World cools on global warming as green fatigue sets in

Public concern about environmental issues including climate change has slumped to a 20-year low since the financial crisis, a global study reveals.

Fewer people now consider issues such as CO2 emissions, air and water pollution, animal species loss, and water shortages to be “very serious” than at any time in the last two decades, according to the poll of 22,812 people in 22 countries including Britain and the US.

Despite years of studies showing the impact of global warming on the planet, only 49 per cent of people now consider climate change a very serious issue – far fewer than at the beginning of the worldwide financial crisis in 2009.

Worries about climate change first dropped in industrialised nations but they have now also fallen in developing economies including Brazil and China, according to the survey by GlobeScan Radar.

The declining interest in climate change comes amid a backlash against costly green energy investments in an age of austerity. David Nussbaum, head of WWF UK, said “sustained pressure” was required from political leaders to combat climate change. He said it was only when “real indicators” of climate change came, such as floods and droughts, that public perceptions changed.

He told The Independent: “Of course people’s concerns about climate change changed in 2009 when economic pressures were rising… [But] the problems haven’t gone away… There are longer-term concerns that may not seem imminent that are extremely serious. A skilled political leader has got to grapple with how you act and respond to the immediate pressure people feel while helping [to take] account of the wider concerns and interests.”

Campaigners said the “perceived seriousness” of climate change had also fallen sharply since the unsuccessful UN Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen in December 2009. The summit ended in what was described as “confusion, disagreement and disarray” as political leaders failed to agree a legally binding deal to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

Graham Thompson, a spokesman for Greenpeace, said: “The public can see that the response of our politicians is completely inadequate to the threat scientists have revealed, and that dissonance is reflected in these polls.”

Doug Miller, chairman of GlobeScan, said: “Evidence of environmental damage is stronger than ever, but our data shows that economic crisis and a lack of political leadership mean that the public are starting to tune out.”

The Department of Energy and Climate Change reiterated the view of Ed Davey, Climate Change Secretary, that “the basic physics of climate change is irrefutable”.

The GlobeScan survey found that water pollution is viewed as the most serious environment problem worldwide with 58 per cent of people polled saying it represents a very serious concern.

SOURCE:http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/world-cools-on-global-warming-as-green-fatigue-sets-in-8513826.html

Corrupt science supports global warming theories

The column "Where are we going with climate change?" (Feb. 21) could have been written by me 43 years ago. Only I would have been writing about the coming calamity of global cooling.

In 1970, I leafletted for the first Earth Day. I belonged to the Coalition for the Environment, Sierra Club, donated to Greenpeace, etc. I was a true believer. Never did I question that science could be promoting an agenda for those who would like to exercise control over human beings by promoting this green ruse and making this into a moral crusade. Nor did news magazines, such as Time and Newsweek, newspapers and all of the media question anything put out by the "experts." All in the media behaved as stenographers, as is happening today with global warming. Scientists who are not on board were ignored in the '70s and are ignored today. Or mocked.

Global cooling came and left and was replaced with global warming. With no explanation. Although I am sure an explanation for this could be concocted by someone clever enough with info that has been altered, massaged and jiggered.

I was a believer in 1970 but I am no longer a believer in what is being pushed because I believe science has become corrupt in support of a sham.

SOURCE:http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/mailbag/letters-to-the-editor/corrupt-science-supports-global-warming-theories/article_404b758d-6039-539f-a2ba-1c037543e1a8.html

Global warming and airflow changes 'caused US and EU heatwaves'

Global warming may have caused extreme events such as a 2011 drought in the United States and a 2003 heatwave in Europe by slowing vast, wave-like weather flows in the northern hemisphere, scientists said on Tuesday.

The study of meandering air systems that encircle the planet adds to understanding of extremes that have killed thousands of people and driven up food prices in the past decade.

Such planetary airflows, which suck warm air from the tropics when they swing north and draw cold air from the Arctic when they swing south, seem to be have slowed more often in recent summers and left some regions sweltering, they said.

