Archive for June, 2008

National Academies call for 50% CO2 cut

Saturday, June 14th, 2008

The National Academies of 13 countries told the leaders of the biggest polluting countries that “immediate large-scale mitigation action is required.”

While objections have been raised by a few people (well, one person anyway) to these leading scientific groups inserting themselves into the climate debate, the rest of us should be glad they are counseling the world — especially their own countries — toward sanity. The statement is clear on what actions will be needed:

The transition to a low carbon society requires: setting standards; designing economic instruments and promoting energy efficiency across all sectors; encouraging changes in individual behaviour; strengthening technology transfer to enable leapfrogging to cleaner and more efficient technologies; and investing strongly in carbon-removing technologies and low-carbon energy resources: nuclear power, solar energy, hydroelectricity and other renewable energy sources.

More…

Hints of methane’s renewed rise

Wednesday, June 11th, 2008

– And why would a rise in Methane levels be important?:

“Methane is the second most important gas causing man-made climate change. Each molecule causes about 25 times more warming than a molecule of CO2, but it survives for shorter times in the atmosphere before being broken down.”

 – As the world’s temperature rises, vast amounts of Methane trapped in the permafrost will be released as the permafrost melts.   In addition, there are vast amounts of Methane trapped in deep ocean sediments as Methane Clathrates and scientists fear that given sufficient warming of the oceans, these will be released into the atmosphere as well.   More warming, more releases, more releases, more warming.   It’s not a pretty picture.

– – – – – – – – – – – – –

Levels of the greenhouse gas methane in the atmosphere seem to be rising having remained stable for nearly 10 years.

Data from the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa) in the US suggest concentrations rose by about 0.5% between 2006 and 2007.

The rise could reflect melting of permafrost, increased industrialisation in Asia or drying of tropical wetlands.

The rise in carbon dioxide levels was significantly higher than the average annual increase for the last 30 years.

Noaa figures show CO2 concentrations rising by 2.4 parts per million (ppm) from 2006 to 2007. By comparison, the average annual increase between 1979 and 2007 was 1.65ppm.

Concentrations now stand at 384 ppm, compared to about 280 ppm before the era of human industrialisation began

Upwards curve?

The rise in CO2 is not exceptional compared with the previous few years, but does add more evidence that concentrations are rising faster than they were a decade or so ago.

The methane figure is more interesting, and potentially of more concern.

Concentrations have been more or less stable since about 1999 following years of rapid increases. Industrial reform in the former Soviet bloc, changes to rice farming methods and the capture of methane from landfill sites all contributed to the levelling off.

But the 2007 figure indicates that levels may be on the rise again.

More…

US climate change bill is blocked

Wednesday, June 11th, 2008

– “It’s a huge tax increase,” said Mitch McConnell, leader of the Senate Republicans, most of whom opposed the bill.

-Mmmm- what a great reason to put off saving the world from catastrophe.   Bravo. 

= = = = =

A US attempt to establish a system of caps and tax relief to cut carbon emissions has been blocked in Congress.

The bill was backed by most senators, but did not get the 60 votes needed to stop a delaying tactic – a filibuster – used by the bill’s opponents.

Even if it had succeeded in passing Congress, President George W Bush had pledged to veto the bill.

Lawmakers will now wait until next year – when there will be a new president – before attempting to pass a new bill.

More…

Doomed Kiribati needs escape plan

Wednesday, June 11th, 2008

Kiribati’s President, Anote Tong, says his country may already be doomed by global warming – and he wants New Zealand and Australia to consider the issue of environmental refugees.

“We may already be at the point of no return, where the emissions in the atmosphere will carry on contributing to climate change, so in time our small low-lying islands will be submerged,” Mr Tong said yesterday in Wellington.

Kiribati’s highest point of land is just 2m above sea level, and under “worst-case” scenarios it will be flooded by the Pacific this century and its 94,000 people will have to be re-settled in other countries.

Mr Tong, a graduate of the London School of Economics, said climate change “is not an issue of economic development, it’s an issue of human survival”.

More…

Ominous warning oil price rise just starting

Wednesday, June 11th, 2008

LONDON – The chief executive of the world’s largest energy company has issued the most dire warning yet about the soaring the price of oil, predicting that it will hit US$250 ($332) per barrel in the foreseeable future.

The forecast from Alexey Miller, the head of the Kremlin-owned gas giant Gazprom, would herald even more expensive petrol and send shockwaves through the economy.

