Green Sanctuary/Climate Change Group

To Cartoons (1/22/2012) and Videos (1/1/2012) on Climate Change   

To Table of Contents on Climate Change (1/8/2012) and Green Sanctuary (11/29/2011)

Here is a working copy of the First Parish Environmental Practices Word file.  And here is a copy of the recent energy audit of First Parish By Massachusetts Interfaith Power and Light.

Green Sanctuary Resolution Adopted

The Green Sanctuary Group is pleased to report that at the November 21st congregational meeting, the Members of First Parish UU of Arlington, MA, voted in favor of adopting the Green Sanctuary resolution with a few amendments.  The final adopted resolution appears below:

Resolution on Becoming a Green Sanctuary Congregation

BE IT RESOLVED THAT

AS MEMBERS OF FIRST PARISH UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST OF ARLINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS

We recognize the seriousness of the challenges posed by dramatic climate change.  Life on our beautiful planet is threatened by an exploding population, destruction of the environment, and excessive use of fossil fuels.

We have a responsibility to be mindful of the environmental consequences of our choices for the sake of the human community, all other species and the resources that sustain them now on earth, and for future generations.

We value the seventh principle of our Unitarian Universalist Association:  "Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part."

THEREFORE:

We strive to be a green sanctuary congregation whose way of living as a religious community is grounded in sound environmental policies and practices.

We seek an identity as a religious community that enables us to embody a "green way of life."

We hope that when members and staff make decisions concerning First Parish - its maintenance, the use of its facilities, its programs, and its outreach to the community - they seriously consider environmental factors as well as issues of cost, functionality, and aesthetics.

And

We seek Green Sanctuary Accreditation from our Unitarian Universalist Association.

Information about the Unitarian Universalist Association's Green Sanctuary Program is available Here.

Cartoons

Videos

Science and Distortion - Stephen Schneider

This is a new video out produced by Stephen Thomson of Plomomedia that was first aired at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco on December 6, 2011.  Not only is this an excellently produced video, but it is a wonderful and balanced encapsulation of the reality of the climate situation and public debate.  If you have friends who are just starting to become interested in the climate change issue, this would be an excellent place to point them for an introduction.

For further debunking of the myths that pop up in this video see:

Time Ranks ‘Fracking’ Rap Among Most Creative Videos of 2011

An online video featuring an unlikely fusion of hip-hop lyrics and the natural gas extraction technology known as “fracking” was ranked number 2 on Time magazine’s list of most creative videos in 2011.  Produced by a team of students from New York University’s Studio 20 journalism program, the video, “My Water’s on Fire Tonight (The Fracking Song),” features a rap-style description of the hydraulic fracturing drilling process — and its possible environmental consequences — over animated graphics and a funky backbeat.  Lisa Rucker, a Los Angeles-based editor who helped produce the video, said the video has the potential to introduce the controversial fracking debate to a wide audience.  The video has attracted more than 200,000 viewers since it was posted on YouTube in the spring.  “Hopefully, if they watch the video, they’ll go read an article about it or find out more information about what it is and what the effects are,” she told the Los Angeles Times.  The 2-minute-33-second rap song taps into information from ProPublica’s three-years of investigative reporting on the drilling process.

"Get It Done!":  Youth Delegate Anjali Appadurai Speaks Truth to Power at Conclusion of COP17 in Durban

Perhaps the most powerful speech made in all of COP17 at Durban came at the very end, a statement by Anjali Appadurai, a student at the College of the Atlantic in Bar Harbor, Maine, who addressed the conference on behalf of the youth delegates.  Ms. Appadurai is from Coquitlam, a suburb of Metro Vancouver, Canada.

Watch Coverage of Ms. Appadurai's statement, courtesy of Democracy Now!

Transcript:

APPADURAI:  I speak for more than half the world’s population.  We are the silent majority.  You’ve given us a seat in this hall, but our interests are not on the table.  What does it take to get a stake in this game?  Lobbyists?  Corporate influence?  Money?  You’ve been negotiating all my life.  In that time, you’ve failed to meet pledges, you’ve missed targets, and you’ve broken promises.  But you’ve heard this all before.

We’re in Africa, home to communities on the front line of climate change.  The world’s poorest countries need funding for adaptation now.  The Horn of Africa and those nearby in KwaMashu needed it yesterday.  But as 2012 dawns, our Green Climate Fund remains empty.  The International Energy Agency tells us we have five years until the window to avoid irreversible climate change closes.  The science tells us that we have five years maximum.  You’re saying, “Give us ten.”

The most stark betrayal of your generation’s responsibility to ours is that you call this “ambition.” Where is the courage in these rooms?  Now is not the time for incremental action.  In the long run, these will be seen as the defining moments of an era in which narrow self-interest prevailed over science, reason and common compassion.

There is real ambition in this room, but it’s been dismissed as radical, deemed not politically possible.  Stand with Africa.  Long-term thinking is not radical.  What’s radical is to completely alter the planet’s climate, to betray the future of my generation, and to condemn millions to death by climate change.  What’s radical is to write off the fact that change is within our reach.  2011 was the year in which the silent majority found their voice, the year when the bottom shook the top.  2011 was the year when the radical became reality.

Common, but differentiated, and historical responsibility are not up for debate.  Respect the foundational principles of this convention.  Respect the integral values of humanity.  Respect the future of your descendants.  Mandela said, “It always seems impossible, until it’s done.” So, distinguished delegates and governments around the world, governments of the developed world, deep cuts now.  Get it done.

Mic check!

PEOPLE’S MIC:  Mic check!

ANJALI APPADURAI:  Mic check!

PEOPLE’S MIC:  Mic check!

ANJALI APPADURAI:  Equity now!

PEOPLE’S MIC:  Equity now!

ANJALI APPADURAI:  Equity now!

PEOPLE’S MIC:  Equity now!

ANJALI APPADURAI:  You’ve run out of excuses!

PEOPLE’S MIC:  You’ve run out of excuses!

ANJALI APPADURAI:  We’re running out of time!

PEOPLE’S MIC:  We’re running out of time!

ANJALI APPADURAI:  Get it done!

PEOPLE’S MIC:  Get it done!

ANJALI APPADURAI:  Get it done!

PEOPLE’S MIC:  Get it done!

ANJALI APPADURAI:  Get it done!

PEOPLE’S MIC:  Get it done!

CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Miss Appadurai, who was speaking on behalf of half of the world’s population, I think she said at the beginning.  And on a purely personal note, I wonder why we let not speak half of the world’s population first in this conference, but only last.

Facing Race - 2010's keynote presentation by Melissa Harris-Lacewell

Facing Race - 2010's keynote presentation by Melissa Harris-Lacewell, Associate Professor of Politics and African American Studies at Princeton University and a recurring guest on MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show” and “Countdown with Keith Olbermann”, was both funny and fiery as she urged progressives to see how race, gender, LGBT issues are all interconnected.

Lord Nicholas Stern at Tufts University

On March 8 Senior Research Fellow Frank Ackerman discussed at Tufts University with Lord Nicholas Stern, widely renowned for pioneering and influential analysis of the economics of global climate change.

Annie Leonard's The Story of Citizens United v. FEC explores "the inordinate power that corporations exercise in our democracy."  It analyzes some of the reasons why corporations can dodge the blame for mucking up the environment.

Noam Chomsky:  Contours of global order:  Domination, stability, security in a changing world
Climate change discussed at end (1:08:38/1:13:54)

