WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Al Gore on Thursday urged the United States to wean the nation from its entire electricity grid to carbon-free energy within 10 years, warning that drastic steps were needed to avoid a global economic and ecological cataclysm.
Like a modern Jeremiah, Mr. Gore called down thunder to justify the spending of trillions of dollars to remake the American power system, a plan fraught with technological and political challenges that goes far beyond the changes recently debated in Congress and by world leaders.
Fact: All history reveals that time after time this planet of ours has experienced periods of warming and periods of cooling. A century of slight global warming, about half a degree, ended in 1998.
Fact: In this century a global cooling has set in. In 2008 most of the northern hemisphere, except for Western Europe, is coming out of what most scientists say has been the harshest winter in decades.
Malta, Israel, China and India's New Delhi have been subjected to record low temperatures. In Afghanistan, more than 900 people and 316,000 head of cattle died as a result of bitter cold weather according to Reuters.
In a letter to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon 13 top scientists including one Nobel Prize winner, pointed to the fact that while CO2 levels have continued to rise, global temperatures have fallen, dramatically contradicting the claim that CO2 levels cause global warming. They wrote that the U.N. Climate Change Panel "must be called to account and cease its deceptive practices — policies based on false science must be ended."
I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector.
FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology and satellite data. I've been following the global warming debate closely for years.
When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects.
The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created. We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet.
The Bush administration has made it official: The federal government will ignore climate change as an environmental threat for the remainder of the current president's term.
The result is more missed opportunities for the environment, our health and the economy. Many of the measures designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would have also slowed the growth in the consumption of fossil fuels in this country.
Friday, Environmental Protection Agency chief Stephen L. Johnson said the agency will not impose mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions, saying to do so was beyond the scope of the EPA's authority.
The Supreme Court had ruled 15 months ago that the agency must make a determination on the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on the health and well-being of humans, or to provide an explanation for failing to do so.
The missed opportunities include the failure of the Environmental Protection Agency to allow states including Vermont to set limits on auto emissions of greenhouse gases that go further than federal standards.
David Cameron has failed to convince many of his MPs that man-made global warming is a serious problem, according to a poll that finds widespread sceptisicm across parliament about the issue.
A third of Tory MPs who responded to the survey questioned the existence of climate change and its link to human activity. Two-thirds said tackling climate change should not be a priority for local councils.
A significant number of MPs from other parties also told the survey they had doubts on the issue. Overall, the results suggest that up to a fifth of the MPs who have been debating the UK's climate change bill do not understand, or choose to ignore, the science on which it is based. (Download a PDF of the full poll of MPs attitudes to climate change.)
By the way assuming this absurd idea were true, then Barbara Boxer, Harry Reid and Sen Markey and Dr Hansen are all complicit in causing an increase in kidney stones..
By blocking new drilling and energy sources and the building of new coal fired plants they have been causing the costs of energy and electricity to rise. There will be less use of air conditioning which will result in the population of much of the country to be more uncomfortable and sweat more leading to more kidney stones.
The observed climate changes the order of 0.18F since 1940 can't possibly have any influence on health but man/woman through their stupidity can.
The law of unintended consequences at work again. Just like banning DDT to MAYBE save a few songbirds led to the death of 30-100,000,000 children from malaria. The high costs of energy and food which the environmental extremists cheer as forcing us to change our wasteful energy consuming ways will lead to more excess deaths from cold and heat and starvation.