David B. Benson | 18 Apr 2013 06:33

[Global Change: 3895] IEA: World has stalled on clean energy

IEA: World has stalled on clean energy
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/EE_World_has_stalled_on_clean_energy_1...
"The world's governments are failing on almost every level to clean up their energy systems and must intervene to support nuclear power, said the IEA, noting that only renewables and electric vehicles are 'on track'."

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change.
 
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude.
 
To post to this group, send email to globalchange <at> googlegroups.com
 
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to globalchange-unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com
 
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "globalchange" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to globalchange+unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 
antoniodelgado | 17 Oct 2012 13:46
Picon

[Global Change: 3891] tipping points: methane in the Arctic

I pass a link with our contribution to the debate about the effects of methane emissions in the Arctic.
 
 
Best regards
 
Antonio

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change.
 
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude.
 
To post to this group, send email to globalchange <at> googlegroups.com
 
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to globalchange-unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com
 
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
Tom Adams | 18 Jul 2011 14:25
Picon
Favicon

[Global Change: 3888] Voting by Car

If the average drive to the poll for the US 2008 election was 2 miles
round trip, the it put about 1/4 billion tons of CO2 into the
atmosphere.  (The rest of the factors in this calculation are pretty
easy to estimate, but I am not sure about the average miles driven to
vote.)

There are all these books and web sites about things to do to save the
Earth, but not a single one of them mentions voting by mail.

Advocating voting by mail as an efficiency that should be practiced by
an environmentalist should have the effect of increasing voter turnout
among environmentalist.   Environmentalist can get very deducated and
habitual about these minor efficiencies.  These have a feel good
effect.  They seem addictive.  They seem to be a kind of ethical
ritual practice.

Perhaps this could increase voter turnout among young
environmentalist.  Voter turnout among the young is relatively low.

Hanson and others argue that these minor personal efficiencies are not
effective and certainly not a substitute for political action.  But
voting by mail increases efficiency and the level of polical action.

--

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange")
newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics
and policy dimensions of global environmental change. 

Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive
and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. 

To post to this group, send email to globalchange <at> googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to globalchange-unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange

Tom Adams | 12 Jul 2011 15:16
Picon
Favicon

[Global Change: 3887] Skepticism about scientific consensuses

1.  We can get a scientific consensus even when there is no hypothesis
test supporting the consensus.

2.  Solutions involve engineering, and we can still screw up the
engineering even when the science is right.

3.  Politics and social factors bias what solutions get implemented,
even if good engineering points elsewhere

4.  People get passionate about doing good and can find ways
neutralize the skeptics without addressing the issues they raise.

5.  The consensus tends to follow the funding.  There can be a
synergism between funding, consensus, passionate dogooders.

--

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange")
newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics
and policy dimensions of global environmental change. 

Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive
and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. 

To post to this group, send email to globalchange <at> googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to globalchange-unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange

Jim Torson | 11 Jul 2011 06:03

[Global Change: 3886] What the NRC and Nuclear Industry Don't Want You to Know

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Fairewinds Update" <update <at> fairewinds.com>
Date: July 10, 2011 7:15:17 PM MST
Subject: Boston Video Released

Video at the following website:



 

 
 

VIDEO  UPDATE: June 10th, 2011
Why Fukushima Can Happen Here: What the NRC and Nuclear Industry Dont Want You to Know.  

 The well-known safety flaws of Mark 1 Boiling Water Reactors have gained significant attention in the wake of the four reactor accidents at Fukushima, but a more insidious danger lurks. In this video nuclear engineers Arnie Gundersen and David Lochbaum discuss how the US regulators and regulatory process have left Americans unprotected. They walk, step-by-step, through the events of the Japanese meltdowns and consider how the knowledge gained from Fukushima applies to the nuclear industry worldwide. They discuss "points of vulnerability" in American plants, some of which have been unaddressed by the NRC for three decades. Finally, they concluded that an accident with the consequences of Fukushima could happen in the US.