A video of "talking hands" put together by a bunch of youth climate activists

ABC Runs Good Prime Time Story on Climate Change

Climate Change and National Security

Climate Change:  How Do We Know? Science and Distortion - Stephen Schneider Our Extreme Weather:  Arctic Changes to Blame? Hansen and Caldeira on Sensitivity:  Paleoclimate Record Points Toward Potential Rapid Climate Changes Huge Methane Plumes Are Discovered in Arctic Ocean 2011 Extreme Weather Map Climate Deal Reached, Kyoto Extended, All Nations Have Same CO2 Limits "Get It Done!":  Youth Delegate Anjali Appadurai Speaks Truth to Power at Conclusion of COP17 in Durban Renewable Power Tops Fossil Fuels for First Time Cutting Soot Emissions:  Fastest, Most Economical Way to Slow Global Warming? The False Promise of Biofuels Time to Wake Up:  Days of Abundant Resources and Falling Prices Are Over Forever Masters:  Driven by Global Warming, "It Is Quite Possible That 2010 Was The Most Extreme Weather Year Globally Since 1816" The Earth Is Full - NY Times Columnist Tom Friedman on The Great Disruption Off the Pedestal:  Creating a New Vision of Economic Growth Futurist Ray Kurzweil Isn’t Worried About Climate Change The tentacles of the Kochtopus:  What you need to know about the financiers of the Radical Right The Acid Sea, by Elizabeth Kolbert Winning the Biofuel Future “My Fear is that Climate Change is the Biggest Crisis of All”:  Naomi Klein Warns That Global Warming Could Be Exploited by Capitalism and Militarism 350.Org To Launch New Campaign:  ‘The U.S. Chamber Doesn’t Speak For Me’ Data Highlights from World on the Edge by Lester Brown Insurance Report Concludes ‘Trillions of Dollars at Stake’ from Climate Change Research Links Heavy Rains and Snow to Humans That Awkward Conversation (About the Climate) WWF Energy Report The Coal Boom Moral Dimension of Climate Change BP:  'An accident waiting to happen' Climate Negotiations in Cancún Attended by an Arlingtonian We Are at a Climate Tipping Point That, Once Crossed, Enables Multi-Meter Sea Level Rise This Century James E. Hansen and Makiko Sato Earth's Hot Past Could Be Prologue to Future Climate Doctors Group Sues USDA For Ignoring Vegetarianism The Many Lines of Evidence for Global Warming in a Single Graphic The Large Potential of Geothermal Heat Pump Systems Huge Parts of World Are Drying Up:  Land 'Evapotranspiration' Change What Is Geoengineering and Why Is It Considered a Climate Change Solution? Ocean Acidification:  'Evil Twin of Global Warming' Threatens World's Oceans

Click here to see a graph and how to explain it

350 Is the Most Important Number on the Planet

In December of 2007, NASA's Jim Hansen gave a slide show at the American Geophysical Union annual meeting in San Francisco.  He'd been thinking about what it meant that we'd just come through a summer of very rapid ice melt in the high Arctic, and that researchers were reporting "ahead of schedule" changes in dozen other of the earth's big physical features—melting glaciers, acidifying oceans and so on.

Combined with reams of paleo-climate data, his team believed they now had enough information to finally draw a red line for the planet:  when atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide were above 350 ppm, they said, global warming would be dangerously out of control.  In fact, they said in the abstract of the paper they soon published, above 350 you couldn't have a planet "similar to the one on which civilization developed and to which life on earth is adapted."

What role do you think religious communities can play in the environmental movement?

They can help focus on one of the most important dimensions -- that this is the prime moral issue of our time or really any time.  The truth is that the more of the problem you cause the less of the damage you suffer, at least at first.  It's as if God is giving us an exam and we're failing it.  We are failing to protect the world that is under our dominion, failing to love our neighbors.  Instead, we are making life impossible for so many people and other species on the planet. 

What is one thing you would like every reader of this interview to do today to help heal our earth?

Get politically involved.  350.org is a good place to start.

  — Bill McKibben Click here to see and hear "Three Five 0" Anthem, composed and performed by a UU Minister.

Click here to read about the Massachusetts Climate Action Network (MCAN).  MCAN is a coalition of locally organized groups fighting the climate crisis.

Climate change:  How do we know?

The Earth's climate has changed throughout history.  Just in the last 650,000 years there have been seven cycles of glacial advance and retreat, with the abrupt end of the last ice age about 7,000 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization.  Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.

The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is very likely human-induced and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented in the past 1,300 years.

Earth-orbiting satellites and other technological advances have enabled scientists to see the big picture, collecting many different types of information about our planet and its climate on a global scale.  Studying these climate data collected over many years reveal the signals of a changing climate.

Certain facts about Earth's climate are not in dispute:

• The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.  Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many JPL-designed instruments, such as AIRS.  Increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.
• Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that the Earth’s climate responds to changes in solar output, in the Earth’s orbit, and in greenhouse gas levels.  They also show that in the past, large changes in climate have happened very quickly, geologically-speaking:  in tens of years, not in millions or even thousands.

The evidence for rapid climate change is compelling.

Our Extreme Weather:  Arctic Changes to Blame?

"The question is not whether sea ice loss is affecting the large-scale atmospheric circulation...it's how can it not?"  That was the take-home message from Dr. Jennifer Francis of Rutgers University, in her talk "Does Arctic Amplification Fuel Extreme Weather in Mid-Latitudes?", presented at last week's American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco.  Dr. Francis presented new research in review for publication, which shows that Arctic sea ice loss may significantly affect the upper-level atmospheric circulation, slowing its winds and increasing its tendency to make contorted high-amplitude loops.  High-amplitude loops in the upper level wind pattern (and associated jet stream) increases the probability of persistent weather patterns in the Northern Hemisphere, potentially leading to extreme weather due to longer-duration cold spells, snow events, heat waves, flooding events, and drought conditions.

Read More

Arctic sea ice in September 2007 reached its lowest extent on record, approximately 40% lower than when satellite records began in 1979.  Sea ice loss in 2011 was virtually tied with the ice loss in 2007, despite weather conditions that were not as unusual in the Arctic.  Image credit:  University of Illinois Cryosphere Today.

Hansen and Caldeira on Sensitivity:  Paleoclimate Record Points Toward Potential Rapid Climate Changes

Amounts of warming previously thought to be safe may instead trigger widespread melting of the world’s ice sheets and other catastrophic impacts, scientists said….

“There’s evidence that climate sensitivity may be quite a bit higher than what the models are suggesting,” said Ken Caldeira, a senior scientist at Stanford University’s Carnegie Institution for Science. ...

Accelerating melting on the world’s ice sheets and other new observations have scientists concluding that even a two-degree Celsius rise in temperatures – a benchmark long seen as safe in global climate talks and other emissions reductions scenarios – could lead to an 80-foot rise in sea levels.

That’s from a Daily Climate piece on this panel discussion at last weeks AGU meeting:

Accelerating melting on the world’s ice sheets and other new observations have scientists concluding that even a two-degree Celsius rise in temperatures – a benchmark long seen as safe in global climate talks and other emissions reductions scenarios – could lead to an 80-foot rise in sea levels.

“The dangerous level of global warming is less than what we thought a few years ago,” said James Hansen, director of NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.  “It was natural to think that a few degrees wasn’t so bad….  (But) a target of two degrees is actually a prescription for long-term disaster.”

Antarctica and Greenland are losing ice at a surprising clip, Hansen said, and methane hydrates – a potent source of greenhouse gas frozen beneath the seas – are starting to bubble up.

The key question for climatologists:  How sensitive is the climate to increasing amounts of fossil fuel emissions.  Last year humanity pumped almost 10 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, a half-billion tons more than 2009 and the largest jump in any year since the Industrial Revolution, according to the Global Carbon Project.

Read More

Huge Methane Plumes Are Discovered in Arctic Ocean

Russian scientists sampling the waters of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf have discovered enormous plumes of methane, some more than a kilometer wide, bubbling up from the thawing seabed.  Igor Semiletov, an oceanographer from the Far Eastern branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said a research cruise late this summer detected more than 100 of these extensive methane “fountains” in an area of less than 10,000 square miles.  Semiletov, who has been studying the region’s seabed for 20 years, said the scale and volume of the plumes far surpasses anything he had seen previously and could indicate that slushy methane hydrates on the seabed are thawing at an intensifying rate as Arctic Ocean ice disappears and sea temperatures rise.

Read More

2011 Extreme Weather Map:  Thousands of Weather Records Broken in the US, Costs Climbing – and Climate Change a Factor

Climate change increases the risk of record-breaking extreme weather events that threaten communities across the country.  In 2011 there were at least 2,941 monthly weather records broken by extreme events that struck communities in the US.  Check out the interactive map below to find out what events hit your area from January to October 2011.

Extreme Weather Map

Climate Deal Reached, Kyoto Extended, All Nations Have Same CO2 Limits

Agreement was reached to extend the Kyoto climate protocols that apply to developed nations for 5 years and to implement new protocols that will be the same for all countries by 2020 at the latest.  The three major greenhouse gas emitters, China, the United States and India will be included in the standards for the first time.  Reaching agreement with the major emitters to follow one standard is a big step forward and a victory for the U.S.  negotiator.  A green fund to assist developing nations was agreed upon.  The agreement is better than expected but falls short of what's needed to stop global warming, according to environmentalists.

Read More

Renewable Power Tops Fossil Fuels for First Time

Renewable energy is surpassing fossil fuels for the first time in new power-plant investments, shaking off setbacks from the financial crisis….

Electricity from the wind, sun, waves and biomass drew $187 billion last year compared with $157 billion for natural gas, oil and coal, according to calculations by Bloomberg New Energy Finance using the latest data.  Accelerating installations of solar- and wind-power plants led to lower equipment prices, making clean energy more competitive with coal.

