Thursday, January 24, 2013

January 24 News: White House Says It Has 'No Intention Of Proposing A Carbon Tax'

In a blow to environmentalists' hopes, White House spokesman Jay Carney declared yesterday that the Obama Administration has "no intention of proposing a carbon tax." [DailyCaller]

White House spokesman Jay Carney Jan. 23 deflated environmentalists' hope of a major federal program to counter climate change, by declaring that the "we have no intention of proposing a carbon tax."

Carney's statement is a letdown for progressive climate-control advocates, who say the federal government has the regulatory and taxing power to try to affect the globe's temperature by curbing the release of carbon dioxide from cars, houses, factories, power plants....

"I think the President has long supported congressional action on climate change," Carney said Jan. 22. But "he looks at [climate control] in a more holistic way, and he will move forward in implementing some of the [regulatory and spending] actions that he took in the first term," he said.

The Chinese government has announced it will aim to limit the country's total primary energy consumption to 4 billion tons of coal-equivalent by 2015, in a bid to improve efficiency and reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emission. However, the target will not be binding. [Reuters]

The European Commission has proposed new standards to encourage alternative fuel use - such as electricity, hydrogen, and liquified natural gas - throughout the European Union's transportation infrastructure. [Bloomberg]

According to a new study, the Andean glaciers - a vital source of fresh water for millions of South Americans - are retreating at their fastest rate in 300 years, having already shrunk between 30 and 50 percent since the 1970s. [The Guardian]

Senator Lisa Murkowski, the ranking Republican on the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, says she will release a "very comprehensive" energy plan next week. The blueprint was put together in consultation with the Committee's other GOP members, and will likely not include any proposal to curb greenhouse egad emissions. [The Hill]

Oregon State University will be building the first utility-scale, grid-connected wave energy testing site in the country. [Renewable Energy World]



http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/01/24/1489291/january-24-news-wh

Meeting the Climate Change Challenge: Cities Plan for Worst and Hope for the Best

In many ways meeting the challenge of climate change and sustainable development is often most effective at the municipal level. Cities strike a balance between meeting the diverse needs of its inhabitants with the ability to adopt and adapt to the realities and challenges of global warming, development, infrastructure and energy.

http://theenergycollective.com/globalwarmingisreal/176211/meeting-clim

Why Greenland's Melting Could Be the Biggest Climate Disaster of All

Glaciologist Jason Box is racing to figure out just how rapidly we're pushing the 7 meters of sea rise level locked up in the Greenland ice sheet onto our shores.

Jason Box

Jason Box speaks the language of Manhattans. Not the drink-the measuring unit.

As an expert on Greenland who has traveled 23 times to the massive, mile thick northern ice sheet, Box has shown an uncanny ability to predict major melts and breakoffs of Manhattan-sized ice chunks. A few years back, he foretold the release of a "4x Manhattans" piece of ice from Greenland's Petermann Glacier, one so big that once afloat it was dubbed an "ice island." In a scientific paper published in February of 2012, Box further predicted "100 % melt area over the ice sheet" within another decade of global warming. As it happened, the ice sheet's surface almost completely melted just a month later in July-an event that, in Box's words, "signals the beginning of the end for the ice sheet."

Box, who will speak at next week's Climate Desk Live briefing in Washington, D.C., pulls no punches when it comes to attributing all of this to humans and their fossil fuels. "Those who claim it's all cycles just don't understand that humans are driving the cycle right now, and for the foreseeable future," he says. And the coastal consequences of allowing Greenland to continue its melting-and pour 23 feet's worth of sea level into the ocean over the coming centuries-are just staggering. "If you're the mayor of Hamburg, or Shanghai, or Philadelphia, I think it's in your job description that you think forward a century," says Box. "They're completely inundated by the year 2200."

Unless, that is, something big changes-something big enough to start Greenland cooling, shifting its "mass balance" from ice loss to ice gain once again. But that would require us to reverse global climate change, in an ever-dwindling time frame for doing so.

Currently based at the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State-with a joint appointment at the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland-Box got his research start while an undergraduate at the University of Colorado-Boulder. As a senior, he traveled north with the Swiss glaciologist Konrad Steffen. In subsequent years, as his scientific career developed, Box increasingly began to think outside of...his last name. Rather than waiting on funding agencies, he teamed up with Greenpeace on a series of expeditions to document, and also dramatize, the ice sheet's melting. He also began to set up time lapse cameras to observe the ice as it declines, something captured in the new documentary Chasing Ice, which features Box's work.