"During several recent extreme weather events these planetary waves almost freeze in their tracks for weeks," wrote Vladimir Petoukhov, lead author of the study at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany.

"So instead of bringing in cool air after having brought warm air in before, the heat just stays," he said in a statement of the findings in the US journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

A difference in temperatures between the Arctic and areas to the south is usually the main driver of the wave flows, which typically stretch 2,500km- 4,000km (1,550-2,500 miles) from crest to crest.

But a build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, blamed on human activities led by use of fossil fuels, is heating the Arctic faster than other regions and slowing the mechanism that drives the waves, the study suggested.

Weather extremes in the past decade include a European heatwave in 2003 that may have killed 70,000 people, a Russian heatwave and flooding in Pakistan in 2010 and a 2011 heatwave in the United States, the authors added.

The authors wrote that they proposed "a common mechanism" for the generation of waves linked to climate change.

Past studies have linked such extremes to global warming but did not identify an underlying mechanism, said Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute and a co-author, who called the findings "quite a breakthrough," he wrote. The scientists added that the 32-year-period studied was too short to predict future climate change and that natural variations in the climate had not been ruled out completely as a cause.

The study only considered the northern part of the globe, in summertime. Petoukhov led another study in 2010 suggesting that cold snaps in some recent winters in Europe were linked to low amounts of ice in the Arctic Ocean.

Almost 200 governments have agreed to work out by the end of 2015 a deal to combat rising global greenhouse gas emissions that will enter into force from 2020.

SOURCE:http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/26/global-warming-planetary-airflow-extreme-weather-us-eu

POLL: Fewer Californians see global warming as threat - See more at: http://www.pe.com/local-news/topics/topics-environment-headlines/20130225-poll-fewer-californians-see-global-warming-as-threat.ece#sthash.9DXD4I7H.dpuf

Fewer Californians today believe global warming is a problem that needs remedying than six years ago, according to a Field Poll released Monday, Feb. 25.

In a September 2007 Field Poll, 76 percent of California voters surveyed said they believed global warming was a real problem and action should be taken. The latest poll shows that 64 percent of registered voters in the state hold the same views.

“The current measure represents a decline, which is kind of a surprise,” said Field Poll Director Mark DiCamillo. He noted that the biggest drop came from Republicans.

In 2007, 56 percent of Republicans believed action should be taken to reduce global warming, and now the proportion is down to 37 percent of Republicans, he said.

In contrast, 79 percent of Democrats and 71 percent of voters who have no party preference or belong to third parties believe it is a problem that requires action.

“In my judgment, this issue has become much more politicized over the past six years,” DiCamillo said, pointing to former Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore’s 2006 movie, “An Inconvenient Truth.”

“Skeptics have kind of used it as almost a piñata that they’ve taken aim at,” he said. “It’s become very partisan. You can see in current data that there are big differences by party.”

In the latest poll, 33 percent of people responding said that concerns about global warming were unfounded or that not enough information is available to determine whether action is necessary. Three percent had no opinion.

Caroline Deao, 42, of Corona said she thinks concern about climate change is overblown.

“I think we’ve gone way too far,” Deao said, adding that she doesn’t believe there is enough data to warrant any action.

On the other hand, she said, her family members have replaced the incandescent bulbs in their home and are using energy-saving appliances.

“I’m not against trying to do our part,” Deao said. “But I’m not exactly sold on (the idea of climate change).”

She is against California’s AB32, which legislators passed in 2006 and currently requires a 17 percent reduction in greenhouse gases in the state over the next 10 years.

But she is in the minority. The Field Poll shows that 70 percent of respondents support the law and the effort to bring down emissions. In fact, support for AB32 has increased since November 2010, when 66 percent approved.

DiCamillo said he suspects the change regarding AB32 is a result of the progress the state has made in reducing emissions.

“Moving in the right direction is benefiting the public attitude toward it,” DiCamillo said.