Last week, Bloomberg New Energy Finance reported that renewable energy investments are projected to double over the next eight years and reach $395 billion per year.  No, that isn’t enough to stabilize emissions and control climate change, according to the International Energy Agency.  But it is still very impressive.

Click Here to read more.

Cutting Soot Emissions:  Fastest, Most Economical Way to Slow Global Warming?

A new study of dust-like particles of soot in the air -- now emerging as the second most important, but previously overlooked, factor in global warming -- provides fresh evidence that reducing soot emissions from diesel engines and other sources could slow melting of sea ice in the Arctic faster and more economically than any other quick fix, a scientist reported in Denver, Colorado on August 31, 2011.

Calculations by Mark Z. Jacobson, Ph.D., indicate that controlling soot could reduce warming above parts of the Arctic Circle by almost 3 degrees Fahrenheit within 15 years.  That would virtually erase all of the warming that has occurred in the Arctic during the last 100 years.

"No other measure could have such an immediate effect," said Jacobson, who is with Stanford University. "Soot emissions are second only to carbon dioxide (CO2) in promoting global warming, but its effects have been underestimated in previous climate models.  Consequently, soot's effect on climate change has not been adequately addressed in national and international global warming legislation.  Soot emissions account for about 17 percent of global warming, more than greenhouse gases like methane.  Soot's contribution, however, could be reduced by 90 percent in 5-10 years with aggressive national and international policies."

Read More

The False Promise of Biofuels
The breakthroughs needed to replace oil with plant-based fuels are proving difficult to achieve

In Brief

Despite extensive research, biofuels are still not commercially competitive.  The breakthroughs needed, revealed by recent science, may be tougher to realize than previously thought.

Corn ethanol is widely produced because of subsidies, and it diverts massive tracts of farmland needed for food.  Converting the cellulose in cornstalks, grasses and trees into biofuels is proving difficult and expensive.  Algae that produce oils have not been grown at scale.  And more advanced genetics are needed to successfully engineer synthetic micro­organisms that excrete hydrocarbons.

Some start-up companies are abandoning biofuels and are instead using the same processes to make higher-margin chemicals for products such as plastics or cosmetics.

See Scientific American Description of Article

Time to Wake Up:  Days of Abundant Resources and Falling Prices Are Over Forever
Jeremy Grantham

Jeremy Grantham is an American investor and Co-founder and Chief Investment Strategist of Grantham Mayo Van Otterloo (GMO), a Boston-based asset management firm.  GMO is one of the largest managers of such funds in the world, having more than US $107 billion in assets under management as of December 2010.  Grantham is regarded as a highly knowledgeable investor in various stock, bond, and commodity markets, and is particularly noted for his prediction of various bubbles.

He has been a vocal critic of various governmental responses to the Global Financial Crisis.  Grantham started one of the world's first index funds in the early 1970s.

Summary of the Summary

The world is using up its natural resources at an alarming rate, and this has caused a permanent shift in their value.  We all need to adjust our behavior to this new environment.  It would help if we did it quickly.

Summary

• Until about 1800, our species had no safety margin and lived, like other animals, up to the limit of the food supply, ebbing and flowing in population.
• From about 1800 on the use of hydrocarbons allowed for an explosion in energy use, in food supply, and, through the creation of surpluses, a dramatic increase in wealth and scientific progress.
• Since 1800, the population has surged from 800 million to 7 billion, on its way to an estimated 8 billion, at minimum.
• The rise in population, the ten-fold increase in wealth in developed countries, and the current explosive growth in developing countries have eaten rapidly into our finite resources of hydrocarbons and metals, fertilizer, available land, and water.
• Now, despite a massive increase in fertilizer use, the growth in crop yields per acre has declined from 3.5% in the 1960s to 1.2% today.  There is little productive new land to bring on and, as people get richer, they eat more grain-intensive meat.  Because the population continues to grow at over 1%, there is little safety margin.
• The problems of compounding growth in the face of finite resources are not easily understood by optimistic, short-term-oriented, and relatively innumerate humans (especially the political variety).
• The fact is that no compound growth is sustainable.  If we maintain our desperate focus on growth, we will run out of everything and crash.  We must substitute qualitative growth for quantitative growth.
• But Mrs. Market is helping, and right now she is sending us the Mother of all price signals.  The prices of all important commodities except oil declined for 100 years until 2002, by an average of 70%.  From 2002 until now, this entire decline was erased by a bigger price surge than occurred during World War II.
• Statistically, most commodities are now so far away from their former downward trend that it makes it very probable that the old trend has changed – that there is in fact a Paradigm Shift – perhaps the most important economic event since the Industrial Revolution.
• Climate change is associated with weather instability, but the last year was exceptionally bad.  Near term it will surely get less bad.
• Excellent long-term investment opportunities in resources and resource efficiency are compromised by the high chance of an improvement in weather next year and by the possibility that China may stumble.
• From now on, price pressure and shortages of resources will be a permanent feature of our lives.  This will increasingly slow down the growth rate of the developed and developing world and put a severe burden on poor countries.

We all need to develop serious resource plans, particularly energy policies.  There is little time to waste.

Read More (pdf)

Masters:  Driven by Global Warming, "It Is Quite Possible That 2010 Was The Most Extreme Weather Year Globally Since 1816"

Where will Earth’s climate go from here?

The pace of extreme weather events has remained remarkably high during 2011, giving rise to the question–is the “Global Weirding” of 2010 and 2011 the new normal?  Has human-caused climate change destabilized the climate, bringing these extreme, unprecedented weather events?  Any one of the extreme weather events of 2010 or 2011 could have occurred naturally sometime during the past 1,000 years.  But it is highly improbable that the remarkable extreme weather events of 2010 and 2011 could have all happened in such a short period of time without some powerful climate-altering force at work.  The best science we have right now maintains that human-caused emissions of heat-trapping gases like CO2 are the most likely cause of such a climate-altering force.

Human-caused climate change has fundamentally altered the atmosphere by adding more heat and moisture.  Observations confirm that global atmospheric water vapor has increased by about 4% since 1970, which is what theory says should have happened given the observed 0.5°C (0.9°F) warming of the planet’s oceans during the same period.  Shifts of this magnitude are capable of significantly affecting the path and strength of the jet stream, behavior of the planet’s monsoons, and paths of rain and snow-bearing weather systems.  For example, the average position of the jet stream retreated poleward 270 miles (435 km) during a 22-year period ending in 2001, in line with predictions from climate models.

A naturally extreme year, when embedded in such a changed atmosphere, is capable of causing dramatic, unprecedented extremes like we observed during 2010 and 2011.  That’s the best theory I have to explain the extreme weather events of 2010 and 2011….  [T]he ever-increasing amounts of heat-trapping gases humans are emitting into the air puts tremendous pressure on the climate system to shift to a new, radically different, warmer state, and the extreme weather of 2010 – 2011 suggests that the transition is already well underway.  A warmer planet has more energy to power stronger storms, hotter heat waves, more intense droughts, heavier flooding rains, and record glacier melt that will drive accelerating sea level rise.  I expect that by 20 – 30 years from now, extreme weather years like we witnessed in 2010 will become the new normal.

Finally, I’ll leave you with a quote from Dr. Ricky Rood’s climate change blog, in his recent post, Changing the Conversation:  Extreme Weather and Climate:  “Given that greenhouse gases are well known to hold energy close to the Earth, those who deny a human-caused impact on weather need to pose a viable mechanism of how the Earth can hold in more energy and the weather not be changed.  Think about it.”

The Earth Is Full - NY Times Columnist Tom Friedman on The Great Disruption

You really do have to wonder whether a few years from now we’ll look back at the first decade of the 21st century — when food prices spiked, energy prices soared, world population surged, tornados plowed through cities, floods and droughts set records, populations were displaced and governments were threatened by the confluence of it all — and ask ourselves:  What were we thinking?  How did we not panic when the evidence was so obvious that we’d crossed some growth/climate/natural resource/population redlines all at once?

“The only answer can be denial,” argues Paul Gilding, the veteran Australian environmentalist-entrepreneur, who described this moment in a new book called The Great Disruption:  Why the Climate Crisis Will Bring On the End of Shopping and the Birth of a New World.  “When you are surrounded by something so big that requires you to change everything about the way you think and see the world, then denial is the natural response.  But the longer we wait, the bigger the response required.”