Today, Box is trying to understand the feedback loops that may be driving a melting of Greenland that is much faster and more dramatic than many scientists expected. Take, for instance, melting on the ice's sheet surface: Warmer or melting ice (or just plain meltwater) absorbs more sunlight than does healthy, cold ice. So as warmer temperatures melt the ice, the ice sheet absorbs more solar heat-melting even more. Another example: As Greenland melts, the massive ice sheet, more than two miles above sea level at its highest point, slumps in altitude. When that happens, more of the ice sheet is bathed in the warmer atmospheric temperatures that are found at lower elevations. So-you guessed it-it melts more.

But Box is most intrigued by one of the processes occurring atop the ice sheet, on its surface. Last summer, wildfires torched large parts of the US West, and especially Box's home state of Colorado. The soot from the fires traveled as far north as the Greenland ice sheet and, once deposited on the ice, these dark particles absorbed additional sunlight. Compounding this effect are the Arctic microbes that live off of impurities from soot-living longer as the ice warms, and releasing dark pigments to protect themselves from the sunlight.

"I'm sitting in LaGuardia on my way to Greenland, people riveted to the TV with news about fire across the US," Box remembers. "It was really dramatic, but I'm like, 'Hold on, we need to really measure the soot." Thus was born the Dark Snow project, in which Box and colleagues are trying to crowd-fund an expedition to sample the ice at high elevations and determine just how much soot from global wildfires and pollution are amplifying Greenland's melting.

The upshot of what they know so far is that Greenland is not only melting-it may be melting faster than anyone expected, including most scientists. And what's more, we may be blowing past a point of irreversibility, where the world commits, irrevocably, to a level of sea level rise that, as it unfolds over the coming centuries, would devastate many coastal megacities.

Just consider one striking statistic from Box: The summer melt from Greenland in 2012 alone added a millimeter to the global sea level. And not only is that millimeter felt around the globe, but it is felt in specific places. For instance, it rode atop the wall of water that Superstorm Sandy pushed inland at New York and New Jersey.

And that's just a tiny fraction of what's to come. One recent scientific prediction suggested that 1.6 degrees Celsius (just under 3 degrees Fahrenheit) of temperature rise above pre-industrial levels might be enough to lock in Greenland's complete melting. Greenland temperatures in summer have already risen a full degree Celsius since the year 2000, and if the soot-related and biological feedbacks that are Box's current focus turn out to be big enough, the 1.6 degree threshold might also be too conservative.

In other words, Box's boots-on-the-ground perspective on Greenland suggests that the models might be undershooting things-and all that water may be coming faster still.

In his inaugural address, President Obama put a strong focus on the issue of climate change, citing the "devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms." But all of this pales in comparison to a global ocean containing what used to be Greenland. And that, Box says, should serve as a major wake-up call, since "there's no doubt that if climate continued like in 2012, Greenland's gone."

http://climatedesk.org/2013/01/why-greenlands-melting-could-be-the-big

How Climate Change Could Wipe Out the Western Forests

If current trends continue, the landscapes of states like New Mexico and Arizona may soon be unrecognizable.

DVIDSHUB/Flickr

The fire that burned through Forest Canyon, a breathtaking stretch of wilderness ringed by snowy peaks in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado, started in October and burned long past the end of the fire season. Trees still smoldered in late December, and the smoke mixed with dry snow blowing in the air. Known as the Fern Lake Fire, the blaze tore through 3,500 acres of land the federal government set aside a century ago both to provide public enjoyment and protect it from human destruction.

One of those missions has been accomplished: 3.1 million people visit the park each year. Increasingly, however, the destruction it was meant to prevent is encroaching. Like most wildfires, the Fern Lake Fire was the work of careless individuals. Most likely campers let an illegal campfire get out of control. But science suggests our collective effort may have made it much worse.

Last year was the hottest on record in the United States, and the fall weather was unseasonably warm in the Rockies. The forest was weakened by prolonged drought; that November was the driest ever recorded in the park. An epidemic of bark beetles, which thrive in warmer conditions, was already in the process of killing off thousands of trees. The area's first heavy snow came unusually late, in mid-December, and only then did the fire slow down.

To keep reading, click here.

http://climatedesk.org/2013/01/how-climate-change-could-wipe-out-the-w

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Incoming! New Report Notes 14 "Carbon Bombs" Threatening To Blow The Global Carbon Budget

The general scientific consensus is that the average global temperature cannot be allowed to warm more than two degrees Celsius [3.6°F] in order to avoid catastrophic climate change. In fact, a two degree rise alone would threaten the water supplies of hundreds of millions of people, lead to global crop declines, bleach coral reefs around the world, and drive up ocean acidification.