With more radioactive Cesium in the Pilgrim Nuclear Plant's spent fuel pool than was released by Fukushima, Chernobyl, and all nuclear bomb testing combined, Gundersen and Lockbaum ask why there is not a single procedure in place to deal with a crisis in the fuel pool? These and more safety questions are discussed in this forum presented by the C-10 Foundation at the Boston Public Library. Special thanks to Herb Moyer for the excellent video and Geoff Sutton for the frame-by-frame graphics of the Unit 3 explosion.
 
  

Watch the Video


 
    

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change.
 
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude.
 
To post to this group, send email to globalchange <at> googlegroups.com
 
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to globalchange-unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com
 
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
Jim Torson | 10 Jul 2011 14:33

[Global Change: 3885] Can Fukushima Happen Here?

Here is an excellent 2-hour video that is a panel discussion that includes four
very credible and very qualified people discussing Fukushima and nuclear
power in general.  I highly recommend it.

-- Jim

-------

On Arnie Gundersen's Fairewinds Associates website:

http://www.fairewinds.com/content/duxbury-emergency-management-hosts-independent-nuclear-expert-panel-0

Duxbury Emergency Management Hosts Independent Nuclear Expert Panel

<see website for 2-hour video>

As you know we were on a road trip three weeks ago and thus some there has been some time without videos. At the same time we were away, our media and video producer Kevin Hurley was traveling in Brazil. While videos and the web are an amazing tool, it takes an effort from our whole team to bring our work to you.

Kevin has taken the video of the June 15th Duxbury Masachusetts Emergency Management Agency and the Duxbury Nuclear Advisory Committee forum entitled "Can Fukushima Happen Here?" and posted it for you to view.

Arnie was among four of the nation's leading independent nuclear experts invited to participate on the panel. The other panelists were: David Lockbaum, Director of the nuclear safety project with the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), Dr. Gordon Thompson from Clark University and the executive director for the Institute for research and security studies in Cambridge, MA, who is a recognized expert in the field of spent nuclear fuel, and Paul Blanch has 45 years experience as an electrical engineer in the nuclear power arena.

Check back on Monday for the complete C-10 presentation held at the Boston Public Library.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change.
 
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude.
 
To post to this group, send email to globalchange <at> googlegroups.com
 
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to globalchange-unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com
 
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
Eric Swanson | 11 Mar 2011 17:10
Favicon

[Global Change: 3882] Roy Spencer Slammed - major flaws found in his work

For several years, Roy Spencer has been promoting some work he did
which he claims shows that the feedback from clouds is negative.
Spencer has been a vocal critic of the science of climate change and
he works are frequently referenced by denialist, such as Rush
Limbaugh.  Here's a link to Spencer's 2010 paper:

http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/Spencer-Braswell-JGR-2010.pdf

Spencer has even written a book about his thinking, " The Great Global
Warming Blunder:  How Mother Nature Fooled the World’s Top Climate
Scientists ".   It now appears that Spencer's work is seriously
flawed, according to an analysis by geologist Barry Bickmore, which he
presents in three parts on his blog:

http://bbickmore.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/roy-spencers-great-blunder-part-1/

Worse yet, another analysis by Arthur Smith goes to the heart of the
situation with a detailed look at the math:

http://arthur.shumwaysmith.com/life/content/mathematical_analysis_of_roy_spencers_climate_model

For those in the US who might be interested, results from Spencer's
analysis was just used by John Christy in his presentation before the
US House Committee Energy and Commerce Committee.  Here's a link, (see
graph on page 17):

http://republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/Media/file/Hearings/Energy/030811/Christy.pdf

The hearing is about H.R. 910, which prohibits the EPA imposing any
regulation of greenhouse gases.  It would appear that the Republicans
in the House are working with improper information as they set out to
destroy the EPA's efforts to limit emissions of greenhouse gases.  The
bill just passed out of the committee and is headed to floor for a
vote by the full house.  The Republican War on Science continues and
all humanity will all "enjoy" the results...

E. S.

--

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange")
newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics
and policy dimensions of global environmental change. 

Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive
and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. 