Gilding cites the work of the Global Footprint Network, an alliance of scientists, which calculates how many “planet Earths” we need to sustain our current growth rates.  G.F.N. measures how much land and water area we need to produce the resources we consume and absorb our waste, using prevailing technology.  On the whole, says G.F.N., we are currently growing at a rate that is using up the Earth’s resources far faster than they can be sustainably replenished, so we are eating into the future.  Right now, global growth is using about 1.5 Earths.  “Having only one planet makes this a rather significant problem,” says Gilding.

This is not science fiction.  This is what happens when our system of growth and the system of nature hit the wall at once.  While in Yemen last year, I saw a tanker truck delivering water in the capital, Sana.  Why?  Because Sana could be the first big city in the world to run out of water, within a decade.  That is what happens when one generation in one country lives at 150 percent of sustainable capacity.

“If you cut down more trees than you grow, you run out of trees,” writes Gilding.  “If you put additional nitrogen into a water system, you change the type and quantity of life that water can support.  If you thicken the Earth’s CO2 blanket, the Earth gets warmer.  If you do all these and many more things at once, you change the way the whole system of planet Earth behaves, with social, economic, and life support impacts.  This is not speculation; this is high school science.”

It is also current affairs. “In China’s thousands of years of civilization, the conflict between humankind and nature has never been as serious as it is today,” China’s environment minister, Zhou Shengxian, said recently.  “The depletion, deterioration and exhaustion of resources and the worsening ecological environment have become bottlenecks and grave impediments to the nation’s economic and social development.” What China’s minister is telling us, says Gilding, is that “the Earth is full.  We are now using so many resources and putting out so much waste into the Earth that we have reached some kind of limit, given current technologies.  The economy is going to have to get smaller in terms of physical impact.”

We will not change systems, though, without a crisis.  But don’t worry, we’re getting there.

We’re currently caught in two loops:  One is that more population growth and more global warming together are pushing up food prices; rising food prices cause political instability in the Middle East, which leads to higher oil prices, which leads to higher food prices, which leads to more instability.  At the same time, improved productivity means fewer people are needed in every factory to produce more stuff.  So if we want to have more jobs, we need more factories.  More factories making more stuff make more global warming, and that is where the two loops meet.

But Gilding is actually an eco-optimist.  As the impact of the imminent Great Disruption hits us, he says, “our response will be proportionally dramatic, mobilizing as we do in war.  We will change at a scale and speed we can barely imagine today, completely transforming our economy, including our energy and transport industries, in just a few short decades.”

We will realize, he predicts, that the consumer-driven growth model is broken and we have to move to a more happiness-driven growth model, based on people working less and owning less.  “How many people,” Gilding asks, “lie on their death bed and say, ‘I wish I had worked harder or built more shareholder value,’ and how many say, ‘I wish I had gone to more ballgames, read more books to my kids, taken more walks?’ To do that, you need a growth model based on giving people more time to enjoy life, but with less stuff.”

Sounds utopian?  Gilding insists he is a realist.

“We are heading for a crisis-driven choice,” he says.  “We either allow collapse to overtake us or develop a new sustainable economic model.  We will choose the latter.  We may be slow, but we’re not stupid.”

Read Joe Romm of Climate Progress commenting on the book and interviewing Paul Gilding, the author.

Off the Pedestal:  Creating a New Vision of Economic Growth
The idea of economic growth as an unquestioned force for good is ingrained in the American psyche.  But a longtime environmental leader argues it’s time for the U.S. to reinvent its economy into one that focuses on sustaining communities, family life, and the natural world.
by james gustave speth

Is anything in America more faithfully followed than economic growth?  Its movements are constantly watched, measured to the decimal place, deplored or praised, diagnosed as weak or judged healthy and vigorous.  Newspapers, magazines, and cable channels report endlessly on it.  Promoting growth may be the most widely shared and robust cause in the United States today.

If the growth imperative dominates U.S. political and economic life, what happens when growth hits some serious stumbling blocks?

When I was in school in England, the dean of my college told us when we first arrived that we could walk on the grass in the courtyard — but not across it.  That helped me love the English and their language.  Here is another creative use of prepositions:  there are limits to growth, and there are limits of growth.

Let’s first take up the limits of growth.  Despite the constant claims that we need more growth, there are limits on what growth can do for us.  The ecological economist Herman Daly has reminded us that if neo-classical economists were true to their trade, they would recognize that there are diminishing returns to growth.  Most obviously, the value of income growth declines as one gets richer and richer.  Similarly, growth at some point has increasing marginal costs.  For example, workers have to put in too many hours, or the climate goes haywire.  It follows that for the economy as a whole, we can reach a point where the extra costs of more growth exceed the extra benefits.  One should stop growing at that point.  Otherwise the country enters the realm of “uneconomic growth,” to use Daly’s delightful phrase, where the costs of growth exceed the benefits it produces.

There are some, myself included, who believe that the U.S. is now experiencing uneconomic growth.  If one could measure and add up all the environmental, security, social and psychological costs that U.S. economic growth generates at this point in our history, they would exceed the benefits of further ramping up what is already the highest GDP per capita of any major economy.

Though not widely accepted, the case is strong that growth in the affluent U.S. is now doing more harm than good.  Today, the reigning policy orientation holds that the path to greater well-being is to grow and expand the economy.  GDP, productivity, profits, the stock market, and consumption must all go up.  This growth imperative trumps all else.  It can undermine families, jobs, communities, the climate and environment, and a sense of place and continuity because it is confidently asserted and widely believed that growth is worth the price that must be paid for it.

But an expanding body of evidence is now telling us to think again.  The never-ending drive to grow the overall U.S. economy is ruining the environment; it fuels a ruthless international search for energy and other resources; it fails at generating the needed jobs; it hollows out communities; and it rests on a manufactured consumerism that is not meeting the deepest human needs.  Americans are substituting growth and consumption for dealing with the real issues — for doing things that would truly make us and the country better off.

Read More

Futurist Ray Kurzweil Isn’t Worried About Climate Change

Author, inventor and futurist Ray Kurzweil famously and accurately predicted that a computer would beat a man at chess by 1998, that technologies that help spread information would accelerate the collapse of the Soviet Union, and that a worldwide communications network would emerge in the mid 1990s (i.e. the Internet).

Most of Kurzweil's prognostications are derived from his law of accelerating returns—the idea that information technologies progress exponentially, in part because each iteration is used to help build the next, better, faster, cheaper one.  In the case of computers, this is not just a theory but an observable trend—computer processing power has doubled every two years for nearly half a century.

Kurzweil also believes this theory can be applied to solar energy.  As part of a panel convened by the National Association of Engineers, Kurzweil, together with Google co-founder Larry Page, concluded that solar energy technology is improving at such a rate that it will soon be able to compete with fossil fuels.

Read More

The tentacles of the Kochtopus:  What you need to know about the financiers of the Radical Right

The Koch brothers outspend Exxon Mobil on pro-pollution disinformation aimed at preventing action to preserving a livable climate.  They also fund and help oversee the extremist Tea Party movement.

Any attempt to understand the modern conservative movement will eventually lead to billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch.  Using their vast wealth and connections, the Koch brothers are key players in bankrolling right-wing political action groups, think tanks, and individual politicians, using this array of political power to advance their ideological agenda of limited government and less regulation.  Chances are they are part of any recent right-wing attack you have seen lately.

The Koch brothers, leaders of a vast family oil-and-gas conglomerate, use this political network to pursue their right-wing agenda at nearly every level of government.  Whether they are contributing millions in campaign contributions, spending millions on lobbying, or investing millions in right-wing think tank and advocacy groups, the Koch brothers’ influence is pervasive.

Charles and David Koch would prefer to keep their influence behind the scenes but recent reporting by the Center for American Progress Action Fund’s Think Progress and a variety of media and advocacy organizations shed light on the enormous breadth and reach of their network.  This report will showcase the players involved in the Koch network, where they operate, and the vast amounts of money involved.  The report also exposes the Koch right-wing ideological agenda that often protects their business interests at the expense of everyone else.

Read More

Read a long analysis by The Center for Public Integrity

Here is the Greenpeace Report on Koch Industries.

The Acid Sea
By Elizabeth Kolbert

The carbon dioxide we pump into the air is seeping into the oceans and slowly acidifying them.  One hundred years from now, will oysters, mussels, and coral reefs survive?

Since the start of the industrial revolution, enough fossil fuels—coal, oil, and natural gas—have been burned and enough forests cut down to emit more than 500 billion tons of CO2.  As is well known, the atmosphere has a higher concentration of CO2 today than at any point in the past 800,000 years and probably a lot longer.

