Click here to get your FREE $50 Bankroll

Join The Fight To Stop Global Warming !!!'s Fan Box

Facebook značka

Showing posts with label Renewable energy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Renewable energy. Show all posts

Sunday, January 6, 2008

Letter from all gore

Dear Mateo,

I wanted to share with you my speech from the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo. Check AlGore.com for video of the event later today.

Thank you,

Al Gore

SPEECH BY AL GORE ON THE ACCEPTANCE
OF THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE
DECEMBER 10, 2007
OSLO, NORWAY

Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, Honorable members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen.

I have a purpose here today. It is a purpose I have tried to serve for many years. I have prayed that God would show me a way to accomplish it.

Sometimes, without warning, the future knocks on our door with a precious and painful vision of what might be. One hundred and nineteen years ago, a wealthy inventor read his own obituary, mistakenly published years before his death. Wrongly believing the inventor had just died, a newspaper printed a harsh judgment of his life’s work, unfairly labeling him “The Merchant of Death” because of his invention – dynamite. Shaken by this condemnation, the inventor made a fateful choice to serve the cause of peace.

Seven years later, Alfred Nobel created this prize and the others that bear his name.

Seven years ago tomorrow, I read my own political obituary in a judgment that seemed to me harsh and mistaken – if not premature. But that unwelcome verdict also brought a precious if painful gift: an opportunity to search for fresh new ways to serve my purpose.

Unexpectedly, that quest has brought me here. Even though I fear my words cannot match this moment, I pray what I am feeling in my heart will be communicated clearly enough that those who hear me will say, “We must act.”

The distinguished scientists with whom it is the greatest honor of my life to share this award have laid before us a choice between two different futures – a choice that to my ears echoes the words of an ancient prophet: “Life or death, blessings or curses. Therefore, choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.”We, the human species, are confronting a planetary emergency – a threat to the survival of our civilization that is gathering ominous and destructive potential even as we gather here. But there is hopeful news as well: we have the ability to solve this crisis and avoid the worst – though not all – of its consequences, if we act boldly, decisively and quickly.

However, despite a growing number of honorable exceptions, too many of the world’s leaders are still best described in the words Winston Churchill applied to those who ignored Adolf Hitler’s threat: “They go on in strange paradox, decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all powerful to be impotent.”

So today, we dumped another 70 million tons of global-warming pollution into the thin shell of atmosphere surrounding our planet, as if it were an open sewer. And tomorrow, we will dump a slightly larger amount, with the cumulative concentrations now trapping more and more heat from the sun.

As a result, the earth has a fever. And the fever is rising. The experts have told us it is not a passing affliction that will heal by itself. We asked for a second opinion. And a third. And a fourth. And the consistent conclusion, restated with increasing alarm, is that something basic is wrong.

We are what is wrong, and we must make it right.

Last September 21, as the Northern Hemisphere tilted away from the sun, scientists reported with unprecedented distress that the North Polar ice cap is “falling off a cliff.” One study estimated that it could be completely gone during summer in less than 22 years. Another new study, to be presented by U.S. Navy researchers later this week, warns it could happen in as little as 7 years.

Seven years from now.

In the last few months, it has been harder and harder to misinterpret the signs that our world is spinning out of kilter. Major cities in North and South America, Asia and Australia are nearly out of water due to massive droughts and melting glaciers. Desperate farmers are losing their livelihoods. Peoples in the frozen Arctic and on low-lying Pacific islands are planning evacuations of places they have long called home. Unprecedented wildfires have forced a half million people from their homes in one country and caused a national emergency that almost brought down the government in another. Climate refugees have migrated into areas already inhabited by people with different cultures, religions, and traditions, increasing the potential for conflict. Stronger storms in the Pacific and Atlantic have threatened whole cities. Millions have been displaced by massive flooding in South Asia, Mexico, and 18 countries in Africa. As temperature extremes have increased, tens of thousands have lost their lives. We are recklessly burning and clearing our forests and driving more and more species into extinction. The very web of life on which we depend is being ripped and frayed.

We never intended to cause all this destruction, just as Alfred Nobel never intended that dynamite be used for waging war. He had hoped his invention would promote human progress. We shared that same worthy goal when we began burning massive quantities of coal, then oil and methane.