To post to this group, send email to globalchange <at> googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to globalchange-unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange

Eric Swanson | 4 Mar 2011 16:56
Favicon

[Global Change: 3880] Bjørn Lomborg admits "Global warming is real"

Yes folks, he said it:

"Global warming is real, it's a man-made problem, it's something we
need to fix," he said on Tuesday.

http://qcl.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/agribusiness-and-general/general/carbon-tax-no-climate-cureall-lomborg/2093288.aspx?src=rss

I'd say he's a little late.  The damage from his previous confusion
still rings loud after the denialist have spread his words far and
wide.  He still doesn't really want to DO anything.   He just hopes
for the appearance of some low cost energy alternatives.  What does he
think all us engineers and scientists have been doing for more than 40
years after the Arab/OPEC Oil Embargo???

E. S.

--

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange")
newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics
and policy dimensions of global environmental change. 

Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive
and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. 

To post to this group, send email to globalchange <at> googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to globalchange-unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange

K N Vajpai | 28 Jan 2011 05:31
Picon
Gravatar

[Global Change: 3879] How does it Matter to my Social values and Environmental Ethics?

How does it Matter to my Social values and Environmental Ethics?

You might have come across, as I, the ‘social values’ and ‘environmental ethics’, while your interaction with people in various organizations and institutions across development sector (d-sector) i.e. social and environmental domains. I am talking about our public sector organizations, civil society groups, research institutions, think tanks, corporate led societies, international bodies, to name a few.

People talk about corruption by politicians and bureaucrats, policy flaws, poor planning and implementation, poor monitoring, un-coordinated or non-integrated approach and missing post program/project follow-ups.

Reduce your carbon foot prints for ‘me’: I have seen the advocates of this ‘tag’ line running; Air conditioners while they are not in offices, using plastic bags when they shop, using bath tubs and un-necessary showers when they take baths, travelling in cars to nearby markets where they could simply walk, using heaters in winters when there is not body in rooms, using lights when we can avoid during sun light, dumping garbage to neighborhoods plot during nights-rather walking to common garbage bin at nearby place, prefer wooden furnishers though there are alternate,.. ….! They want us to reduce your carbon foot prints, for them at least! Read full article>>

Regards

K N Vajpai

--
Know about Climate Change NEWs from Himalayan Mountains at Climate Himalaya Initiative  http://chimalaya.org.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change.
 
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude.
 
To post to this group, send email to globalchange <at> googlegroups.com
 
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to globalchange-unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com
 
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
Robert I Ellison | 22 Jan 2011 09:54
Picon

[Global Change: 3878] The political implications of s shifting climate

I am looking for a political middle ground.  Yes there is a
possibility of planetary cooling as a result of internal climate
vatiation and yes there is still a significant climate risk.  These
arise for the same reason - climate as a complex and dynamic system in
theoretical physics.

'Climate is an example of a complex and dynamic system in theoretical
physics.  There is real world evidence for this in, especially,
Pacific ocean/climate shifts.   The first manuscript (Pacific SST and
Climate) is an interdisciplinary review of relevant peer reviewed
science.  Pacific Ocean science suggests the potential for global
cooling over the next decade or three as a result of what the Royal
Society called internal climate variation in their recent climate
science summary. This is a difficult concept to follow, requiring a
basis in interdisciplinary science.  Nonetheless, it must objectively
be accepted as a very real possibility that would create a very real
quandary for carbon reduction politics...'

http://www.earthandocean.robertellison.com.au/

--

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange")
newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics
and policy dimensions of global environmental change. 

Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive
and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. 

To post to this group, send email to globalchange <at> googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to globalchange-unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange

Robert I Ellison | 16 Jan 2011 02:10
Picon

[Global Change: 3869] The Pacific Ocean drives climate much more dramatically than the reverse

Greetings from the flood zone.  I am fine - thank you - but
traumatised by the deaths and angered and saddened by idiots who seek
to make a political point out of tragedy.  Both sides of this argument
are full of shit - intellectual featherweights who are instant
internet experts on everything and are utterly convinced of their own
logical infallibility.  Both sides angling to blame the deaths and
destruction on the other.  I wish they would pull their f....... heads
in.

Rant over - I thought I would see if I could put a ruler under 20
years of work.  Neither the floods or the current La Nina are notably
unusual over the longer term - it is part of a Pacific decadal pattern
that is likely to lead to decades more intense and frequent La Nina.

see - http://www.earthandocean.robertellison.com.au/index.html

As an Australian hydrologist, I was introduced to the concept of
drought dominated and flood dominated regimes (DDR and FDR) in the
late 1980’s. These are 20 to 40 year periods dominated by droughts
followed by  a 20 to 40 year period dominated by floods.  The original
result was replicated dozens of times across Australia in the
following decade.  In 1997 the Pacific Decadal Oscillation was
described defining a link between sea surface temperatures and
fisheries biology.  The periods of the PDO modes were exactly the same
as the periods of DDR and FDR.  An apparent but astonishingly odd link
between North American fisheries and Australian rainfall.  Over the
following decade it emerged that the PDO is part of a pattern of
decadal and longer changes in sea surface temperature in the Pacific
Basin with teleconnections to Asian, Australian, African and American
rainfall - and seemingly to the formation of cyclones in the
Atlantic.

In 2003 I made the mistake of looking closely at the Climatic Research
Unit surface temperature record - and saw that the inflection points
are at exactly the same periods as the transitions between DDR and FDR
and between PDO modes.  Still looking for the causes of DDR and FDR I
read nearly everything that emerged on the PDO and the El Niño
Southern Oscillation (ENSO).  However, without much of an idea
anywhere of causative mechanisms, there was not much more than an
intriguing similarity in the timing of changes.

More recent work has identified the Pacific Ocean climate system as
chaotic.  As I eventually realised, chaos is not just a word but a
property of complex and dynamic systems in chaos theory.  It explains
abruptness in the changes observed in ocean states and therefore in
global temperature and in the transitions of Australian rainfall
regimes.  It changes the way in which climate risk is viewed.  Where
before, climate evolved slowly with cycles of minor warming and
cooling in a system that is far from driven solely by greenhouse gas
forcing.  After chaos theory, climate change is abrupt and predictable
only as a probability density function.  There is objectively a small
risk of catastrophic climate change (warming or cooling) that could
happen within months as a result of anthropogenic greenhouse gas
emissions.

Currently, revisions to existing satellite records, new data sources
for radiative flux and ocean heat content, new theoretical work and
computer modeling and new compilations of surface cloud observations
are providing new ways of confirming a Pacific Ocean influence on
global climate.  The picture that emerges is of the Pacific Ocean as
far and away the major driver of global climate.  It does this
primarily by changing cloud formation dynamics.  More cloud forms
above cold water - and the biggest change to sea surface temperature
on interannual, decadal and millennial scales occurs as a result of
upwelling of  cold and nutrient rich (and also acidic) sub-surface
water in the eastern Pacific.  These changes in cloud cover are seen
in surface observations of cloud over the Pacific, in satellite
measurements of reflected shortwave and outgoing long wave radiation
and in modeling studies.  Most recent climate change has been as a
result of changing cloud cover.

And the cause of these changes? A small change in the initial
conditions of a complex and dynamic system that most probably involves
top down forcing by solar UV heating of ozone in the upper
atmosphere.  As Judith Lean says - ‘ongoing studies are beginning to
decipher the empirical Sun-climate connections as a combination of
responses to direct solar heating of the surface and lower atmosphere,
and indirect heating via solar UV irradiance impacts on the ozone
layer and middle atmospheric, with subsequent communication to the
surface and climate. The associated physical pathways appear to
involve the modulation of existing dynamical and circulation
atmosphere-ocean couplings, including the ENSO and the Quasi-Biennial
Oscillation.'

Cheers
Robert

--

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange")
newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics
and policy dimensions of global environmental change. 

Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive
and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. 

To post to this group, send email to globalchange <at> googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to globalchange-unsubscribe <at> googlegroups.com

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange


Gmane