His comments were the most stark to be expressed by an industry executive and come just days after the oil price registered its largest-ever single-day spike, hitting US$139.12 per barrel last week amid fears that the world’s faltering supply will be unable to keep up with demand.

More…

Major crop decline adds to food insecurity

Wednesday, June 11th, 2008

– This in from Pakistan:

– – – – – – – – – – –

ISLAMABAD, June 10: The agriculture sector performed poorly and grew by only 1.5 per cent during the financial year 2007-08 against the target of 4.8 per cent, making the nation vulnerable to food insecurity and badly hurting economic growth.

Major crops and forestry declined by three per cent and 8.5 per cent respectively, according to the Pakistan Economic Survey 2007-08. Livestock, minor crops and fisheries somehow averted an apparent collapse of the entire agriculture sector.

Cotton, which accounts for about 1.6 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) and a major source of foreign earning, grew less than last year. The country produced 11.7 million bales, compared to 12.9 million bales last year.

The survey says that heavy rainfall in May 2007 in Punjab, where sowing was already 2.2 per cent less than last year, caused poor germination. Cotton sowing in Sindh was 6.6 per cent less than last year. A severe attack of the leave curl virus also hit the crop.

Similarly, the wheat production target of 24 million tons was missed by 1.5 million tons. The output was 21.7 million tons — 6.6pc less than last year and 9.9pc less than the target. The reasons were about 40pc less use of fertilisers and availability of 23.3pc less water for the Rabi season. The price of a 40kg DAP fertiliser increased to Rs3,000 from last year’s Rs850.

The survey showed that the country was unable to produce the annual 124kg per capita flour. An analysis of the last 12 years showed that the per capita flour target had been missed for eight years.

More…

Zuma: Rising food prices a time bomb

Wednesday, June 11th, 2008

Cape Town, South Africa

The rising cost of food is a time bomb that could result in uprisings, African National Congress president Jacob Zuma told the World Economic Forum on Africa on Thursday.

“The issue of food prices is actually a time bomb,” he told a plenary of the forum, which is being held in Cape Town.

“With those who have the budgets to adjust, [it] is one thing. But with those who have no money to buy at all, once the food price goes up, they are cut out, even from the possibility of buying food. Then you are sitting with a situation that an uprising would emerge.”

Individual governments cannot solve the problem of food insecurity, said Zuma. “We must have global solutions to global problems.” He said he did not think that there was much that governments could do. “I think the world organisations must do it.”

Zuma was speaking against the background of a global doubling in the price of wheat in the past year, and an almost 80% hike in the African and Asian staples maize and rice over the same period. Soaring food costs have already sparked riots in Egypt, Indonesia, Cameroon, Peru and Haiti.

More…

About Corporations

Monday, June 9th, 2008

A couple of years ago, if you had asked me what the world’s biggest problems were, I would have listed quite a few things – but corporations would not have been among them. At that point in time, they were such a part of the background that I hadn’t really ‘seen’ them.

But, today, I’d list corporations as among the biggest problems mankind is facing.

If you train a dog to be a junkyard dog and to attack anyone who comes onto the premises, that’s fine. The dog serves a purpose. But to create such a dog and not control it is criminal.

Corporations are like that. And, note here that I am not talking about small entities where the original founders are still involved in the day to day activities like Ben and Jerry’s Ice Cream or such. I’m talking here about large publicly traded companies with boards of directors and thousands of stock holders.

What are corporations, that I should give them such a bad rap? We all know what they are, if we just think about it. They are entities that are created and that exist to seek profit for their shareholders. And the people running them are judged and retained or dismissed based on how well they maximize return-on-investment for the shareholders.

So, why is a corporation like a junkyard dog? Because they will seek the path of the highest profit at each decision juncture. If the choice is between what’s good for the company’s bottom line or what’s good for people – they will always go for the bottom line – unless the economic consequences of the potential PR fall-out might outweigh the profits gained. And even with that latter consideration – it will still be a consideration based on where the maximum profit lies in the situation.

So, is this an evil thing? No, no more that the junkyard dog, once trained, is evil for doing what he was trained to do. It’s just a plain and simple fact that corporations are about profits – not people. They are like that junkyard dog or the sharp pocket-knife in your pocket. They can be very useful in the right situation and they can cause serious harm when they are misused or uncontrolled.

The problem with corporations in today’s world is that they are largely uncontrolled. Especially in the U.S. The economic power of many of them rival or exceed the economic power of many sovereign nations today. This is a very bad thing. We have loosed great slobbering junkyard dogs of Capitalism on the world and now we stand about surprised that

– Our rain forests are being cut down
– Our fisheries are being destroyed
– Our atmosphere is being polluted by excessive CO2

And on and on. If you look what’s behind many of the world’s big problems today, you will find corporations and their decisions.