What is less well known is how carbon emissions are changing the oceans too.  The air and the water constantly exchange gases, so a portion of anything emitted into the atmosphere eventually ends up in the sea.  Winds quickly mix it into the top few hundred feet, and over centuries currents spread it through the ocean depths.  In the 1990s an international team of scientists undertook a massive research project that involved collecting and analyzing more than 77,000 seawater samples from different depths and locations around the world.  The work took 15 years. It showed that the oceans have absorbed 30 percent of the CO2 released by humans over the past two centuries.  They continue to absorb roughly a million tons every hour.

For life on land this process is a boon; every ton of CO2 the oceans remove from the atmosphere is a ton that's not contributing to global warming.  But for life in the sea the picture looks different.  The head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Jane Lubchenco, a marine ecologist, has called ocean acidification global warming's "equally evil twin."

Read Article

Winning the Biofuel Future
Submitted by Secretary Steven Chu

Today the Department of Energy announced that a research team at our BioEnergy Science Center achieved yet another advance in the drive toward next generation biofuels:  using a microbe to convert plant matter directly into isobutanol.  Isobutanol can be burned in regular car engines with a heat value higher than ethanol and similar to gasoline.  This is part of a broad portfolio of work the Department is doing to reduce America's dependence on foreign oil and create new economic opportunities for rural America.

This announcement is yet another sign of the rapid progress we are making in developing the next generation of biofuels that can help reduce our oil dependence.  This is a perfect example of the promising opportunity we have to create a major new industry based on bio-material such as wheat and rice straw, corn stover, lumber wastes, and plants specifically developed for bio-fuel production that require far less fertilizer and other energy inputs.  But we must continue with an aggressive research and development effort.

America's oil dependence -- which leaves hardworking families at the mercy of global oil markets -- won't be solved overnight.  But the remarkable advance of science and biotechnology in the past decade puts us on the precipice of a revolution in biofuels.  In fact, biotechnologies, and the biological sciences that provide the underlying foundation, are some of the most rapidly developing areas in science and technology today - and the United States is leading the way.  In the coming years, we can expect dramatic breakthroughs that will allow us to produce the clean energy we need right here at home.  We need to act aggressively to seize this opportunity and win the future.

Read More

“My Fear is that Climate Change is the Biggest Crisis of All”:  Naomi Klein Warns That Global Warming Could Be Exploited by Capitalism and Militarism

Award-winning journalist Naomi Klein has been reporting on global warming and the climate justice movement for years.  “My fear is that climate change is the biggest crisis of all,” Klein says.  “If we don’t come up with a positive vision of how climate change can make our economies and our world more just, more livable, cleaner, fairer, then this crisis will be exploited to militarize our economies, to create fortress continents.  And we’re really facing a choice.  What we really need now is for the people fighting for economic justice and environmental justice to come together.”

On March 9 Democracy Now!'s guest for the hour was Naomi Klein, journalist and author.  Her latest book, The Shock Doctrine:  The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.  She’s writing a new book on climate change and the climate change deniers.

AMY GOODMAN:  And what does it say, you don’t believe in climate change?

NAOMI KLEIN:  Well, some people believe in climate change, but the main thing is they don’t believe that humans have anything to do with climate change.  And it isn’t about the science, because when you delve deeper into it and ask why people don’t believe in it, they say that it’s because they think it’s a socialist plot to redistribute wealth.  And a lot of—it’s easy to make fun of, you know, and there’s all this language, like "watermelons," that they say, you know, the green groups are watermelons:  they’re green on the outside, but they’re red on the inside.  Or George Will once said it’s a green tree with red roots.  And the idea is that it’s some sort of a communist plot.  And this is, as I was saying earlier, actually not at all true.  And in fact, most of the big green groups are loath to talk about economics and often don’t want to see themselves as being part of a left at all, see climate change as an issue that transcends politics entirely.

But something very different is going on on the right, and I think we need to understand what that is.  Why is climate change seen as such a threat?  I don’t believe it’s an unreasonable fear.  I think it is—it’s unreasonable to believe that scientists are making up the science.  They’re not.  It’s not a hoax.  But actually, climate change really is a profound threat to a great many things that right-wing ideologues believe in.  So, in fact, if you really wrestle with the implications of the science and what real climate action would mean, here’s just a few examples what it would mean.

Well, it would mean upending the whole free trade agenda, because it would mean that we would have to localize our economies, because we have the most energy-inefficient trade system that you could imagine.  And this is the legacy of the free trade era.  So, this has been a signature policy of the right, pushing globalization and free trade.  That would have to be reversed.

You would have to deal with inequality.  You would have to redistribute wealth, because this is a crisis that was created in the North, and the effects are being felt in the South.  So, on the most basic, basic, "you broke it, you bought it," polluter pays, you would have to redistribute wealth, which is also against their ideology.

You would have to regulate corporations.  You simply would have to.  I mean, any serious climate action has to intervene in the economy.  You would have to subsidize renewable energy, which also breaks their worldview.

You would have to have a really strong United Nations, because individual countries can’t do this alone.  You absolutely have to have a strong international architecture.

So when you go through this, you see, it challenges everything that they believe in.  So they’re choosing to disbelieve it, because it’s easier to deny the science than to say, "OK, I accept that my whole worldview is going to fall apart," that we have to have massive investments in public infrastructure, that we have to reverse free trade deals, that we have to have huge transfers of wealth from the North to the South.  Imagine actually contending with that.  It’s a lot easier to deny it.

But what I see is that the green groups, a lot of the big green groups, are also in a kind of denial, because they want to pretend that this isn’t about politics and economics, and say, "Well, you can just change your light bulb.  And no, it won’t really disrupt.  You can have green capitalism."  And they’re not really wrestling with the fact that this is about economic growth.  This is about an economic model that needs constant and infinite growth on a finite planet.  So we really are talking about some deep transformations of our economy if we’re going to deal with climate change.  And we need to talk about it.

Read More

350.Org To Launch New Campaign:  ‘The U.S. Chamber Doesn’t Speak For Me’

One of America’s largest grassroots climate organizations is readying a national campaign against the lobbying efforts of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.  The Chamber, described by 350.org founder Bill McKibben as the “power plant” of “money pollution” in Washington, DC, has led lobbying efforts to block action on climate change for decades.

Because of its pro-pollution, anti-science stance, the Chamber is threatening American prosperity — its supposed mission.  Several companies, including Apple, Exelon, and Pacific Gas & Energy, have quit the lobbying group over its climate denial.  In the Tom Dispatch, McKibben explains how 350.org plans to expose the split between real American businesses and the multinational polluters that fund the “U.S.” Chamber of Commerce, with the simple message, “The U.S. Chamber Doesn’t Speak For Me“:

Still, the rest of us can stand up and be counted.  We can tell the Congressional representatives taking their money that they don’t speak for us.  We can urge more big companies to act like Apple and Microsoft, which publicly denounced the chamber.  (It’s good to hear Levi Strauss, General Electric, and Best Buy making similar noises.) We need to hear from more dissenting chambers of commerce.  It cheered me to find that the CEO of the Greater New York Chamber said, “They don’t represent me,” or to discover that just a few weeks ago the Seattle chamber cut its ties.

But it’s even more important to hear from small businesspeople, the very contingent the U.S. Chamber of Commerce draws on for its credibility.  Across America in the coming months, volunteers from the climate change organization I helped to found, 350.org, will be fanning out to canvass local businesses — all those bakeries and beauty salons, colleges and chiropractors, pharmacies and fitness centers that belong to local chambers of commerce.

The volunteers will be asking for signatures on a statement announcing that “the U.S. Chamber doesn’t speak for me,” and offering businesspeople the chance to post videos expressing just how differently they do think when it comes to global warming, energy, and the environment.  It’s a chance to emphasize that American business should be about nimbleness, creativity, and adaptation — that it’s prepared to cope with changing circumstances, instead of using political cash to ensure that yesterday’s technologies remain on artificial life support.

Read More

Data Highlights from World on the Edge by Lester Brown

The hundreds of data sets that accompany Lester Brown’s latest book, World on the Edge:  How to Prevent Environmental and Economic Collapse, illustrate the world’s current predicament and give a sense of where we might go from here.  Here are some highlights from the collection.

Veering toward the edge

As the world economy has expanded nearly 10-fold since 1950, consumption has begun to outstrip natural assets on a global scale.  The same values that have allowed ecological deficits to grow are contributing to ballooning fiscal deficits around the world, threatening to undermine economic progress.

Some of the planet’s natural capital, like fossil fuels or water in non-replenishable aquifers, is finite and exhaustible.  And some is regenerative; it can be thought of like an interest-earning bank account, where if the principal is maintained, one can live off of the interest indefinitely.  In nature, we can harvest plants from the same land as long as soils are maintained; we can continue to catch fish from the sea as long as the catch remains below each fishery’s sustainable yield; we can get water from underground as long as pumping does not exceed rates of recharge; and carbon can regularly cycle through the atmosphere, land, and oceans without major consequence.