Green Valley Lake resident John Mills, 66, said he supports the effort to reduce California’s emissions, even though he isn’t convinced that humans can do anything about global warming.

As to the planet’s rising temperatures, Mills said, “I think it’s just a cycle we go through.”

But when it comes to California’s air, Mills thinks cutting emissions is a good idea. “It’s got to be done. It’s for health reasons, not global warming.”

The Field Poll interviewed 834 California residents between Feb. 5-17. For some questions, the polling involved a sub-sample of 415 voters. The margin of error is 3.5 percent for the larger sample and 5 percent for the smaller one. The survey is conducted for The Press-Enterprise and other California media subscribers.

- See more at: http://www.pe.com/local-news/topics/topics-environment-headlines/20130225-poll-fewer-californians-see-global-warming-as-threat.ece#sthash.9DXD4I7H.dpuf

SOURCE:http://www.pe.com/local-news/topics/topics-environment-headlines/20130225-poll-fewer-californians-see-global-warming-as-threat.ece

‘Global warming means fewer icebergs’: Clive Palmer unveils his plans for Titanic II

His heart will go on ... a digital impression of the forthcoming Titanic II to be built for Clive Palmer’s Blue Star line. Passengers will be offered a time-travel experience with Edwardian clothing and no internet access. But the new ship will have air conditioning, enough lifeboats for every passenger, and, Palmer insists, a better chance of making it to New York. Photo: Blue Star line

Clive Palmer has pulled the cover off plans for a replica of the ill-starred ship RMS Titantic, which sank in the North Atlantic more than 100 years ago.

I’ve got enough money for it, I think that’s all that matters. 

Palmer told a new York press conference that the new Titanic II ship would be built for his Blue Star Line in China and would make its maiden voyage in 2016.

That voyage will follow the same route as the original ship from Southampton in England to New York.

Palmer ranked eighth on the 2012 BRW Rich 200 list, with a fortune of $3.85 billion, down from $5.05 billion in 2011.

He declined to put a price tag on the new ship. “It’s not about the money,” Palmer said. “I’ve got enough money for it, I think that’s all that matters.”

The ship will be built by China’s state-owned CSC Jinling shipyards.

Palmer said 40,000 people had already registered to buy tickets for the trip, with some expressing interest in paying up to $1 million to sail aboard the replica.

Passengers would be given Edwardian clothes to wear if they wished to help recreate the atmosphere of the original.

Clive Palmer talks in New York about his plan for building a perfect replica of the Titanic in New York.Photo: AFP

The ship will carry three classes of passengers and the classes would be kept separate, Palmer said.

The replica ship has a better chance of making landfall in New York than the original. “One of the benefits of global warming is there’s not as many icebergs in the North Atlantic,” The Age reported Palmer as saying at the announcement.

However the mining magnate stopped short of calling the ship “unsinkable”, a label famously carried by the doomed original, which sank in two hours in April 1912 with the loss of 1500 lives.

A digital rendering of the planned third class dining room aboard the Titanic II.Photo: Blue Star Line

“Anything will sink if you put a hole in it,” Palmer said. “I think it would be very cavalier to say it.”

The Titanic II will have more than enough lifeboat spaces for every passengers and extra staircases, Reuters reported. It will also include some modern comforts, such as air conditioning, but offer no internet or television services.

“If you go for six days and want to go back to 1912, you shouldn’t have internet,” Palmer said.

The main staircase planned for the Titanic II will replicate the grandeur of the original.Photo: Blue Star Line

Undoubtedly one of the BRW Rich-list’s more eccentric members, Palmer has previously announced plans for a rebel football federation to run soccer in Australia, as well as a plan to run against and defeat federal treasurer Wayne Swan in the Queensland seat of Lilley.

- with Reuters, AP

SOURCE:http://www.brw.com.au/p/brw-lounge/global_warming_means_fewer_icebergs_PSUR43Vklbb8vzqFmQ85hK

Obama has the power to act on global warming

The test of President Obama’s seriousness about addressing climate change is not hispending decision on the much-debated Keystone XL pipeline. It’s whether he effectively consigns coal-fired power plants — one of the biggest sources of carbon emissions — to the ashcan of history.