Even in Nobel’s time, there were a few warnings of the likely consequences. One of the very first winners of the Prize in chemistry worried that, “We are evaporating our coal mines into the air.” After performing 10,000 equations by hand, Svante Arrhenius calculated that the earth’s average temperature would increase by many degrees if we doubled the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Seventy years later, my teacher, Roger Revelle, and his colleague, Dave Keeling, began to precisely document the increasing CO2 levels day by day.

But unlike most other forms of pollution, CO2 is invisible, tasteless, and odorless -- which has helped keep the truth about what it is doing to our climate out of sight and out of mind. Moreover, the catastrophe now threatening us is unprecedented – and we often confuse the unprecedented with the improbable.

We also find it hard to imagine making the massive changes that are now necessary to solve the crisis. And when large truths are genuinely inconvenient, whole societies can, at least for a time, ignore them. Yet as George Orwell reminds us: “Sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield.”

In the years since this prize was first awarded, the entire relationship between humankind and the earth has been radically transformed. And still, we have remained largely oblivious to the impact of our cumulative actions.

Indeed, without realizing it, we have begun to wage war on the earth itself. Now, we and the earth's climate are locked in a relationship familiar to war planners: "Mutually assured destruction."

More than two decades ago, scientists calculated that nuclear war could throw so much debris and smoke into the air that it would block life-giving sunlight from our atmosphere, causing a "nuclear winter." Their eloquent warnings here in Oslo helped galvanize the world’s resolve to halt the nuclear arms race.

Now science is warning us that if we do not quickly reduce the global warming pollution that is trapping so much of the heat our planet normally radiates back out of the atmosphere, we are in danger of creating a permanent “carbon summer.”

As the American poet Robert Frost wrote, “Some say the world will end in fire; some say in ice.” Either, he notes, “would suffice.”

But neither need be our fate. It is time to make peace with the planet.

We must quickly mobilize our civilization with the urgency and resolve that has previously been seen only when nations mobilized for war. These prior struggles for survival were won when leaders found words at the 11th hour that released a mighty surge of courage, hope and readiness to sacrifice for a protracted and mortal challenge.

These were not comforting and misleading assurances that the threat was not real or imminent; that it would affect others but not ourselves; that ordinary life might be lived even in the presence of extraordinary threat; that Providence could be trusted to do for us what we would not do for ourselves.

No, these were calls to come to the defense of the common future. They were calls upon the courage, generosity and strength of entire peoples, citizens of every class and condition who were ready to stand against the threat once asked to do so. Our enemies in those times calculated that free people would not rise to the challenge; they were, of course, catastrophically wrong.

Now comes the threat of climate crisis – a threat that is real, rising, imminent, and universal. Once again, it is the 11th hour. The penalties for ignoring this challenge are immense and growing, and at some near point would be unsustainable and unrecoverable. For now we still have the power to choose our fate, and the remaining question is only this: Have we the will to act vigorously and in time, or will we remain imprisoned by a dangerous illusion?

Mahatma Gandhi awakened the largest democracy on earth and forged a shared resolve with what he called “Satyagraha” – or “truth force.”

In every land, the truth – once known – has the power to set us free.

Truth also has the power to unite us and bridge the distance between “me” and “we,” creating the basis for common effort and shared responsibility.

There is an African proverb that says, “If you want to go quickly, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” We need to go far, quickly.

We must abandon the conceit that individual, isolated, private actions are the answer. They can and do help. But they will not take us far enough without collective action. At the same time, we must ensure that in mobilizing globally, we do not invite the establishment of ideological conformity and a new lock-step “ism.”

That means adopting principles, values, laws, and treaties that release creativity and initiative at every level of society in multifold responses originating concurrently and spontaneously.

This new consciousness requires expanding the possibilities inherent in all humanity. The innovators who will devise a new way to harness the sun’s energy for pennies or invent an engine that’s carbon negative may live in Lagos or Mumbai or Montevideo. We must ensure that entrepreneurs and inventors everywhere on the globe have the chance to change the world.

When we unite for a moral purpose that is manifestly good and true, the spiritual energy unleashed can transform us. The generation that defeated fascism throughout the world in the 1940s found, in rising to meet their awesome challenge, that they had gained the moral authority and long-term vision to launch the Marshall Plan, the United Nations, and a new level of global cooperation and foresight that unified Europe and facilitated the emergence of democracy and prosperity in Germany, Japan, Italy and much of the world. One of their visionary leaders said, “It is time we steered by the stars and not by the lights of every passing ship.”

In the last year of that war, you gave the Peace Prize to a man from my hometown of 2000 people, Carthage, Tennessee. Cordell Hull was described by Franklin Roosevelt as the “Father of the United Nations.” He was an inspiration and hero to my own father, who followed Hull in the Congress and the U.S. Senate and in his commitment to world peace and global cooperation.

My parents spoke often of Hull, always in tones of reverence and admiration. Eight weeks ago, when you announced this prize, the deepest emotion I felt was when I saw the headline in my hometown paper that simply noted I had won the same prize that Cordell Hull had won. In that moment, I knew what my father and mother would have felt were they alive.

Just as Hull’s generation found moral authority in rising to solve the world crisis caused by fascism, so too can we find our greatest opportunity in rising to solve the climate crisis. In the Kanji characters used in both Chinese and Japanese, “crisis” is written with two symbols, the first meaning “danger,” the second “opportunity.” By facing and removing the danger of the climate crisis, we have the opportunity to gain the moral authority and vision to vastly increase our own capacity to solve other crises that have been too long ignored.

We must understand the connections between the climate crisis and the afflictions of poverty, hunger, HIV-Aids and other pandemics. As these problems are linked, so too must be their solutions. We must begin by making the common rescue of the global environment the central organizing principle of the world community.

Fifteen years ago, I made that case at the “Earth Summit” in Rio de Janeiro. Ten years ago, I presented it in Kyoto. This week, I will urge the delegates in Bali to adopt a bold mandate for a treaty that establishes a universal global cap on emissions and uses the market in emissions trading to efficiently allocate resources to the most effective opportunities for speedy reductions.

This treaty should be ratified and brought into effect everywhere in the world by the beginning of 2010 – two years sooner than presently contemplated. The pace of our response must be accelerated to match the accelerating pace of the crisis itself.

Heads of state should meet early next year to review what was accomplished in Bali and take personal responsibility for addressing this crisis. It is not unreasonable to ask, given the gravity of our circumstances, that these heads of state meet every three months until the treaty is completed.

We also need a moratorium on the construction of any new generating facility that burns coal without the capacity to safely trap and store carbon dioxide.

And most important of all, we need to put a price on carbon -- with a CO2 tax that is then rebated back to the people, progressively, according to the laws of each nation, in ways that shift the burden of taxation from employment to pollution. This is by far the most effective and simplest way to accelerate solutions to this crisis.

The world needs an alliance – especially of those nations that weigh heaviest in the scales where earth is in the balance. I salute Europe and Japan for the steps they’ve taken in recent years to meet the challenge, and the new government in Australia, which has made solving the climate crisis its first priority.

But the outcome will be decisively influenced by two nations that are now failing to do enough: the United States and China. While India is also growing fast in importance, it should be absolutely clear that it is the two largest CO2 emitters — most of all, my own country –– that will need to make the boldest moves, or stand accountable before history for their failure to act.

Both countries should stop using the other’s behavior as an excuse for stalemate and instead develop an agenda for mutual survival in a shared global environment.

These are the last few years of decision, but they can be the first years of a bright and hopeful future if we do what we must. No one should believe a solution will be found without effort, without cost, without change. Let us acknowledge that if we wish to redeem squandered time and speak again with moral authority, then these are the hard truths:

The way ahead is difficult. The outer boundary of what we currently believe is feasible is still far short of what we actually must do. Moreover, between here and there, across the unknown, falls the shadow.
online poker
That is just another way of saying that we have to expand the boundaries of what is possible. In the words of the Spanish poet, Antonio Machado, “Pathwalker, there is no path. You must make the path as you walk.”We are standing at the most fateful fork in that path. So I want to end as I began, with a vision of two futures – each a palpable possibility – and with a prayer that we will see with vivid clarity the necessity of choosing between those two futures, and the urgency of making the right choice now.

The great Norwegian playwright, Henrik Ibsen, wrote, “One of these days, the younger generation will come knocking at my door.”The future is knocking at our door right now. Make no mistake, the next generation will ask us one of two questions. Either they will ask: “What were you thinking; why didn’t you act?”

Or they will ask instead: “How did you find the moral courage to rise and successfully resolve a crisis that so many said was impossible to solve?”

So let us renew it, and say together: “We have a purpose. We have everything we need to get started, save perhaps political will, but political will is a renewable resource.We are many. For this purpose we will rise, and we will act.”

online poker

Friday, August 17, 2007

Global Warming Basics What it is, how it's caused, and what needs to be done to stop it.


  • What causes global warming?
  • Is the earth really getting hotter?
  • Are warmer temperatures causing bad things to happen?
  • Is global warming making hurricanes worse?
  • Is there really cause for serious concern?
  • Could global warming trigger a sudden catastrophe?
  • What country is the largest source of global warming pollution?
  • How can we cut global warming pollution?
  • Why aren't these technologies more commonplace now?
  • Do we need new laws requiring industry to cut emissions of global warming pollution?

  • Is it possible to cut power plant pollution and still have enough electricity?

  • How can we cut car pollution?
  • What can I do to help fight global warming?
  •  


    What causes global warming?


    Carbon dioxide and other air pollution that is collecting in the atmosphere like a thickening blanket, trapping the sun's heat and causing the planet to warm up. Coal-burning power plants are the largest U.S. source of carbon dioxide pollution -- they produce 2.5 billion tons every year. Automobiles, the second largest source, create nearly 1.5 billion tons of CO2 annually.


    online poker
    Here's the good news: technologies exist today to make cars that run cleaner and burn less gas, modernize power plants and generate electricity from nonpolluting sources, and cut our electricity use through energy efficiency. The challenge is to be sure these solutions are put to use.


    Is the earth really getting hotter?


    Yes. Although local temperatures fluctuate naturally, over the past 50 years the average global temperature has increased at the fastest rate in recorded history. And experts think the trend is accelerating: the 10 hottest years on record have all occurred since 1990. Scientists say that unless we curb global warming emissions, average U.S. temperatures could be 3 to 9 degrees higher by the end of the century.


    Are warmer temperatures causing bad things to happen?


    Global warming is already causing damage in many parts of the United States. In 2002, Colorado, Arizona and Oregon endured their worst wildfire seasons ever. The same year, drought created severe dust storms in Montana, Colorado and Kansas, and floods caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damage in Texas, Montana and North Dakota. Since the early 1950s, snow accumulation has declined 60 percent and winter seasons have shortened in some areas of the Cascade Range in Oregon and Washington.



    Of course, the impacts of global warming are not limited to the United States. In 2003, extreme heat waves caused more than 20,000 deaths in Europe and more than 1,500 deaths in India. And in what scientists regard as an alarming sign of events to come, the area of the Arctic's perennial polar ice cap is declining at the rate of 9 percent per decade.


    Is global warming making hurricanes worse?


    Global warming doesn't create hurricanes, but it does make them stronger and more dangerous. Because the ocean is getting warmer, tropical storms can pick up more energy and become more powerful. So global warming could turn, say, a category 3 storm into a much more dangerous category 4 storm. In fact, scientists have found that the destructive potential of hurricanes has greatly increased along with ocean temperature over the past 35 years.


    Is there really cause for serious concern?


    Yes. Global warming is a complex phenomenon, and its full-scale impacts are hard to predict far in advance. But each year scientists learn more about how global warming is affecting the planet, and many agree that certain consequences are likely to occur if current trends continue. Among these:




    • Melting glaciers, early snowmelt and severe droughts will cause more dramatic water shortages in the American West.



    • Rising sea levels will lead to coastal flooding on the Eastern seaboard, in Florida, and in other areas, such as the Gulf of Mexico.



    • Warmer sea surface temperatures will fuel more intense hurricanes in the southeastern Atlantic and Gulf coasts.


      online poker
    • Forests, farms and cities will face troublesome new pests and more mosquito-borne diseases.



    • Disruption of habitats such as coral reefs and alpine meadows could drive many plant and animal species to extinction.







    Could global warming trigger a sudden catastrophe?


    Recently, researchers -- and even the U.S. Defense Department -- have investigated the possibility of abrupt climate change, in which gradual global warming triggers a sudden shift in the earth's climate, causing parts of the world to dramatically heat up or cool down in the span of a few years.



    In February 2004, consultants to the Pentagon released a report laying out the possible impacts of abrupt climate change on national security. In a worst-case scenario, the study concluded, global warming could make large areas of the world uninhabitable and cause massive food and water shortages, sparking widespread migrations and war.



    While this prospect remains highly speculative, many of global warming's effects are already being observed -- and felt. And the idea that such extreme change is possible underscores the urgent need to start cutting global warming pollution.


    What country is the largest source of global warming pollution?


    The United States. Though Americans make up just 4 percent of the world's population, we produce 25 percent of the carbon dioxide pollution from fossil-fuel burning -- by far the largest share of any country. In fact, the United States emits more carbon dioxide than China, India and Japan, combined. Clearly America ought to take a leadership role in solving the problem. And as the world's top developer of new technologies, we are well positioned to do so -- we already have the know-how.


    How can we cut global warming pollution?


    It's simple: By reducing pollution from vehicles and power plants. Right away, we should put existing technologies for building cleaner cars and more modern electricity generators into widespread use. We can increase our reliance on renewable energy sources such as wind, sun and geothermal. And we can manufacture more efficient appliances and conserve energy.


    Why aren't these technologies more commonplace now?


    Because, while the technologies exist, the corporate and political will to put them into widespread use does not. Many companies in the automobile and energy industries put pressure on the White House and Congress to halt or delay new laws or regulations -- or even to stop enforcing existing rules -- that would drive such changes. From requiring catalytic converters to improving gas mileage, car companies have fought even the smallest measure to protect public health and the environment. If progress is to be made, the American people will have to demand it.


    Do we need new laws requiring industry to cut emissions of global warming pollution?


    Yes. The Bush administration has supported only voluntary reduction programs, but these have failed to stop the growth of emissions. Even leaders of major corporations, including companies such as DuPont, Alcoa and General Electric, agree that it's time for the federal government to create strong laws to cut global warming pollution. Public and political support for solutions has never been stronger. Congress is now considering fresh proposals to cap emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping pollutants from America's largest sources -- power plants, industrial facilities and transportation fuels.



    Stricter efficiency requirements for electric appliances will also help reduce pollution. One example is the 30 percent tighter standard now in place for home central air conditioners and heat pumps, a Clinton-era achievement that will prevent the emission of 51 million metric tons of carbon -- the equivalent of taking 34 million cars off the road for one year. The new rule survived a Bush administration effort to weaken it when, in January 2004, a federal court sided with an NRDC-led coalition and reversed the administration's rollback.


    Is it possible to cut power plant pollution and still have enough electricity?


    Yes. First, we must use more efficient appliances and equipment in our homes and offices to reduce our electricity needs. We can also phase out the decades-old, coal-burning power plants that generate most of our electricity and replace them with cleaner plants. And we can increase our use of renewable energy sources such as wind and sun. Some states are moving in this direction: California has required its largest utilities to get 20 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2017, and New York has pledged to compel power companies to provide 25 percent of the state's electricity from renewable sources by 2013.


    How can we cut car pollution?


    Cost-effective technologies to reduce global warming pollution from cars and light trucks of all sizes are available now. There is no reason to wait and hope that hydrogen fuel cell vehicles will solve the problem in the future. Hybrid gas-electric engines can cut global warming pollution by one-third or more today; hybrid sedans, SUVs and trucks from several automakers are already on the market.



    But automakers should be doing a lot more: They've used a legal loophole to make SUVs far less fuel efficient than they could be; the popularity of these vehicles has generated a 20 percent increase in transportation-related carbon dioxide pollution since the early 1990s. Closing this loophole and requiring SUVs, minivans and pick-up trucks to be as efficient as cars would cut 120 million tons of carbon dioxide pollution a year by 2010. If automakers used the technology they have right now to raise fuel economy standards for new cars and light trucks to a combined 40 m.p.g., carbon dioxide pollution would eventually drop by more than 650 million tons per year as these vehicles replaced older models.



    For more information on hybrid vehicles, see NRDC's hybrid guide.


    What can I do to help fight global warming?


    There are many simple steps you can take right now to cut global warming pollution. Make conserving energy a part of your daily routine. Each time you choose a compact fluorescent light bulb over an incandescent bulb, for example, you'll lower your energy bill and keep nearly 700 pounds of carbon dioxide out of the air over the bulb's lifetime. By opting for a refrigerator with the Energy Star label -- indicating it uses at least 15 percent less energy than the federal requirement -- over a less energy-efficient model, you can reduce carbon dioxide pollution by nearly a ton in total.

    Join NRDC in our campaign against global warming.
    online poker

     

    Arctic Climate Impact Assessment

    Global warming is happening now, bringing changes to our climate and our world. Yet the climate is changing at an accelerated pace in the Arctic region. In the past few decades, temperatures in the Arctic have risen at nearly twice the rate as in the rest of the world, disrupting the region and its people in many ways. A new overview report of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, Impacts of a Warming Arctic, explores these impacts in depth.

    The Arctic region has long fascinated humankind, sparking holiday myths, motivating explorers, and inspiring people to create clever solutions for living in extreme cold. Yet Arctic dwellers from Alaska to Siberia have noticed, within their lifetimes, significant changes in local climate. Scientists have now quantified these trends: climate change is already occurring in the Arctic, and happening at an accelerating pace. 

    online poker

    Arctic albedo feedback loopMounting evidence of climate change in the region motivated international organizations to call for a four-year study of Arctic climate known as the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA).  The Arctic Council, an intergovernmental forum with eight Arctic country members and six Indigenous Peoples organizations, and the International Arctic Science Committee (IASC) representing 18 national academies of science released its report Impacts of a Warming Arctic in November 2004.


    The report establishes evidence of rapid climate change in the Arctic over the last half century and projects much larger changes ahead. Global climate models use emissions scenarios based on the anticipated greenhouse gas emissions from factors such as economic growth and energy consumption to project future climate outcomes. The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment researchers selected the mid-range emissions scenario used by the 2001 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 



    Contents:

    •  Changes observed in the Arctic over the last century

    •  Projected changes in the Arctic over the next century

    •  Impact of Arctic warming on global sea-level rise




    Observed changes in the Arctic over the last century


    For a springtime diversion, one Arctic community wages bets on the exact timing of river ice breakup; the winners have picked on earlier dates in recent years. Today's icebreakers transit the Northwest Passage with relative ease compared to the 19th century explorers. The overwhelming volume of scientific data in the ACIA report presents unmistakable trends that amplify this anecdotal evidence.


    Changes in Arctic sea ice 19792003


    Temperature: Mean annual surface air temperature over the past 50 years has increased 3.6 to 5.4°F in Alaska and Siberia and decreased by 1.8°F over southern Greenland.



    Sea ice: Sea ice extent in late summer decreased 15 to 20% over the past 30 years (see above).


    Glaciers: Between 1961 and 1998, North American glaciers lost about 108 cubic miles of ice—about equivalent to spreading one foot of water over California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, and Colorado. 


    Vegetation: White spruce, the most valuable timber species of the North American boreal forest, experienced sharp declines as summer temperatures frequently exceeded the tree's critical threshold temperature.


    Marine Animals: Almost no seal pups, dependent on sea ice, survived in Canada's Gulf of St. Lawrence during the ice-free years of 1967, 1981, 2000, 2001, and 2002. 


    Fisheries: Warming in the Bering Sea after 1977 has increased the herring, Pacific cod, skates, and flatfish species, and Pacific salmon commercial catches have been high since 1980. 


    Indigenous Culture: Peary caribou populations on Canadian arctic islands plummeted from 26,000 in 1961 to 1000 by 1997, affecting people whose culture is intertwined with caribou.




    Projected changes in the Arctic over the next century


    Climate shifts detected in the Arctic serve as an early warning for global climate impacts. Listed below are a few of the projected changes based on a mid-range emissions scenario.


    Comparison of tundra greenhouse gas emissions to forest greenhouse gas absorption


    Temperature: Mean annual surface air temperature over the Arctic region (north of 60° latitude) is projected to increase 3.6°F by 2050 and 8°F by 2100. 


    Sea ice: Summer average sea ice extent is projected to dramatically decrease by at least 50% by 2100. 


    Glaciers: Surface air temperatures are projected to warm enough in this century to initiate long-term melting of the Greenland ice sheet.


    Vegetation: Forests will expand northward into the current tundra regions. Although forest growth increases carbon dioxide uptake, this beneficial effect will be overwhelmed by the release of large stores of methane and carbon dioxide as tundra regions thaw. The increased absorption of solar radiation by forests, compared to the more reflective tundra they will replace, will also lead to net warming. 

    online poker

    Marine Animals: Ringed seals are entirely dependent on sea-ice for their survival and will be the most vulnerable to reduced sea-ice projections. Polar bears are also dependent on sea ice and their preferred diet is almost exclusively Ringed seal. If there is almost complete loss of summer sea-ice polar bears may not survive as a species.


    Fisheries: Warming may improve fish stocks of cod and herring but threaten cold water stocks such as northern shrimp.


    Indigenous Culture: Caribou and reindeer depend on tundra vegetation, and will be affected as projected vegetation zones shift northward and the tundra area diminishes significantly. The shifts in terrestrial and in particular marine species dependent on sea ice threaten traditional food sources for indigenous people.


    Navigation: The Northern Sea Route navigation season is likely to increase from the current 20 to 30 days per year to almost 100 days per year by 2080. 


    Ozone: Arctic climate shifts are expected to delay recovery of the northern stratospheric ozone layer. 


    Arctic impact on global sea-level rise


    One of the ways a warming Arctic could directly impact the rest of the world is by raising global sea level. The place at which the sea surface intersects with the land depends on many factors such as tides, local atmospheric effects such as storm surges, sinking or uplifting of a land region, the temperature and salinity of ocean layers, and how much of the world's water supply is stored on land in lakes, groundwater, snow, and ice. 


    spacerPolar regions currently store vast amounts of water on land as frozen ice sheets and glaciers.  Fully 3.1 million cubic kilometers of ice is contained in the Arctic glaciers—roughly equivalent to 1.3 times the volume of seawater in the Gulf of Mexico. Scientists are working to better quantify, through measurements and models, the rate at which this ice will melt and be released to the ocean.  The ACIA report projects that combined land-based Arctic ice melt will contribute a little over an inch of sea level rise over the next 60 years and nearly 3 inches by 2100.


    The IPCC 2001 report, based on the full range of emissions scenarios, projected an overall global sea-level rise of between 4 inches and 3 feet by the end of this century. The bulk of this sea-level rise is based on the thermal expansion of the ocean from warming. In light of the new data presented in the ACIA report, scientists will be able to better project the Arctic contribution to expected global sea-level rise. Although a couple of inches may not sound like a significant increase in sea level, consider that low-lying coastal areas, such as parts of Louisiana or Bangladesh, are very vulnerable to every inch of sea-level rise.



    online poker
    Reference: ACIA, Impacts of a Warming Arctic, Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, 2004

    World's largest photovoltaic power plants

    Construction of a 40 MW solar generation power plant is underway in the Saxon region of Germany. The Waldpolenz Solar Park will consist of some 550,000 thin-film solar modules. The direct current produced in the modules will be converted into alternating current and fed completely into the power grid. Once completed in 2009, the project will be one of the largest photovoltaic projects ever constructed. Currently the biggest PV plant in the world has an output capacity of around 12 megawatts.



    online poker
    The CIS Tower, Manchester, England, was clad in PV panels at a cost of £5.5 million. It started feeding electricity to the national grid in November 2005.



    The CIS Tower, Manchester, England, was clad in PV panels at a cost of £5.5 million. It started feeding electricity to the national grid in November 2005.




    A large photovoltaic power project has been completed in Portugal, the Serpa solar power plant is at one of the Europe's sunniest areas. The 11 megawatt plant covers 150 acres and is comprised of 52,000 PV panels. The panels are raised 2 metres off the ground and the area will remain productive grazing land. The project will provide enough energy for 8,000 homes and will save an estimated 30,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions per year.


    A $420 million large-scale Solar power station in Victoria is to be the biggest and most efficient solar photovoltaic power station in the world. Australian company Solar Systems will demonstrate its unique, world leading design incorporating space technology in a 154MW solar power station connected to the national grid. The power station will have the capability to concentrate the sun by 500 times onto the solar cells for ultra high power output. The Victorian power station will generate clean electricity directly from the sun to meet the annual needs of over 45,000 homes with zero greenhouse gas emissions.

    online poker

    However, when it comes to renewable energy systems and PV, it is not just large systems that matter. Building-integrated photovoltaics or "onsite" PV systems have the advantage of being matched to end use energy needs in terms of scale. So the energy is supplied close to where it is needed.

    Wind power market grows

    Figures from the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) show that 2006 recorded an increase in installed wind power capacity of 15,197 megawatts (MW), taking the total installed capacity to 74,223 MW, up from 59,091 MW in 2005.[5] Despite constraints facing supply chains for wind turbines, the annual market for wind continued to increase at the rate of 32% following the 2005 record year, in which the market grew by 41%.[5] In terms of economic value, the wind energy sector has become one of the important players in the energy markets, with the total value of new generating equipment installed in 2006 reaching €18 billion, or US$23 billion.[5]

    The countries with the highest total installed capacity are Germany (20,621 MW), Spain (11,615 MW), the USA (11,603 MW), India (6,270 MW) and Denmark (3,136 MW).[5] In terms of new installed capacity in 2006, the USA lead with 2,454 MW, followed by Germany (2,233 MW), India (1,840 MW), Spain (1,587 MW), China (1,347 MW) and France (810 MW).[5]online poker

    In the UK, a licence to build the world's largest offshore windfarm, in the Thames estuary, has been granted. The London Array windfarm, 12 miles off Kent and Essex, should eventually consist of 341 turbines, occupying an area of 90 square miles. This is a £1.5 billion, 1,000 megawatt project, which will power one-third of London homes. The windfarm will produce an amount of energy that, if generated by conventional means, would result in 1.9 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions every year. It could also make up to 10% of the Government's 2010 renewables target

    ACT NOW - Renewable energy

    Renewable energy flows involve natural phenomena such as sunlight, wind, tides and geothermal heat. Renewable energy technologies range from solar power, wind power and hydroelectricity through to biomass and biofuels for transportation. About 13 percent of primary energy comes from renewables and the technical potential for their use is very large.



    online poker
    Renewable energy sources worldwide in 2005 (2004 for items marked * or **). Off-grid electric and ground source heat pumps not included. Source: REN21





    Renewable energy sources worldwide in 2005 (2004 for items marked * or **). Off-grid electric and ground source heat pumps not included. Source: REN21




    Renewable energy technologies are sometimes criticised for being unreliable or unsightly, yet the market is growing for many forms of renewable energy. Wind power has a worldwide installed capacity of 74,223 MW and is widely used in several European countries and the USA.] The manufacturing output of the photovoltaics industry has now reached more than 2,000 MW per year, and PV power plants are particularly popular in Germany.resolving production of ethanol fuel from sugar cane, and ethanol now provides 18 percent of the country's automotive fuel. Ethanol fuel is also widely available in the USA.


    While there are many large-scale renewable energy projects, renewable technologies are also suited to small off-grid applications, sometimes in rural and remote areas, where energy is often crucial in human development. Kenya has the world's highest household solar ownership rate with roughly 30,000 small (20-100 watt) solar power systems sold per year.


    Climate change concerns coupled with high oil prices and increasing government support are driving increasing renewable energy commercialization. Investment capital flowing into renewable energy climbed from $80 billion in 2005 to a record $100 billion in 2006. Some very large corporations such as BP, GE, Sharp, and Shell are investing in the renewable energy sector



    A laundromat in California with flat-plate solar water heating collectors on its roof.





    A laundromat in California with flat-plate solar water heating collectors on its roof.

    ...

    Global warming is happening now!!!

    Avoid dangerous climate change!

    POKER STRATEGY - SIGN UP - NO GAMBLING - PURE STRATEGY

    online poker