Yet as our human family has grown and the global economy has expanded, demand has surpassed the earth’s regenerative capacity.  We are overharvesting forests, overplowing fields, overgrazing grasslands, overdrawing aquifers, overfishing oceans, and pumping far more carbon into the atmosphere than nature can absorb.

Many of these negative trends intersect at our global food supply.  While for many years the world was making gains in reducing the number of hungry people, this progress was reversed in the late 1990s.  Today close to one billion people in the world are undernourished.

As food prices rise, the ranks of the hungry are likely to grow even larger.  Following the punishing heat wave that devastated Russia’s wheat harvest in summer 2010, staple grain prices have soared to near-record highs in early 2011.  Rising food prices hit people on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder—many of whom spend over half their income feeding their families—the hardest.

Governments that are unable to ensure adequate and affordable food risk political instability and social unrest.  If they cannot provide basic security, they may descend into state failure.  Many of the world’s failing states are hampered by high population growth rates and a deteriorating resource base, and depend heavily on international food aid.

Read More - A New Direction

Insurance Report Concludes ‘Trillions of Dollars at Stake’ from Climate Change

According to research released by Mercer and a group of leading global investors representing around $2 trillion in assets under management, continued delay in climate change policy action and lack of international coordination could cost institutional investors trillions of dollars over the coming decades.

...

Some of the key findings discussed in the report show that by 2030:

• Climate change increases uncertainty for long term institutional investors and as such, needs to be pro-actively managed.
• Investment opportunities in low carbon technologies could reach $5 trillion.
• The cost of impacts on the physical environment, health and food security could exceed $4 trillion.
• Climate change related policy changes could increase the cost of carbon emissions by as much as $8 trillion.
• Increasing allocation to “climate sensitive” assets will help to mitigate risks and capture new opportunities.
• Engagement with policy makers is crucial for institutional investors to pro-actively manage the potential costs of delayed and poorly co-ordinated climate policy action.
• Policy developments at the country level will produce new investment opportunities as well as risks that need to be constantly monitored.
• The EU and China/East Asia are set to lead investment in low carbon technology and efficiency improvements over the coming decades [boldface added to emphasize challenge to US].

Read More

Research Links Heavy Rains and Snow to Humans

Two seminal Nature papers join growing body of evidence that human emissions fuel extreme weather and flooding that harm humans and the environment

Here we show that human-induced increases in greenhouse gases have contributed to the observed intensification of heavy precipitation events found over approximately two-thirds of data-covered parts of Northern Hemisphere land areas. These results are based on a comparison of observed and multi-model simulated changes in extreme precipitation over the latter half of the twentieth century analysed with an optimal fingerprinting technique.

Changes in extreme precipitation projected by models, and thus the impacts of future changes in extreme precipitation, may be underestimated because models seem to underestimate the observed increase in heavy precipitation with warming

That’s from the first of two seminal studies in Nature, “Human contribution to more-intense precipitation extremes”.  The second looked at “Anthropogenic greenhouse gas contribution to flood risk in England and Wales in autumn 2000”:

Occurring during the wettest autumn in England and Wales since records began in 1766 these floods damaged nearly 10,000 properties across that region, disrupted services severely, and caused insured losses estimated at £1.3 billion [$2.1 billion]….

Here we present a multi-step, physically based ‘probabilistic event attribution’ framework showing that it is very likely that global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions substantially increased the risk of flood occurrence in England and Wales in autumn 2000.

… in nine out of ten cases our model results indicate that twentieth-century anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions increased the risk of floods occurring in England and Wales in autumn 2000 by more than 20%, and in two out of three cases by more than 90%.

Scientists have predicted for decades that human-caused global warming would increase extreme weather events that cause severe harm to humans, property, and the environment.  These two studies are but the latest in a growing body of scientific literature demonstrating that these predictions are coming true now.

Read More

That Awkward Conversation (About the Climate)

I’ve spent a lot of time lately thinking about climate change liars.  Those people who make a living deliberately deceiving the public about the scientific consensus on climate disruption.  These people are awful, they know who they are.  They have to live with their lies.

But what’s worse is the other lie I’ve discovered in the process.  It’s the lie that I’m telling.  It’s the lie that we all tell to our children and each other when we don’t talk about climate disruption.  It’s the lie of us all pretending that everything will be OK.

People have lots of opinions about what it takes to be a great parent.  But I’m pretty sure that this isn’t on anyone’s list:  Lying to your children about the unraveling of nature and the catastrophes that will certainly follow.

That’s Richard Wiles, co-founder of the Environmental Working Group, on HuffPost.  Prior to EWG, Wiles was a senior staff officer at the National Academy of Sciences’ Board on Agriculture.

Read More

WWF Energy Report

2 years in preparation, The Energy Report is a provocative vision of a world run entirely on renewable energy by 2050.

It comes in 2 parts.

The first part seeks to generate a discussion around the comprehensively researched scenario that is presented in the 2nd part, conducted by project partner consultancy Ecofys.

By 2050, we could get all the energy we need from renewable sources.

This will solve most of the problems of climate change and dwindling fossil fuel resources.

Paramount will be the substantive increase in measures to conserve energy in all sectors.

We can show that such a transition is not only possible but also cost-effective, providing energy that is affordable for all and producing it in ways that can be sustained by the global economy and the planet.

Clean Power for Our Planet
It must be done, and we can do it

The world needs to transition from its current unsustainable energy paradigm to a future powered by entirely renewable energy supply. Only by making such a transition will we be able to avoid the very worst impacts of climate change.

WWF’s ground-breaking energy study - The Energy Report - shows that this future is within our reach, and provides a vital insight into how it can be achieved.

Questioning the views of conventional experts
A growing number of leaders - from within the policy arena, business, media, and civil society, are questioning the views of conventional experts on the world’s energy future, and their “business-as-usual” scenarios, embarking on a serious search for realistic alternatives.

Their reasoning is obvious:  minimizing climate change impacts will require substantial cuts in global emissions - as quickly as possible.

The world has reached peak conventional oil and gas, meaning oil and gas companies are digging deeper and deeper into unconventional sources, with disastrous environmental and social consequences.  Coal is still relatively readily available, but catastrophic in terms of climate changing emissions.  The world can no longer afford to hang on to its old energy paradigm, and its dangerous dependence on fossil fuels.

A feasible global scenario
The Energy Report, produced through a collaboration between WWF and Ecofys, breaks new ground in the energy debate:  a possible system in which ALL of the world’s energy supply is provided by renewable and sustainable sources by mid-century.

The Energy Report draws together strategies and technology options that have already been trialled or implemented - to create a feasible global scenario.

Most of the answers are already at our disposal.

WWF wants to help change the ‘old’ paradigm for the energy industry and articulate a new pathway for the future.

The Energy Report provides a meticulously researched scenario into a truly alternative vision for the energy future and what such a scenario implies for society at large.

What will it mean for me and you?
In 2050, the dominant form of energy available to the consumer wherever he or she lives will be electricity.

This highest value form of energy can be transported and applied relatively easily.

Efficient electricity transport will, however, mean investment in new, more efficient, ‘intelligent’ electricity grids.

Maximum energy efficiency will become the central credo for all economic activities.

Because The Energy Report scenario only considers currently available technologies it highlights the importance for future research and development.

One area that is especially in need of R&D is liquid fuels.  Today, we still cannot power large ships or airplanes with electricity, we still need liquid fuel, and assuming continuous growth of this mode of transport, we would need to cover this with biofuels.

Fair and equitable access
1.4 billion people without access to reliable electricity for essential services such as medical treatment or education.  Some 2.7 billion people depend on unsustainable biomass stoves for cooking and eating.  There are up to 2 million deaths per year from toxic fumes from such stoves.  A world that wants to offer an equitable future for a projected 9 billion people has to solve this problem on a sustainable basis.

Does it pay off?
Once the infrastructure for energy supply has been established, the costs for the renewable system are markedly lower compared to a continued fossil fuel system.

This does not even take into account the additional cost savings from lessening the impacts of climate change!

The Energy Report is not about predictions
It’s about articulating an ambitious pathway towards a possible, positive future - taking into account the necessity to act rapidly and decisively on climate change.

Realistic
It is realistic in its conservative approach, its reliance only on existing technologies, and its clear identification of the challenges ahead.

Optimistic
It is also optimistic, because it shows that with manageable effort, we can transform our energy system in a third industrial revolution for the benefit of all.