So, am I outing myself as anti-Capitalism with all of this rant? Nope. I clearly recognize that Capitalism and corporations produce the vast majority of the wealth and innovations in our world. I’m not advocating here to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. No, I’d just like to suggest that it is time in our human history to recognize that unleashing corporations and letting them do what they do unconstrained – is a very bad idea.

The right approach is to make corporations subordinate to a higher level of control. And that higher level of control would have as its highest priority, the good of mankind. We’re not talking Communism here. We’re not even talking robust Socialism here. We’re just saying that the highest level of decision-making in this world cannot be controlled by entities whose primary purpose for existing is to seek profit. It must be controlled by folks whose primary concern is for the well-being of all of us – humanity.

Would this or should this ‘kill’ Capitalism and corporations and their ability to create wealth and innovation? No. The aim of those at the top should be to leave the Capitalistic elements run free so long as their decisions do not run counter to the highest good for humanity. If this was well and evenly applied, then all the world’s corporations would still operate on a level playing field and would not lose competitive advantage against each other. Their range of action would be restricted but the restrictions would apply equally to all of them.

Idealistic balderdash, you say? Impossible to implement, you say? Perhaps. But, in the end, I think we have no choice but to do this or something not unlike it. Because, the way we are going, we are on a history train bound for deep disaster.

Places like Wal-Mart sell the schlock they do because they’ve decided to try to own the low end of the market and that’s simply how you do it at that end of the market. They will advertise to convince you that their product quality is high, that their products are equivalent to those sold by others, they will shop for their stock at the cheapest places they can find, they will cut quality, they will ignore problems, they will ignore human rights abuses in the factories that supply them, they will intentionally mislead the public if necessary and they will do all of this with a clean conscience – because all of it improves their bottom line – and that’s all that matters at the end of the day to them.

If we piss and moan about their lack of integrity and their lack of caring about people – we’re really just trying to reason with a junkyard dog. And that dog only has one purpose in life – to bite you if you are unwary and get too close.

“Perfect Storm” in Food Prices Caused by Many Factors

Thursday, June 5th, 2008

Part one of a special series that explores the local faces of the world’s worst food crisis in decades.

In Australia a struggling farmer watches another harvest shrivel under the country’s worst drought on record.

Another new member of the Chinese middle-class finally has enough cash to buy his first steak.

And a U.S. agricultural executive decides to grow corn instead of wheat to take advantage of the growing demand for biofuels.

Alone, none of these events would have been responsible for today’s troubled stock markets, rampant civil unrest, and increasing famine and malnourishment for the world’s poor. (See a video on the world food crisis.)

Together, they’ve caused the world’s worst food crisis in a generation.

“A convergence of factors has led to what is sort of a perfect storm for food prices,” Erik Thorbecke, an economist at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, told National Geographic News.

“I can’t think of a time we’ve had this large an increase.”

According to data from the International Monetary Fund, average global food prices have jumped nearly 50 percent since the end of 2006.

More…

Climate Findings Were Distorted, Probe Finds

Wednesday, June 4th, 2008

– If you are not angry – you are not paying attention. 

= = = = =

An investigation by the NASA inspector general found that political appointees in the space agency’s public affairs office worked to control and distort public accounts of its researchers’ findings about climate change for at least two years, the inspector general’s office said yesterday.

The probe came at the request of 14 senators after The Washington Post and other news outlets reported in 2006 that Bush administration officials had monitored and impeded communications between NASA climate scientists and reporters.

James E. Hansen, who directs NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies and has campaigned publicly for more stringent limits on greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming, told The Post and the New York Times in September 2006 that he had been censored by NASA press officers, and several other agency climate scientists reported similar experiences. NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are two of the government’s lead agencies on climate change issues.

From the fall of 2004 through 2006, the report said, NASA’s public affairs office “managed the topic of climate change in a manner that reduced, marginalized, or mischaracterized climate change science made available to the general public.” It noted elsewhere that “news releases in the areas of climate change suffered from inaccuracy, factual insufficiency, and scientific dilution.”

Officials of the Office of Public Affairs told investigators that they regulated communication by NASA scientists for technical rather than political reasons, but the report found “by a preponderance of the evidence, that the claims of inappropriate political interference made by the climate change scientists and career public affairs officers were more persuasive than the arguments of the senior public affairs officials that their actions were due to the volume and poor quality of the draft news releases.”

More…