Limiting global emissions between 2010 and 2050 to 1,050 gigatons of CO2-equivalent pollution should give us a 75 percent chance of staying under a two degree rise, according to a new report from Ecofys and Greenpeace, which rounded up 14 "carbon bombs" - the biggest coal, oil and natural gas projects currently being planned around the world.

According to the analysis, the combined effect of these projects alone would dump 300 new gigatons of carbon into the atmosphere by 2050. That would blow through roughly a third of the allowance that gives us a 75 percent chance of staying under two degrees. Needless to say, if these projects were carried out, it would make it vastly more difficult for the planet to stay on a path that keeps it under the two degree threshold.

Two of the projects can be found in the United States, and a third is deeply bound up with rapidly approaching U.S. policy choices:

  • A plan to export new coal from the Pacific Northwest. This would add 420 million tons of carbon a year by 2020. Activists and even some American politicians have already been battling the project for some time.
  • Expanded shale gas production. This will add 280 million tons a year by 2020 according to the report. But as David Roberts points out, this estimate relies on the assumption that natural gas fields leak methane at a rate of 3.9 percent. There's evidence that assumption significantly low-balls the problem.
  • Tar sands in Canada. This project would be greatly helped along by construction of the Keystone XL pipeline through the lower-48 states. The Obama Administration will decide whether to approve the pipeline sometime after March.

Here's a map of the offenders, put together by The Washington Post's Brad Plumer from the report. (Click the image for a larger version.)

The two biggest offenders in the report were China's plan to ramp up new coal production, creating an additional 1,400 megatons of CO2 emissions a year, and Australia's plan to export 760 new megatons of coal per year. Ironically, both countries were hit by the effects of coal pollution over the course of 2012. Particulate pollution in Beijing literally broke the relevant measuring scales, and Australia was wracked by a record-breaking heat wave and a rash of wildfires, all linked to global warming.

There is some good news in the caveats, as Plumer notes. The energy produced by these projects won't necessarily add on linearly to each other, or to the energy already being produced by fossil fuels. Natural gas from one project could undercut the need for coal from another project, for instance. Or it could displace coal consumption already occurring - a net reduction in carbon output, in the latter instance. (Of course, these projects could also displace energy being produced from renewables. A problem, to put it mildly.)



http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/01/23/1487311/14-carbon-bomb/?mo

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

VIDEO: Is it Obama? Is it Gore? No! It's the Green Ninja!

A group of researchers and educators based at San Jose State University think climate science needs a superhero. So they created one.

President Obama's high-profile statements about climate change in his inauguration speech-"Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms"-will need to be backed by strong action if there's any hope of dimming recent attacks on science in America's classrooms.

The National Center for Science Education lists four new bills in the last week alone that have been introduced in state legislatures: two in Oklahoma, and one each for Missouri and Colorado. For example, House Bill 179, introduced in the Missouri House of Representatives on January 16, labels as controversial the teaching of "biological and chemical evolution;" Ditto for Colorado, which on the same day introduced House Bill 13-1089 (PDF) which also misrepresents global warming and evolution as questionable science.

No wonder Dr Eugene Cordero thinks climate change needs a superhero. Bam! Enter the Green Ninja, the not-very-talkative martial arts master who whips up all sorts mayhem to teach young minds about carbon footprints, energy-saving strategies and gas guzzling leaf blowers, a kind of climate-bent Captain Planet, for a younger generation.

Cordero-both the creator of Green Ninja and a climate scientist at San Jose State University-has already created a series of videos and lesson plans for teachers. And they are now looking to the crowd on the popular funding website Kickstarter for more cash to produce a 16-episode YouTube series, starting this Spring. At the time of writing, with just 10 days to go, the Green Ninja team has raised half of its stated $10,000 goal.

http://climatedesk.org/2013/01/video-is-it-obama-is-it-gore-no-its-the

Climate Change Moves to Forefront in Obama's Second Inaugural Address

President's affirmation of climate science - more prominent than in the campaign - wins praise from environmental groups.

y16i/Flickr

Barack Obama said more about climate change in his inauguration speech - and expressed it more forcefully - than he did at any point in the 2012 election campaign and during much of his first term.

Climate change occupied a significant chunk of Monday's speech, and Obama did not stint on the language, suggesting it was a religious and patriotic duty to deal with the challenge.

"We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations," Obama said. He made a carefully calibrated appeal to Republicans, situating a transition from fossil fuels to clean energy in a religious and conservative framework of God and constitution.

"That is how we will preserve our planet, commanded to our care by God. That's what will lend meaning to the creed our fathers once declared," Obama said.

To keep reading, click here.

http://climatedesk.org/2013/01/climate-change-moves-to-forefront-in-ob