WWF Energy Report (16.59MB pdf)

The Coal Boom

In rich countries, where people worry about air quality and debate ways of pricing carbon emissions, coal is deeply unfashionable.  Elsewhere demand for the dirty rocks has never been stronger.  The International Energy Agency (IEA) reckons world consumption will increase by a fifth over the next 25 years, assuming governments stick to their current climate-change policies.  A new age of coal is upon us.

The IEA estimates that China, which generates more than 70% of its electricity with coal, will build 600 gigawatts (GW) of coal-fired power capacity in the next quarter-century—as much as is currently generated with coal in America, Japan and the European Union put together.  Nomura, a Japanese bank, thinks that may be an underestimate.  It reckons China will add some 500GW of coal-fired power by as early as 2015, and will more than double its current generating capacity by 2020.  It expects Indian coal-fired power generation to grow too—though more slowly.

Read More

Moral Dimension of Climate Change
Faith communities emphasize impact on vulnerable peoples

CANCUN, Mexico — Faith communities came together last month to address climate change, poverty and sustainable development in a side event jointly organized by Caritas Internationalis, ACT Alliance and the World Council of Churches (WCC) at the climate summit here.

“At the end of the day, we are talking about people, not words,” said the moderator Martina Liebsch, director of policy at Caritas Internationalis.  “It is about working towards climate justice so the poor don’t pay the price for climate change.”

The four speakers at the event entitled “Faith based organizations advocate for climate justice” came from Mexico, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Thailand.

They offered ethical contributions to the international negotiations and highlighted the need for greater awareness raising at the grassroots level, social mobilization and advocacy for climate justice.

Read More

BP:  'An accident waiting to happen'

When Tony Hayward took over BP in 2007 - after the oil giant had experienced a series of calamitous accidents - he vowed that safety would be his top priority.  So how did he come to preside over one of the worst industrial disasters in history?  A Fortune investigation reveals a saga of hubris, ambition, and a safety philosophy that focused too much on spilled coffee and not enough on drilling disasters.

By Peter Elkind and David Whitford with Doris Burke

Read the Fortune article

Climate Negotiations in Cancún Attended by an Arlingtonian

by Mary Gilbert

In the December 2010 climate negotiations (COP16) in Cancun, Mexico, the negotiating atmosphere was much more positive and participatory than last year’s contentious and frustrating summit in Copenhagen.  Last year I and many other registered observers had very limited access to the plenary sessions.  The difference in atmosphere this time was due to Mexico’s Patricia Espinoza, who, as the new President of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), made sure that observers like me and my colleagues from Quaker Earthcare Witness could attend every plenary meeting, right up to the final meetings on the final day.

Last year many countries were infuriated by the Copenhagen Accord and the process which produced it.  The Accord was drawn up behind closed doors by an invited group of heads of state, in a process external to accepted UN process.  The plenary first saw the document at 3AM on the Saturday after the sessions were scheduled to close on Friday, and they were asked to adopt it as if they had participated in its creation.  Espinoza repeatedly promised “no secret meetings” and “no surprise text” in Cancún, and she kept her word.  She set up “contact groups” consisting of one rich and one poor country, for difficult issues.  Any text that appeared for negotiation had been discussed and agreed by those parties and brought to the plenary in a timely manner.

Over our two weeks in Cancún we saw a real change in mood, from angry suspicion, “…we will see if you are for real!” to lengthy standing ovations when Espinoza entered.  A palpable sense of trust had grown.  Even low-lying countries and the small island states (some of which are already making plans to move whole populations because of sea level rise and storm events), mountainous countries losing their glaciers, and nations already experiencing serious drought were on board with the compromises.  Only Bolivia remained outside the agreement, mostly because the agreed document endorses a rise of up to 2°C, and if industrial nations live up to current pledges, we can expect an increase of 4°C.  Bolivia called this genocide and ecocide.  (For a full, clear statement of Bolivia’s reasons see pwccc.wordpress.com.)

Read more at Cancun for Arlington.doc.

Hansen and Sato Paper:  We Are at a Climate Tipping Point That, Once Crossed, Enables Multi-Meter Sea Level Rise This Century

Climate change is likely to be the predominant scientific, economic, political and moral issue of the 21st century. -- Joe Romm

Right now, we’re headed towards an ice-free planet.  That takes us through the Eemian interglacial period of about 130,000 years ago when sea levels were 15 to 20 feet higher, when temperatures had been thought to be about 1°C warmer than today.  Then we go back to the “early Pliocene, when sea level was about 25 m [82 feet] higher than today,” as NASA’s James Hansen and Makiko Sato explain in a new draft paper, Paleoclimate Implications for Human-Made Climate Change.

The question is how much warmer was it in the Eemian and early Pliocene than today — and how fast can the great ice sheets disintegrate?

We already know we’re at CO2 levels that risk catastrophe if they are sustained or exceeded for any extended period of time.

Hansen and Sato go further, saying we’re actually at or very near the highest temperatures of the current Holocene interglacial — the last 12,000 years of relatively stable climate that has made modern civilization possible.

They argue that the Eemian was warmer than the Holocene maximum by “at most by about 1°C, but probably by only several tenths of a degree Celsius.”  They make the remarkable finding that sea level rise will be highly nonlinear this century on our current business-as-usual [BAU] emissions and that:

BAU scenarios result in global warming of the order of 3-6°C.  It is this scenario for which we assert that multi-meter sea level rise on the century time scale are not only possible, but almost dead certain.

Read More

Earth's Hot Past Could Be Prologue to Future Climate

On Our Current Emissions Path, CO2 Levels in 2100 Will Hit Levels Last Seen when the Earth Was 29°F (16°C) Hotter

Paleoclimate data suggest CO2 "may have at least twice the effect on global temperatures than currently projected by computer models"

The disinformers claim that projections of dangerous future warming from greenhouse gas emissions are based on computer models.  In fact the paleoclimate data are considerably more worrisome than the models.  That's mainly because the vast majority of the models largely ignore key amplifying carbon-cycle feedbacks, such as the methane emissions from melting tundra.

Science has just published an important review and analysis of "real world" paleoclimate data in Lessons from Earth's Past (subs. req'd) by National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) scientist Jeffrey Kiehl.  The NCAR release is Earth's hot past could be prologue to future climate.

"If we don't start seriously working toward a reduction of carbon emissions, we are putting our planet on a trajectory that the human species has never experienced," says Kiehl, a climate scientist who specializes in studying global climate in Earth's geologic past.  "We will have committed human civilization to living in a different world for multiple generations."

Read More

Doctors Group Sues USDA For Ignoring Vegetarianism

The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine filed suit last week against the US Department of Agriculture and the the Department of Health and Human Services in US District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging that the agencies violated federal law in failing to respond to a PCRM petition advocating a plant-based food pyramid as an alternative to USDA's "MyPyramid" dietary guidelines.

PCRM's nutrition education advisor Susan Levin, quoted in the LA Times:

We are asking the government to protected the average American, not special agribusiness interests.  MyPyramid is confusing, and it recommends meat and dairy products despite overwhelming evidence that these foods are unnecessary and unhealthy.  Research shows Power Plate is a better choice, and it's simple enough that a child could follow it.

In case you're unfamiliar with it, Power Plate is a dietary recommendation chart developed by PCRM which includes no animal products in it whatsoever.  Rather than recommending a hierarchy of foods as do more familiar food pyramid diet charts, Power Plate just recommends eating a variety of what they call The New Four Food Groups daily ("new" since 1991 when PCRM first began the campaign):  3 or more servings of fruits, 2 or more servings of Legumes, 5 or more servings of Whole Grains, and 4 or more servings of Vegetables.  Representative sizes of what contribute a serving size in each food group are listed.

Read More

The Many Lines of Evidence for Global Warming in a Single Graphic

Posted 30 December 2010 on SkepticalScience by John Cook

I've added another pic to the high-rez Climate Graphics.  This one is a graphic summary of just some of the evidence for global warming.  When someone tells you global warming isn't happening, this serves as a visual reminder that you need to consider all the evidence to understand what's happening to our climate.  Signs of warming are being found not only all over the globe but in many different systems.  Ice sheets are shrinking.  Tree-lines are shifting towards the poles and up mountains (eg - to cooler regions).  Glaciers are retreating.  Spring is coming earlier.  Species are migrating to cooler regions.  And so on ...

The Large Potential of Geothermal Heat Pump Systems

If Net Zero Energy buildings are the solution, the question becomes "how can we achieve this?"