Since his reelection, Obama has signaled a new focus on climate change. “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,” he said in an inaugural address that devoted eight sentences to the issue, more than he spent on any other item on his policy agenda. The strong words from Obama were a welcome surprise. Few doubted that the president understood and accepted the scientific consensus about humankind’s impact on the climate. His dramatic toughening of automobile fuel-economy standards, announced last year, was a major step that will eventually produce great benefits. But it has been unclear whether he is prepared to take similarly bold action to mitigate the other big source of atmospheric carbon dioxide: emissions from power plants.

“If Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will,” Obama vowed in his State of the Union speech. That’s what I’d call unequivocal.

As if Obama needed more of an incentive, a new National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration study, published last month in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, confirms that temperatures have been rising ever since the Industrial Revolution — when the burning of fossil fuels dramatically increased — just as climate scientists have been telling us.

The difference with this study is that it does not rely on direct temperature readings, which climate-change skeptics deride as skewed and unreliable. Nor does it use data from examination of tree rings. Instead, it relies on proxy data from 173 sources such as ice cores, lake and ocean sediments, mineral deposits and historical records of agricultural harvests — all of which are sensitive to temperature. Plotted on a graph, the upward trend looks just like climate scientists said it would.

This month, tens of thousands of demonstrators rallied in Washington to urge Obama to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, which would ship crude oil from the Athabasca tar sands in Alberta, Canada, to ports in Texas along the Gulf Coast. Organizers claimed it was the biggest climate protest ever in the United States.

Activists say the process of extracting oil from the tar sands generates more carbon emissions than does conventional means of oil recovery. It is true that the pipeline might accelerate exploitation of the tar sands. But the oil is likely to be extracted eventually, regardless of the pipeline decision.

Meanwhile, about 40 percent of U.S. carbon emissions come from power plants, and coal-burning plants produce far more emissions than do facilities that use other fuels — more than twice as much, per unit of electricity generated, than plants burning natural gas, for example.

Low prices for natural gas have caused utilities to switch fuels. Ten years ago, according to the Energy Information Administration, half of the nation’s electricity came from coal-fired plants and less than one-fifth from plants burning natural gas. Last year, just 37 percent was generated by coal — and about 30 percent by natural gas.

Obama has the opportunity to cut carbon emissions by hastening a transition already under way — without action by the hostile Republican majority in the House or the nervous Democratic majority in the Senate.

The Environmental Protection Agency has the power — I’d call it a duty — to issue rules limiting carbon emissions per unit of electricity generated. Tough, science-based rulemaking would give utilities an incentive to switch from coal to gas — and effectively guarantee that no new coal-fired plants would be built.

Obama has to weigh the political impact on Democratic elected officials in coal-producing states such as West Virginia. But coal-state Democrats are already under pressure because of the shift to natural gas that just happens to be occurring while a Democrat is in the White House. They will have to deal with voters’ economic concerns whether Obama acts or not.

Natural gas is not a panacea. The extraction process known as “fracking”— responsible for the current glut — raises serious environmental concerns. Ultimately, the only way to halt climate change is to wean the global economy from its dependence on fossil fuels.

But that is a journey of many years. Obama can — and should — take us many miles down the road with a stroke of his pen.

SOURCE:http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-obama-has-the-power-to-act-on-global-warming/2013/02/25/e0ddc5e0-7f82-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_story.html

Global warming worries Californians

Two-thirds of California voters believe global warming is a threat and measures need to be taken to stop it, but the level of concern has dropped significantly over the past six years, according to a Field Poll released Monday.

The poll found that 64 percent of Californians believe global warming is happening and something should be done to fight it, with more than half of the respondents, 37 percent, deeming it a serious problem worthy of immediate action.

The survey of 834 registered voters shows that Californians are still very much concerned about global warming, particularly after a series of unusual weather events over the past year, including flooding, Superstorm Sandy and record-level heat and drought across the middle of the country.

Skepticism is, nevertheless, higher than in the past. The percentage of climate-change believers is well below the 76 percent of people who felt the threat was worthy of action in 2007, according to the Field Poll.

Still, 70 percent of voters support California's landmark climate-change law, AB32, which implemented the first full-fledged cap-and-trade program and requires a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by at least 17 percent over the next decade. The 2007 poll found that 79 percent of voters supported the law.

Mark DiCamillo, the director of the Field Poll, said concerns about climate change were higher in 2007 because former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger had just signed into law AB32, also known as the California Global Warming Solutions Act, amid great fanfare.

"There was this burst of enthusiasm about what the governor was doing," DiCamillo said. "This became his signature issue."

Concerns about climate change waned as the California economy tanked, hitting a low point in 2010 when polls showed a 20-point drop in support for AB32, he said. This was also around the time a well-funded national campaign to infuse doubt into climate science hit its stride.

The commonplace attacks on climate scientists, supported mostly by oil interests, have been widely debunked. Meanwhile, sea levels are rising and Arctic ice is melting.

The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said sea levels have risen 6 inches over the past century and could rise more than 2 feet over the next 100 years if nothing is done to curb fossil-fuel emissions. Arctic sea ice shrank last summer to the smallest size it has ever been, covering less than half the area it did 30 years ago when satellites and submarines began measurements.

"An issue like global warming is kind of beholden to events, and this year we've had a lot of unusual weather events," DiCamillo said. "A lot of people are attributing these changes to global warming and that's probably why we've seen an increase in support."

The desire for action against climate change is highest in the Bay Area, with 77 percent of those surveyed there supporting measures to combat the problem, according to the poll. The Central Valley, with 51 percent supporting action, has the lowest percentage of support in California.

At least seven out of 10 Democrats, independents, voters under age 40, Asian Americans and college graduates support efforts to reduce carbon emissions. The least-supportive are Republicans, voters with only a high school education and folks living outside of the urban areas of Los Angeles and the Bay Area, according to the poll.

Voters of all stripes disapprove of the job the federal and state governments are doing on climate-change issues. Federal officials get the worst marks, with 62 percent disapproving of their efforts to deal with global warming. A plurality of 49 percent disapprove of the California government's efforts, with only 37 percent supporting.

Republicans are especially underwhelmed, with less than 20 percent approving of the job either the state or federal government is doing.

The Field Poll was conducted by telephone between Feb. 5 and 13. It has a sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Global-warming-worries-Californians-4305269.php#ixzz2LupLtjgK

SOURCE:http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Global-warming-worries-Californians-4305269.php

Letter: Global warming a moral issue

The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 made it a federal crime for any citizen to aid an escaping slave. Wisconsin's court was the only one in the Union to rule against the law. Most citizens of the United States either accepted slavery or enthusiastically supported it, right up to the Civil War.

We always have 20-20 hindsight where morality is concerned. We'd all like to believe that we would have been in the trenches with the abolitionists, back in 1850. But in our own time, there are moral issues of greater significance than anything humans have ever faced before. Where do we stand now?

If, as a utilitarian humanist, I define moral action as that which results in the greatest good for the greatest number, there can be nothing more immoral than the destruction of our biosphere. No more suffering will have ever occurred on this planet, than that which will occur as a result of the ruination of our atmosphere, soils, climate and oceans. This ruination is well under way.

There are global warming deniers by the millions, just as there were millions that denied the evils of slavery. But, today, most people neither accept nor deny; they just stay in their comfort zone.

Given the gravity of our environmental crisis, it's not possible to write too many letters or have too many conversations on the subject. We have barely begun to question the morality of the self-serving consumption that gives us pleasure today — and will cause untold suffering tomorrow.

— Patrick

source: http://www.chicoer.com/opinion/ci_22510221/letter-global-warming-moral-issue