisticated computer modeling, scientists have been able to predict what the world’s climate will be like when carbon dioxide levels have doubled.
Increase in world’s temperature It is thought that there will be an increase in the average global temperature by between 1.5 and 4.5 deg C . • By year 2030 an increase of 2 deg C, by 2100 an increase of 6 deg C. The warming will be greater at higher latitudes and in winter. This will lead to the melting of polar ice caps and glaciers which is already evident, in places like Greenland, the Arctic and Antarctic. Changes in World’s climate The Greenhouse Effect will lead to world-wide changes in weather and climate. Some places may get more rain and storms while other places may get less. Not all changes will be bad. However, almost everywhere in the world will have changes in weather, which will have a big impact on our lives Rising Sea Level It is estimated that by the year 2030, the average sea level will increase by approximately 20 centimetres. This will be due mainly to the melting of the polar ice cap, but also warming of the atmosphere will heat the upper layers of the oceans, which will expand when heated. For low lying countries in the Pacific like Tuvalu and Kiribati, and in the Indian Ocean like Maldives and other countries like Holland may altogether disappear. Other impacts Other impacts could be the dieing out of some species of animals and plants, such as coastal marine environments and coral reefs. Some plants would not be able to survive temperature increases. It takes thousands of years for forests to move north or south to cooler climates. According to Joel B. Smith, co-author of an EPA report states that “such a warming over a century would require forests to move five times faster than the fastest rate recorded by paleontologists since the end of the last ice age”.
What are the primary Greenhouse gases?
They are a number of organic compounds which have more than two bonds (i.e 3 atoms). The seven major Greenhouse gases are:
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Ozone (O3) Methane (CH4) CFC’s (Freons F11 & F12) Water vapour (H2O) Nitrous Oxides (NOx) Ethane (CH3CH3)
Where do they come from?
Most of the Greenhouse gases have resulted from the burning of fossil fuels. Everything from power stations, motor vehicles, refrigerators, and factory emissions However, CO2 also results from deforestation which releases carbon locked in the soil when trees are felled. CH4 is released from agriculture such as sheep, cattle and manures and places such as tips, sewage treatment plants and mines.
Fossil Fuel contributions
Due to the nature of carbon to hydrogen ratio, different fossil fuels emit different levels of CO2.
Fossil Fuel Carbon to Hydrogen Ratio
Coal Approx. 1:1
Oil Approx. 1:2
Natural Gas Approx. 1:4
• Hence combustion of coal produces twice the CO2 of natural gas
CO2 Levels in the atmosphere (parts per million)
Pre Industrial Revolution 270 ppm
1988 345 ppm
Today >355 ppm
By measuring bubbles of gases trapped in polar ice, scientists have shown that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere prior to the Industrial Revolution was about 270 parts per million (ppm). A special monitoring station established atop from the mountain Mauna Loa in the Hawaiian Islands showed that by 1957 CO2 levels in the atmosphere to 315 ppm, an increase of 17%. By 1988, it had passed 345 ppm. A rise in 31 years of another 11%. An increased total of about 30% since the start of the Industrial Revolution. Expert’s further forecast that CO2 will reach a level of 500-700 ppm by the year 2050, a doubling inside 200 years.
Percentage Contribution of Greenhouse gases to the Greenhouse Effect
CO2 55%
CFC (F-11/F-12)* 17%
CH4 15%
NO 26%
Other 7%
* Please note that CFCs have been phased out since the mid-nineties
To stablise atmospheric concentration of various gases at present day levels, the following reductions would be required instantly:
CO2 60%
CH4 15-20%
NO2 70-80%
CFC (F-11)* 70-75%
CFC (F-12)* 75-85%
Remaining Scientific Uncertainty
No argument that increasing concentrations of heat trapping gases will lead to an increase in average temperatures world-wide.
However there is an argument about the extent in some cases of various positive and negative effects.
1. Uncertainty in effects of clouds Cumulus- negative cooling effect reflect incoming sunlight High Altitude clouds- positive effect by trapping infra-red radiation from earth
This uncertainty explains variation in temperatures from 1.5 deg C to 4.5 deg C.
2. Combustion of fossil fuels e.g. coal to sulphur dioxide (SO2) has cooling effect.
3. Variations in sun’s output are responsible for temperature increases.
4. Ocean levels will naturally increase due to thermal expansion of surface ocean water and melting of glaciers.
An increase in temperature will lead to increased precipitation, which will increase ice thickness at poles, thus reducing sea level.
5. Natural regional climatic changes, such as deforestation and bushfires, as opposed to global changes.
Policies for Greenhouse Emission Reduction Problems
Different countries emit vastly different CO2 levels per capita Countries have very different per capita incomes Very difficult to work out the warming potential for each Greenhouse Gas in terms of CO2 equivalent. Emissions of gases from various countries are not known with certainty
Policies
1. Each country can reduce by the same percentage
Existing emission levels are uneven per capita are taken as standard Poor countries want to increase fossil fuel usage
2. Each country gets the same emission quotas on a per capita basis.These countries sell quotas to rich countries.
3. Rich countries could reduce emissions by 20% with no reductions required by poor countries.
• Not all rich countries have high emissions of CO2, and not all poor countries are low emitters because of deforestation.
4. Assume Australia which is high income and high Greenhouse Gas emitter per capita is required to reduce emissions by 20%.
• How should it be reduced? By: a) each state? b) each industry section?
Some methods of reducing CO2 emissions that have negative impact on our lives;
• Better managing of natural resource;
• Reducing waste in manufacturing;
• Find alternative end uses for waste (recycle and reuse);
• Buying less junks and goods that we don’t need (In Australia, estimated to be worth AUD$10 billion per annum);
• Buying quality goods that don’t need replacing as often;
• Recycling more (e.g. it takes about 8 times more energy to convert bauxite to aluminium than it does to recycle it)
• Reduced use of motor vehicles;
• Increased use of public transport;
• More efficient lighting, heating and cooling;
• Better insulation;
• Less reliance on electricity and electrical goods and machines;
• More efficient electrical appliances;
• More efficient cars;
• Alternative technologies from natural sources such as wind, thermal and tidal;
• Converting landfills and sewage plants into methane plants;
• Bio-fuels such as bio-diesel, methanol and ethanol production from organic waste sources
• Reduce large scale deforestation and land clearing;
• Increase tree planting;
• More efficient agriculture including No till and Conservation agriculture methods;
• Organic farming.
Without a doubt you have heard the avid discussions about global warming and the consequences it has when it comes to the climate. It is true that our planet is slowly melting and that every day more greenhouse gases are released into the atmosphere, which combined with the increased level of infrared energies lead to the rise of the global temperatures. Polar ice caps are melting and temperate climates are changing to 2-season climate patterns. The fauna and flora are suffering from all those changes and we have to ask ourselves: how can we stop our planet from a certain death? Well, there are many solutions presented by global warming activists and one of the most relevant is that of carbon credits.
Given the fact that we live in age where more and more industries are created, increasing the level of pollution worldwide, the concept of carbon credits was well received. It was meant as an initiative to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases and even though at the beginning, attained a certain level of success. Today, the Internet is practically filled with companies that provide the possibility to buy carbon credits and most importantly each provider is involved in different projects. Those who are interested in carbon credits must know what are the carbon projects provided by these companies and thus be able to make a serious-minded comparison. After all, most of the companies that are interested in such services know that they contribute to the problem of global warming due to the emission of greenhouse gases (especially methane and carbon dioxide) and they need to take action, even if that means only buying carbon credits.
Companies like Carbonfund and Terapass have understood the importance of carbon credits and they have developed various carbon projects that will reduce some of the greenhouse gases suffocating the atmosphere. A carbon credit equals with the reduction of one ton of carbon dioxide and it is indeed one of the most practical measures that can be taken against global warming by individuals and companies. It also increases awareness when it comes to such problems, many companies feeling stimulated when they are given an incentive in order to decrease the level of carbon dioxide produced. The question is: where is the best carbon credit project to be found and why would I want to go to this specific provider and not to someone else? What are the rules when it comes to selecting the right provider for a carbon credit? Actually, if you want to reduce your own carbon footprint then you should know that there are no better providers than others. Still, their projects are different especially when it comes to their quality. This is why you need a service that allows not only the comparison of various carbon credit providers but also has the possibility of rating that specific provider.
We are talking about climate change and thus reducing even just a tone of carbon dioxide is extremely important. All companies and businesses out there should take part in fighting the climate change and reduce the level of greenhouse gases that affect the atmosphere. Apart from informing ourselves on the subject of global warming, we should also try and find a reliable provider for carbon credit projects using the comparison services provided by the Internet. As we cannot stop the greenhouse gases that have already been released in the atmosphere, we can take action by preventing the quantity of gases that will be released in the future. There are many carbon reducing projects out there, all meant to stimulate and help people contribute. Some examples include: wind power farms, renewable energy and also reforestation. Just make sure that you bring your own contribution â if each person does the same, we will certainly have a greener and healthier planet!
The Chrysler Group and the Ford Motor Co. recently said that they had joined a group calling for mandatory reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.
The Auburn Hills-unit of German DaimlerChrysler AG and the Dearborn automaker are joining the General Motors Corp. as the first automotive members of the United States Climate Action Partnership. The organization consists of a group of huge businesses and environmental groups in the United States. Additionally, the Toyota Motor Co. spokeswoman Martha Voss said that the automaker was also considering joining the group. Other members of the USCAP include Midland-based Dow Chemical, Alcoa, Duke Energy, PepsiCo, BP America Inc. and the Nature Conservancy.
The USCAP has recommended that Congress establish short- and mid-term emission reduction targets; a national program to accelerate technology research, development and deployment; and approaches to encourage action by other nations.
“Now is the time for advancing a national approach to climate change where all of us, individuals, industry and government – take action toward reducing emissions of greenhouse gases,” said Tom LaSorda, the Chrysler Group’s president and CEO. “We are proud to be an active member with USCAP in the development of climate policy that addresses energy use and emissions from all sectors of the U.S. economy, and ultimately drives increased energy efficiency.”
Meanwhile, Ford said that its decision to join the group is part of its commitment to reduce the country’s reliance on foreign oil and reduce greenhouse gas emissions “by taking an integrated approach that includes the vehicle, plus the fuel, plus the driver.” Alan Mulally, Ford’s president and CEO, has this to say: “We are at a critical stage in the conversation on climate change, energy consumption and environmental protection.”
Automakers are trying to boost their green offers in the wake of alarming need for tougher fuel economy mandates on Capitol Hill. Last week, the Senate voted 65-27 to require automakers to increase the fuel efficiency of vehicles by 40 percent by 2020, to a combined 35 miles per gallon for passenger cars and light trucks.
Those mandates could cost the industry tens of billions of dollars. They also could injure Chrysler the most since about 70 percent of its sales are sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks. Chrysler has said that the Senate bill could add $6,700 per vehicle and potentially force it out of business.
According to the automakers, the fuel mandates would necessitate costly production. Ford engines, the Mercury cold air intake, and other auto parts are required to complement the mileage of the product lines.
The Chrysler Group called for mandatory reductions of heat-trapping emissions that can be imposed “without economic harm and lead to economic opportunities if done across the economy and with provisions to mitigate costs.” As part of Chrysler’s $3 billion investment to produce more fuel-efficient engines, transmissions and axles, the Auburn Hills automaker said last week that it would boost fuel economy across its entire vehicle lineup.
In April, the Cerberus Capital Management LP said that it would buy 80.1 percent of Chrysler from DaimlerChrysler in a $7.4 billion deal that is expected to close soon. That would mark the end of auto industry’s ‘perfect marriage.’ After the divorce, Chrysler is expected to entertain more dramatic plans to alleviate its standing in the industry.
While many view the effects of global warming to be more radical, the scientific consensus on climatic changes related to global warming is that the average temperature of the Earth has increased between 0.4 and 0.8 °C over the past century. Scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate carrying out global warming research have predicted that average global temperatures could go between 1.4 and 5.8 °C by the year 2100.
Loss of forests contributes as much as 30 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions each rivaling emissions from the global transportation sector. The Kyoto Protocol’s offset mechanisms allow credits to be given for replanting trees or establishing new forests, which capture carbon dioxide through photosynthesis. But the current policy regimen does nothing to prevent existing forests from being cut down in the first place.
With Kyoto set to expire in 2012, a new round of talks is under way to develop the next framework for climate change. Experts believe a policy to avoid further deforestation will be a major topic at the conference. But some environmentalists remain wary of forestry climate policy, fearing it will draw attention away from the need to reduce emissions caused by fossil fuels.
The world currently has about ten billion acres of forest. According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization’s (FAO) 2007 report on the world’s forests, the world lost about 3 percent of forest area between 1990 and 2005, and the net rate of loss has declined since 2000 (the world loses on average 32 million acres per year). Growth in northern hemisphere forest has helped offset tropical deforestation. There is disagreement, however, on the extent to which increases in temperate-zone forests offset the loss of carbon sinking in tropical zones.
Deforestation is caused by exploitation of natural resources, including expanding populations, logging, agriculture, biofuel production, and wildfires. Clearing forests for the production of biofuels is causing major concern, as experts contend that it has a significant negative impact on forests without doing much to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The FAO report shows that the greatest overall loss is occurring in Africa, followed closely by Latin America and the Caribbean. Indonesia has the fastest deforestation rate of any single country in the world. When emissions from loss of forests are taken into account, Indonesia could be considered the world’s third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, according to a recent World Bank report. Indonesia recently has made a show of planting 80 million trees ahead of the Bali conference, but some question the country’s long-term commitment to slowing exploitation of its valuable resources, such as stemming illegal logging.
China’s rapid growth in the production of manufactured goods that need wood also poses challenges. The country’s consumption of forest products leads the world. According to Forest Trends, a nonprofit research group, China’s increasing demand has lead to unsustainable and sometimes illegal logging practices in many of the countries seeing significant deforesting activities, such as Indonesia and Papua New Guinea.
China has a seemingly limitless appetite for cheap wood, says Don J. Melnick, a conservation biology professor at Columbia University. Products made from this timber often wind up in U.S. and European markets. Richard Z. Donovan, chief of forestry for the Rainforest Alliance, an advocacy group, says that right now China is not only adding to climate change by burning large amounts of fossil fuels that emit greenhouse gas but also by being a non-discriminating buyer of wood.
The global community is now facing the biggest threat to its existence in the form of global warming. To address the threat of global warming, different industries including the auto industry has taken major steps to reduce the amount of fossil fuel burned and the amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere. And recently, another industry has expressed dedication to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
The aluminum industry announced on March 24th their “Position on Climate Change”. The said action was taken after the meeting of the members of the Aluminum Association.
Patrick Franc, the Chairman of the Aluminum Association, has this to say about the issue: “We believe that it is important for the U.S. aluminum industry to assume a leadership position in this cause for environmental sustainability of our industry and products, on a market-wide and global basis.” Franc is also the president of the ARCO Aluminum.
The industry acknowledged the threat of global warming to the planet as reported by scientists. The industry further concedes that the planet is increasingly becoming warm due to the excessive release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere which radiates heat from the sun. The industry also agrees that to combat the issue, greater efforts would have to come from every industry that has mushroomed from all corners of the world.
Government involvement is also urged by the Association. The industry encouraged the legislative body of the United States to enact laws which will recognize the pay off of recycling towards reduction of greenhouse gas emission. The industry reports that the energy invested on the production of aluminum is offset by the reduction of energy need in recycling their products. The energy savings on recycling of aluminum amounts to 95 percent compared to the initial production.
The U.S. aluminum industry has already taken steps towards the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions as according to Steve Larkin, the president of The Aluminum Association. “The aluminum industry in the U.S. has made considerable reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, offering both experience and a positive track record in this cause. Our contributions through recycling and downstream emissions reductions through better, less emitting automobiles will help the United States and other countries protect the environment,” he further emphasizes.
The use of aluminum on vehicle parts such as a Nissan exhaust tip and the body of the vehicle also reduces the amount of greenhouse gases released. This is because aluminum is a lightweight metal and the lighter the vehicle, the less power it needs. And the less power it needs, the less fuel it needs to burn which translates to less emission.
The aluminum industry also recycles these parts and they are supporting the enactment of legislations which will give incentive to companies that recycles aluminum. One form of incentive that they are asking from the government is the tax credit for companies in the aluminum industry.
When you receive the Seal you begin to care for the earth and your environment. You want to replenish the earth, not destroy it. So you heed the warnings of scientists who show some climate change is happening.
You may not agree with everything about the consensus on global warning. After all, it is a consensus and not proven. But sadly once climate change is “proven” it is too late. The changes have hurt you and everyone else.
Some climate change is already proven to have happened. Regardless of what is causing it global warming is happening. And if you think humans are not contributing to it, think again.
When was the last time you took a serious look at your community? Think about all those automobiles and factories. And in rural areas all the fertilizing of fields and even great numbers of livestock. They all make an impact.
The United Nations says greenhouse gases were higher in 2006 than ever before in the history of people on earth. And of the handful of culprits, carbon dioxide is quickly becoming the major offender.
The concentrations of carbon dioxide in the earth’s atmosphere all over the world are higher than ever, along with higher concentrations of nitrous oxide, according to the World Meteorological Organization.
There are three main greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide and a third, methane which thank God is not showing much of an increased level in the atmosphere.
The WMO says that carbon dioxide previously contributed to 87 percent of the warming the earth has recently experienced. But in the last 5 years its contribution jumped to 91 percent, making it the single-handed villain of global warming.
The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rose a half-percent in 2006. That is quite a big jump for just one year. Nitrous oxide levels also rose but not as much as the CO2 levels.
Carbon dioxide emissions from people heat warm up the surface of the earth and evaporate more water. That makes the air moister so it sustains a higher temperature. And higher temperatures will certainly change things.
They will interrupt the delicate balance God created on earth. And burning of fossil fuels is one of the biggest causes of these CO2 emissions causing this imbalance. A big cause and one that can be changed.
Scientists may not be right about everything about global warming. But the impact of the activity of people is simply measurable, even though the results of that impact are debatable.
And scientists and inventors will prove to be the heroes when they develop alternative fuels like hydrogen cells for our cars. Driving a hydrogen fuel-cell car is one way you can cut your own emissions of carbon dioxide.
When you are sealed you have a brotherhood with the earth. And you look for Jesus returning within you. That time is now. This is the “summer” season Jesus told you to watch for. It is knocking at your door.
That means Jesus is ready to return. And you need to look for Him to return within you instead of looking for the end of the world to happen. The world does not have to end but it should change. And you can change by receiving the Seal.
Greenhouse gas emissions are known to be directly related to the perceived heightened warming of the earth’s oceans and near-surface air. But how does recycling help in cutting back on greenhouse gas emissions?
Recycling is used to refer to the reprocessing of previously manufactured products (such as plastic bottles) so that their core elements (in this case, the plastic substances that make up plastic bottles) can be used to make new products later on. It should be clarified that recycling is different from re-use, because the latter simply means that the previously manufactured product (such as a plastic bottle) will be used for other purposes aside from its original use (such as when a plastic bottle is cut in half and then converted into a plant container.)
When previously manufactured products are recycled, this helps in reducing the amount of energy used to produce new products (compared to “virgin production” where products that are manufactured from substances that were taken purely from the earth’s environment – also known as raw materials.) One substance that has been quite damaging to the environment is plastic, because it does not degrade and become re-absorbed into the environment. There is also less waste that goes into disposal systems such as landfills when recycling is put into play.
When products are recycled, there is less need to look for raw materials from virgin sources. For example, aluminum is one substance which can be recycled over and over again without a decline in the quality of the substance. When plastic is recycled, up to 70% of energy is saved. If paper is the substance being recycled, up to 40% of energy is saved. When less energy is used to produce a product, that means less greenhouse gases are emitted into the atmosphere, which helps reduce the impact on the environment through the greenhouse effect.
Energy is also saved because there is less of the virgin or raw materials that has to be sought after, there is less energy needed to transport these virgin materials from their original sources, and there is less energy to be expended trying to clean up the environment when pollutants like non-biodegradable aluminum and plastic containers are dumped into landfills.
Some criticize recycling since there is still a level of energy required to transport recyclables to recycling centers and recycling plants, and in the recycling process itself. However, the energy savings derived from recycling are considerable, and much less energy will be used to make new products from recyclables compared to the use of virgin materials for manufacturing new products. Another criticism is that recycling can become impractical because the cumulative costs for recycling a certain product may outweigh the environmental benefits derived from recycling.
Despite such criticisms, it is generally accepted nowadays that recycling does help the environment by significantly reducing demands on energy supplies, so that less greenhouse gases are emitted, and can be a cost-effective solution in certain cases.
A natural gas vehicle or NGV is an alternate fuel vehicle that applies contracted natural gas (CNG) or, less normally, liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a clean alternative to other automobile fuels. Worldwide, there are roughly five million NGVs as of 2006, with the largest number of NGVs in Argentina, Brazil, Iran, Pakistan, and Thailand. In Europe they are popular in Germany and Italy.
NGV’s can be refueled anyplace from existing natural gas lines. This makes home fueling stations that exploit into such lines possible. A company called FuelMaker has initiated such a system known as “Phill”, which they have built up in partnership with Honda.
Existing gasoline-powered vehicles may be converted to CNG. An expanding number of vehicles worldwide are being manufactured to run on CNG (Honda Civic, Samand). GM do Brasil introduced the MultiPower engine in August 2004, which was capable of using CNG, alcohol, and petrol as fuel.
The GM engine has electronic fuel injection automatically adjusts to any acceptable fuel configuration. This motor was utilized in the Chevrolet Astra
and was aimed at the taxi market.
Although a localized problem, NGV refill stations can be scarce in some places, with cabdrivers waiting in long queues to refill. This has led to
promptings that taxis should have their own options for refueling at taxi ranks – a model being tested in Casablanca, Morocco. Here, taxi drivers ‘belong’ to a base station where they operate from and have priority fuel rights including an account card.
Natural Gas Vehicle Market Potential report explores natural gas vehicles, the relationship between natural gas vehicles and greenhouse gas emissions, how natural gas vehicles operate, etc. It is a complete resource on natural gas vehicles.
For vast range of market reports please visit: http://www.bharatbook.com/Market-Research-Reports/Natural-Gas-Vehicle-Market-Potential.html
Contact us at:
Bharat Book Bureau
Tel: +91 22 27578668
Fax: +91 22 27579131
Email: info@bharatbook.com
Website: www.bharatbook.com