Simple applications of specific technologies could easily reduce the energy loads required for a building's operation dramatically.  Geothermal Heat Pump Systems (also referred to as ground source heat pump systems) could be the most effective of these technologies.  On average, 65% of a building's energy load is consumed for heating and cooling purposes.  The EPA suggests geothermal systems can potentially reduce the amount of energy used for heating and cooling by up to 72%.  During cooling periods, GHP systems use excess heat for a building's domestic hot water needs, reducing the amount of energy required by another 5-10%.  A conservative estimate of the total reduction in energy consumed by a building would be 40%.  In short, a single, existing and proven technology could conservatively cut a buildings energy use almost in half.

The concept behind geothermal systems is simple.  They utilize the constant temperature of the earth's shallow layers to cool and heat buildings without the need for chillers or boilers.  The earth is used as a heat sink in the summer, and a heat source in the winter.

Geothermal systems not only dramatically reduce the amount of energy consumption of buildings, but have other proven benefits as well.  These benefits include water conservation, reduced operating, maintenance and replacement costs, no on site use of fossil fuels, and system longevity.  Geothermal systems are versatile and can work in combination with any energy management program.  The systems are the only demand side renewable that works the same in all regions and is available at all points of use.

Geothermal can also be a major contributor toward LEED certification for buildings.  Industry estimates are the systems can provide up to 34 potential LEED points towards certification.  It only takes 40 to get basic certification.

Click Here to read more.

Huge Parts of World Are Drying Up:  Land 'Evapotranspiration' Change

The soils in large areas of the Southern Hemisphere, including major portions of Australia, Africa and South America, have been drying up in the past decade, a group of researchers conclude in the first major study to ever examine "evapotranspiration" on a global basis.

Most climate models have suggested that evapotranspiration, which is the movement of water from the land to the atmosphere, would increase with global warming.  The new research, published online this week in the journal Nature, found that's exactly what was happening from 1982 to the late 1990s.

But in 1998, this significant increase in evapotranspiration -- which had been seven millimeters per year -- slowed dramatically or stopped.  In large portions of the world, soils are now becoming drier than they used to be, releasing less water and offsetting some moisture increases elsewhere.

Due to the limited number of decades for which data are available, scientists say they can't be sure whether this is a natural variability or part of a longer-lasting global change.  But one possibility is that on a global level, a limit to the acceleration of the hydrological cycle on land has already been reached.

If that's the case, the consequences could be serious.

They could include reduced terrestrial vegetation growth, less carbon absorption, a loss of the natural cooling mechanism provided by evapotranspiration, more heating of the land surface, more intense heat waves and a "feedback loop" that could intensify global warming.

Read More

What Is Geoengineering and Why Is It Considered a Climate Change Solution?

175 scientists and other interested folks (including companies looking to profit from geoengineering) gathered in the Asilomar conference center near the end of March to try to repeat the success of molecular biologists who gathered there in 1975 to reassure a skeptical public about genetic engineering.  Ultimately, the gathered would-be geoengineers released a statement calling for, among other things, "further research in all relevant disciplines to better understand and communicate whether additional strategies to moderate future climate change are, or are not, viable, appropriate and ethical."

The list of unintended consequences of human manipulation of natural systems is long:  concrete jungles creating urban heat islands, vast oceanic dead zones resulting from fertilizer use on inland agricultural fields, and intentionally introduced species, such as the cane toad in Australia, that then wreak havoc on ecosystems, among others.  Whether the idea is to mimic a volcano's cooling impact on climate by continuously pumping sulfates into the stratosphere or to brighten clouds via crewless ships spewing water vapor, possible problems range from shutting down rainfall in certain regions to unilateral declarations of war.

As the Royal Society noted in its 2009 report on geoengineering:  "The safest and most predictable method of moderating climate change is to take early and effective action to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.  No geoengineering method can provide an easy or readily acceptable alternative solution to the problem of climate change."

Nevertheless, humans are already managing the climate, even with actions intended to improve the environment.  A recent decision to cut sulfate pollution from cargo ships will, in effect, further warm the globe as more cooling particles are removed from the sky.

ScientificAmerican.com spoke to climate modeler and geoengineering expert Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology at Stanford University, who coined the term "solar radiation management" for efforts to dim the sun (though he now prefers "climate intervention"), about why humans might want to get smart about planetary management.

Ocean Acidification:  'Evil Twin of Global Warming' Threatens World's Oceans, Scientists Warn

ScienceDaily (Apr. 1, 2010) - The rise in human emissions of carbon dioxide is driving fundamental and dangerous changes in the chemistry and ecosystems of the world's oceans, international marine scientists have warned.

"Ocean conditions are already more extreme than those experienced by marine organisms and ecosystems for millions of years," the researchers say in the latest issue of the journal Trends in Ecology and Evolution.

"This emphasises the urgent need to adopt policies that drastically reduce CO2 emissions."

Psychology of Climate Change Communication

Columbia University's Center for Research on Environmental Decisions has released a primer on the "Psychology of Climate Change Communication."

Click here to see the Guide.

The upper safety limit for atmospheric CO2 is 350 parts per million.  Atmospheric CO2 levels have stayed higher than 350 ppm since early 1988.  Click here to see a graph that shows why the monthly number is usually different from the yearly average.

Green Sanctuary/Climate Change Group

A Word copy of the unfolding draft document concerning Green Sanctuary Practices is available at ENVIRONMENTAL_PRACTICES.doc.

The Green Sanctuary Group is exploring what it would take to become a "Green Sanctuary."  More information on the Green Sanctuaries movement can be found at UU Ministry for Earth.

Please stop by the social justice table at coffee/friendship hour if you have an interest in working on issues concerning global climate change or email gogreen@firstparish.info .  If you want to write a letter to a politician calling for social action, names and addresses of representatives are here. 

— David Landskov

Mindful Eating

Oprah Winfrey and Dietary Guidelines Highlight the Benefits of Vegan Diet

“Live your best life.”  It’s one of Oprah’s mottos.

The 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans—issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services every five years—devote two full pages to vegetarian and vegan nutrition.  They point out that plant-based eating patterns provide nutritional advantages and reduce obesity, heart disease, and overall mortality:

In prospective studies of adults, compared to non-vegetarian eating patterns, vegetarian-style eating patterns have been associated with improved health outcomes—lower levels of obesity, a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease, and lower total mortality.  Several clinical trials have documented that vegetarian eating patterns lower blood pressure.

Plant-based recommendations for all Americans include:

• Increasing intake of vegetables (especially dark-green, red, and orange vegetables and beans and peas), fruits, whole grains, and fortified soy beverages
• Choosing a variety of protein foods, which include beans, peas, and soy products

Another of the guidelines’ key recommendations is to reduce the intake of calories from solid fats, which come mainly from meats and dairy products and contain few essential nutrients and no dietary fiber.

To learn more about a well-rounded vegan diet, visit ThePowerPlate.org.  Then sign up for the next 21-Day Vegan Kickstart that begins April 4.

Lilian Cheung on Mindful Eating

Eating is as much about mind as matter.  That's one of the main points of Savor:  Mindful Eating, Mindful Life by Thich Nhat Hanh and Lilian Cheung.  Cheung, 57, is a lecturer and director of health promotion and communication at the Harvard School of Public Health.

Vegetarian Restaurants
Click here to see over a dozen restaurants in the Arlington area where you can dine vegetarian.  The list is in a Word file.

Forks Over Knives Coming March 11, 2011
The feature film Forks Over Knives examines the claim that most, if not all, of the degenerative diseases that afflict us can be controlled, or even reversed, by rejecting our present menu of animal-based and processed foods.
More About the Film

The video below is about Melanie Joy's new book Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs and Wear Cows.

In the 40-minute video to the right, Neal Barnard MD discusses the science behind food addictions.  Chocolate, cheese, meat, and sugar release opiate-like substances during digestion.  Dr. Barnard shows how a plant-based diet helps one avoid problems caused by these addictions.

Dr. Barnard is the founder of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.  He spoke at the 2003 VegSource Healthy Lifestyle Expo.

This video is a presentation by Professor T. Colin Campbell, also at the 2003 VegSource Healthy Lifestyle Expo.  Dr. T. Colin Campbell is Professor of Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell University and was principal director of the China Study.

In this 45-minute talk Campbell describes the research that led to his change from dairy rancher and animal-protein advocate to disease prevention researcher and vegan.

Food & Environmental Justice
Welcome to a delicious opportunity for you, your Unitarian Universalist congregation, and our entire Association!  This Food & Environmental Justice Study Guide is part of a new Association-wide effort to explore the hidden ways our food choices impact our communities and our world.

See choices for downloading the Food & Environmental Justice Study Guide.

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle