Environmental News, Articles & Information | Global Warming News | EcoWorld

This evening Former Vice President and Nobel Laureate Al Gore delivered a keynote speech on the subject of innovation at the Fairmont San Jose. The occasion was the annual meeting of the $28 billion CPA firm Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu where about 300 of the most senior partners gather together from all over the world for a few days. There were no cameras or recording devices permitted, but I had the privilege of attending along with a few other select clients and friends.

EcoWorld’s position on climate change has been consistent for several years, and it didn’t change tonight: (1) If humans are causing climate change, it is from a variety of factors – in general, the role of anthropogenic CO2 is being overemphasized and the role of tropical deforestation is being underemphasized, (2) Even if the rise in atmospheric CO2 is due to burning fossil fuel, by the IPCC’s own reasoning, it is impossible to lower it sufficiently to make any impact without completely shutting down industry on planet earth, meaning adaptation would be a more rational investment, (3) CO2 is not pollution, and the emphasis on reducing CO2 is undermining our efforts to reduce other air pollution, and address environmental challenges in general, (4) the political changes that are being proposed and enacted in the name of reducing CO2 emissions are causing increasing harm to our rights and freedoms, and (5) demonizing people who sincerely doubt the “consensus” is absolutely wrong.

So watching this incredibly powerful man, who has become larger than life, stride the stage not more than 20 feet in front of me was something that aroused mixed feelings, to say the least. He spent several minutes cracking jokes, funny jokes at that, with an endearing southern twang that matched his dark black cowboy boots. There sure have been a lot of southerners in high office in recent years in the USA. And it was hard not to like this one.

When Gore got down to business, he said things I was in complete agreement with, such as “we have a series of problems relating to short term thinking,” and things I found refreshingly optimistic, such as “I believe the recession will be shorter than everybody thought.” But when he started to discuss climate change, he said some things that simply must be challenged.

After leading into the topic with the statement “there’s an illusion still out there that the climate crisis may not be real, and if you want to be one step ahead, believe me, it’s real,” he used as his first example “a tale of two planets, Earth and Venus,” which are the “same size, same amount of carbon, but on earth most of the natural processes have put carbon into the earth as fossil fuel.” He then pointed out the average temperature on Earth is 59 degrees (fahrenheit), and the average temperature on Venus is 875 degrees. But he didn’t point out that Venus is 67 million miles from the sun, and earth is 93 million miles from the sun – that plus undoubtedly many other significant differences in the composition of Earth and Venus would account for the difference in temperature. So Gore was not off to a good start.

There isn’t space here to recount all the points Gore made in a generous speech that lasted, including questions, over an hour. But he referenced the IPCC reports as being 99% certain there was human induced climate change – without specifying exactly what they meant by that. To be fair, Gore didn’t have time to go into all these details either. But he didn’t point out that the IPCC reports are written and reviewed by the same people – something that is never supposed to be done in a scientific paper. Peer review of compilations like this are always supposed to be by a separate panel of experts.

Gore then discussed sea ice in the arctic, explaining that on the northern equinox each year the extent of the northern ice cap is measured by scientists, and noting that last September the ice was 40% smaller than it has been historically. “What does it take to get our attention,” he noted, continuing “our kids are going to wonder why you watched this happen and didn’t do anything,” and “it can come back, but only when we quit turning up the thermostat,” and “if we let the heat build up in the Arctic Ocean it [the ice cap] won’t come back, and we will live on a different planet.” Well let’s see what happens this year. Gore did not mention that two recent studies acknowledge the northern hemisphere is about to embark on a cooling period, as the interdecadal oscillations of ocean currents begin to return cool water to the arctic. What Gore and his followers won’t yet consider is that these changes are the result of natural fluctuations.

Gore then noted “there are ten to fifteen other major events,” mentioning a few of them; sea level rise (negligible), storms and floods (tragic, but not more numerous or severe, and only more destructive because we’ve got far more people living in marginal areas on earth today), drought (true, but much of that is being caused by deforestation), extinctions (most of these are from other causes), and deforestation (which we are doing on our own with no help from rising CO2). But as we have noted in previous posts and features, the earth, overall, has had stable temperatures for ten years, and it isn’t clear where all these supposed exajoules of solar heat, allegedly captured by excessive concentrations of atmospheric CO2, are being sequestered, waiting for their moment. In the deep ocean? That’s not what our latest temperature buoys are saying. So where?

Case closed, Gore than leapt to rhetorically asking “why are we seeing these changes.” And here is where Gore’s message becomes something it is far easier to agree with. Because believe it or not, even if you think CO2 induced climate change alarm is overstated, you can still be an environmentalist. Gore noted that along with fossil fuel burning, we are seeing these changes because of a rising population, greater per capita income, and an abundance of short term thinking. And if you take away the fossil fuel burning, and substitute “environmental challenges” for “climate change,” Gore is absolutely right. What ever happened to that iconic image of the ships in the desert, Mr. Gore, published in your book Earth in the Balance? Why can’t we refill the Aral Sea?

On the topic of population growth, Gore reminded the audience that global population will stabilize due to four factors, (1) empowering women, (2) educating girls, (3) making sure people have culturally acceptable access to family planning, and (4) increasing the survivability of children. This is an excellent point, and Gore might have gone on to predict the inevitable population decline that will begin as soon as the peak is reached sometime around 2040. The cultural and economic challenges an aging, declining world population will pose are also things we should be confronting now, as we think ahead.

Along with climate change Gore dealt with the other reason to wean ourselves of fossil fuel, “shifting away from a dirty, expensive [fossil] fuel from dangerous, politically fragile regions,” and not having to compete with the rising nations of China and India for fossil fuel supplies. These are true enough, and the reason many Americans and other westerners embrace climate change even if they aren’t convinced – and I have spoken with countless highly educated and informed people who have stated off the record they are still completely skeptical of the role of CO2 in causing climate change. But so what, if we transition to something new; solar, wind, greater efficiencies, geothermal, “good” biofuel?

Gore is on to something here, as he describes high voltage direct current lines that can be put underground and are far more efficient in transmission, or solar thermal fields so efficient that “a 100×100 square mile area (10,000 square miles) could power 100% of the energy requirements of the entire USA” (we’ve run the numbers and that is theoretically true). Gore has done a lot to stimulate innovation in technologies that will deliver energy independence, and cleaner energy. But there have been tragic missteps as well, such as subsidizing biofuel from tropical rainforests, something that has not only needlessly destroyed tropical rainforests – causing regional droughts and warming, along with heartbreaking losses of wildlife habitat – but has now created an overreaction against all biofuel.

There is nothing wrong with, as Gore puts it “figuring out how to get one step ahead to create a better world.” One of Deloitte’s partners, an urbane gentleman from France, discussed Gore’s remarks with me, saying “we have to exaggerate the problem to solve the problem.” This is a wise sentiment. The problem is letting this crisis mongering cause us to move so fast that we enact political changes and embrace technological solutions that ultimately turn out to be too draconian and too dated, respectively, when high energy prices might have stimulated all the innovation we would ever need, in good time.

Nobody can say with certainty that Al Gore is right or wrong about climate change. But the political changes afoot in the name of fighting climate change are not trivial, they are epochal, and therefore simply arguing we should invoke the precautionary principle is not something that should be stated unequivocably, or so selectively. The debate is not over, the debate has scarcely begun, and that perhaps is my biggest disagreement with Al Gore. His world changing message has awakened a generation to the values of environmentalism, which is wonderful, but now that generation might consider the nuances of the mission and the message. There are myriad environmental challenges, and they cannot possibly be viewed or mitigated in their totality purely through the lens of climate change alarm. If you doubt this, just ask the Orangutans of Borneo.

Africa, vast and varied, is on the verge of extraordinary development.

Sticks note the locations of sunken wells in a dried-up pond in Filtu Woreda, Southern Ethiopia. (Photo: US Aid)

In January 2008 China’s CGC Overseas Construction Company was to start work on a project to increase water production and distribution in Cameroon’s economic capital, Douala.

The company signed the deal for the project last December. It involves construction of pipe networks, wells and a potable water treatment plant and aims to boost Douala’s water production capacity from 115,000 to 260,000 cubic meters in a year.

The Cameroon project of CGC is just the latest in a series of water projects that companies from China are carrying out in African countries. While some of the companies are engaged in providing clean drinking water in African cities and villages, several others are assisting in building dams and water supply and distribution networks across resource-rich Africa. Though Africa as a whole has plenty of water, a number of cities in various countries across the continent lack direct access to potable water for their populations. The continent’s topography, too, poses a serious challenge in getting water to thousands of villages and communities.

Water is being treated by several countries as a vital commodity for not only ensuring proper sanitation but also for a whole range of socio-economic activities.

The Chinese were not, of course, the first to spot an opportunity here. Many companies from the developed world as well as local firms have established a presence in the water sector. But with the coming of the Chinese, they seem to be losing ground.

Chinese companies may not bring the latest technologies, but they offer a critical cost and labor advantage. They also seem not to be bothered by the rather small sizes of some of the water-related projects in Africa. Political support from Beijing has also played an important role in softening the entry of Chinese companies in Africa.

Western organizations and companies often come in with investments and expertise tied to development and human rights stipulations. Chinese firms are building dams and water treatment plants across Africa, guided more by revenue and diplomatic influence than environmental or human rights concerns.

ACCESS TO CLEAN WATER PERCENT OF POPULATION 2004

Source: UNDP Development Report 2006

The Columbia University economist Jeffery Sachs, in a conference in Beijing in late 2006, may have summed it up best: “China gives fewer lectures and more practical help and thus offers Africa something new, a straightforward business relationship between equals based on mutual interest and non-interference in the internal affairs of its allies.”

As a result, many African governments prefer to work with Chinese companies, who maintain a hands-off approach in the countries where they operate. There are also reports of Chinese firms offering ultra-small, cheap “micro-hydro” dams, which appeal to water-rich but power-short African nations. The Chinese have technical mastery over these micro-dams, which can generate tiny amounts of electricity from mere trickles of water. Hundreds of such systems are operating in China.

Besides undertaking water projects, Chinese companies are also building railways, telecommunication systems, highways and port facilities. The influence of the Chinese is growing by the day in Africa. According to reports, China has become Africa’s second largest aid donor and trading partner, behind the United States. At the moment, there could be as many as 700 Chinese companies active across the continent.

Among the firms well entrenched in Africa is China International Water and Electric Corporation, a state-owned enterprise under the direct jurisdiction of the central government. The company, which has a presence in several African countries, has undertaken projects in Cameroon, Algeria, Tunisia, Sudan and Ghana, where it carried out the rehabilitation of water supply systems in the Volta region.

It has been working in Sudan since 1998, building pumping stations. China Jiangxi Corporation for International Economic & Technical Cooperation, which began working in Zambia in 2004, has sunk over 1,500 wells there.

China Geo-Engineering Company, has been working on the Kabwe water and sanitation project in Zambia, even in the wake of delays by the local government in disbursing its portion of the project funding. The government recently moved to pay some of the outstanding amount it owes to the company in counterpart funding for the project, which runs up to 2010.

China Geo Engineering in late 2005 won a tender to build the water supply network in Mozambique’s southern cities of Xai-Xai and Chokwe. Ten companies or consortia had bid for the conract. Similarly, China Henan International won a tender to supply water in two other Mozambican cities, Inhambane and Maxixe, beating out eight companies. Several Chinese companies working in Africa are importing material, equipment and accessories from back home, helping other firms in China to extend their business. But the growing might of the Chinese firms is causing resentment among its local competition.

In some countries, local industry players have been expressing concern over the ways Chinese firms are dislodging them as preferred contractors, especially for social projects including water systems. They accuse the Chinese firms of resorting to price undercutting to win contracts. But ultimately, China is building infrastructure that is helping to transform Africa.

The mighty Ubangi River, northern tributary of the Congo. Just a trickle north from this huge river could refill Lake Chad. (Photo: Pete Chirico, USGS, Wikipedia Commons)

Additional EcoWorld reports on China:

• China’s Corn Ethanol
• China’s Coal
• Cleaning Up China
• China’s Energy Demand
• China’s Renewable Energy
• Wind Power in China
• China’s Energy Outlook
• Fuel Cell Development in China
• China, Canals & Coal

In Madagascar lives a creature that looks so bizarre it is no wonder that the local Malagasy and Sakalava people believe it to be a symbol of death. The menacing omen comes in the shape of an aye-aye: Its piercing orange eyes, bony fingers, large incisors and bat-like ears definitely give this nocturnal primate a unique appearance. Some tribesmen even go so far as to claim that the aye-aye will sneak into your home at night and use its slender middle finger to pierce your heart.

These beliefs couldn’t be further from the truth. The creature that the local villagers are so petrified to come across spends most of its time searching out grubs, nuts, nectar and fruits rather than people to condemn to death.

Unfortunately, superstitions associated with the aye-aye result in the animal being killed on sight. It doesn’t help that the aye-aye is almost tame when compared to other wild animals. Aye-ayes are known to walk right up to naturalists and into busy villages, raiding farms for coconuts, mangoes or lychees. This makes them an easy target for individuals who want to avoid the curse by killing the primate.

In Gerald Durrel’s short novel, “The Aye-Aye and I”, Durrel describes how an aye-aye fearlessly crawled onto his shoulder and proceeded to gently probe the inside his ear for a tasty bug. Finding nothing, the aye-aye simply clamored back up into the trees with what is described as a disappointing grunt.

The aye-aye displays a unique foraging behavior when searching for its preferred food: It will tap at trees with its finger and use echolocation to find any grubs hiding underneath the bark. Once found, the aye-aye will rasp away at the wood with its teeth and insert the specially adapted middle finger into the larvae’s burrow to pull it out.

Naturalists once claimed the species to be extinct in the wild. Thankfully this is not the case, but aye-ayes are still a threatened species. It is disappointing to find an animal killed simply because of a superstition. Ancient beliefs are still strong in various parts of the world and it can be a hindrance to attempts at preserving a species. It is a huge challenge working with cultures in third-world countries. Politics are always complicated, but it needs to be done.

With habitats shrinking, unlucky aye-ayes stumble into local villages more and more often and if found, don’t make it out. Hopefully, local people have begun to realize that no aye-aye has ever singled out a person to die.

Few would dispute the benefits unions have brought to society, especially through about the middle of the last century. But the inspirational work of leaders from Mary Harris Jones to Cesar Chavez is used to obscure the reality in the 21st century – that in most states in America, unions in the public sector now exercise nearly absolute control over elections, politicians, and policy, and this is happening at all levels; state, county and municipal.

Cesar Chavez A great and courageous American. (Photo: Wikipedia)

In California, the reality of union control over state politics became obvious during Governor Schwarzenegger’s 2005 “year of reform.”

After fruitless attempts to negotiate, Schwarzenegger supported four initiatives: (1) to extend to five years from two the time required before public school teachers gain tenure, (2) to eliminate gerrymandering by creating a non-partisan board to govern redistricting, (3) to increase the ability of the Governor to reduce expenditures to balance the budget, and (4) to give public employees the right to decide individually whether or not their union dues are used for political activity.

While these initiatives were seen as a partisan threat to Democrats, and were cast as an errant act by an out-of-control Governor, these initiatives should have been seen as a bipartisan necessity. These initiative reforms were the first steps in a process that, supposedly, voters had elected Schwarzenegger to implement. But they failed because public employee unions, using taxpayers money – if their dues are mandatory, and they usually are, then this is taxpayer’s money – spent hundreds of millions of dollars to demonize Schwarzenegger and defeat the initiatives.

Now California is in precisely the fiscal predicament those initiatives were intended to help prevent. And Governor Schwarzenegger – one of the only politicians to openly defy the public sector unions in recent history – has perhaps now become one of the “girlee men” he once mocked, refusing to state the problem plainly as he once did – public employee unions control California.

It is important to again emphasize that unions, per se, are not necessarily a bad thing. After all, in the globalized private sector, unions either are reasonable or they destroy entire industries. Much of America’s manufacturing sector has been destroyed because unions took too long to recognize the threat of global competition. Since then unions in the private sector have become more reasonable and realistic in their expectations. Now the most powerful unions operate almost exclusively in the public sector, where there is no competition, and revenues are guaranteed through taxes. For more on the principles that should underlie reform and regulation of public sector unions, read “Unions, Ideals vs. Reality.”

When unions no longer negotiate with the government, but are the government, elections become a travesty. The injustice and hypocrisy that attends this reality is so multi-faceted as to pretty much defy description. Every program, every cause, every campaign brought forth by government is suspect. Every candidate is a puppet. Every bureaucrat is a pawn. There is a shadow government that exercises the real power in California, and they don’t occupy the capitol building – but instead the various union headquarters across the country.

There are 3.7 million state, county and city employees in California, and nearly all of them pay union dues averaging about $1,000 per year. This means the unions have access to literally billions of dollars every year to pour into election campaigns. As a result, compliant politicians have granted concession after concession, so today public employees make 2-4x what private sector workers make (depending on whether or not you factor in the present value of their retirement benefits during the years they work), retire 10 years earlier than private sector workers, enjoy far more paid time off, and receive outrageously generous pensions and health care plans – while the rest of us have to either be rich to retire with financial security, or have to sell our homes via reverse mortgages and hope we die before the payments stop – with nothing to leave our heirs. This is the real “two Americas.”

For a long time unions weren’t able to exercise this level of control at the national level, but that is quickly changing. Just last week the U.S. Senate voted, with a veto-proof majority of 69 Senators, to send to the Senate floor a bill that will require every city or county government in the United States to engage in mandatory collective bargaining with national unions representing public safety workers. This bill already sailed through the House of Representatives with an overwhelming majority. That the unions have now mustered the power to intimidate 69 U.S. Senators into accepting this legislation is testimony to the fact they have consolidated their power at the state level, and is a harbinger of what is to come. One of the reasons we don’t hear much about this is because today Republicans are on the run, fragmented, lacking any mission, instead falling over themselves to be more Democratic than the Democrats. But Republicans provide balance, at least as long as they remember their principles, and America will not be better off as a one-party nation. Again, this is a bipartisan issue, or should be.

It isn’t our charter to editorialize continuously about politics – our charter is to report on clean technology and the status of species and ecosystems. Similarly, it isn’t our charter to report on global warming alarm, but because global warming alarm is being used opportunistically by virtually every powerful vested interest in the world to further their special agenda, and because the policies attendant to this alarm are going to undermine our property rights and economic opportunities more than anything else in American history, we have to spend time on that, too. And the connection between the rise of public employee unions and global warming alarm is quite interesting:

Rather than face inevitable financial insolvency due to pension and health care obligations too expensive to possibly be met, the public sector understands that global warming alarm will facilitate huge transfers of wealth into the public sector without officially enacting new taxes. Using California as an example, here’s how:

1. Public agencies can impose fees to mitigate for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, then redefine existing public sector jobs to address GHG challenges.
2. Public agencies intend to regularly auction GHG emission allowances to industry, using the billions in proceeds in ways yet unspecified.
3. Zoning laws will require more draconian “in-fill” than ever, creating ultra high density housing and ruining semi-rural neighborhoods everywhere, then the public agencies will calculate the alleged annual GHG emission tonnage savings vs. “business as usual” and sell these reductions as emissions credits to industry. AB 2596 sets the stage for this activity.
4. Public agencies will assess fines and launch lucrative civil suits against any industry that fails to sufficiently reduce their “carbon footprint.” For more on global warming read “Environmentalist Priorities.”

Everything coming out of Sacramento so far relating to global warming mitigation suggests that it is viewed as a huge windfall revenue opportunity by the public agencies. And so this will be, ironically enough, the real “endless war,” this futile attempt to reduce GHG emissions based on flawed logic. But it may very well bring enough revenue into the public sector to delay reforms for a generation.

Instead of fleecing the consumer and undermining the economy, here are some basic reforms that should apply to public sector unions and finance – and given sufficient public awareness, these reforms can be accomplished either via citizen’s initiatives or through bankruptcy court:

1. All future public employees will recieve social security and medicare, just like the rest of us. This will mean the same baseline retirement and health security formula will apply to all voters – if reform and upgrades to social security and medicare is ever to occur, this is how we’ll get it done. This will also prevent public employees from being slaves to their pensions – afraid to ever take a chance in the private sector.
2. Current public employees will participate in both their current benefits or the new system according to a formula based on their years in the workforce. If they are 90% completed with their working years, then they will get 90% of what they would have gotten through their old pension plan, along with 10% of what they would get if they had been social security participants their entire career. If they are only 10% completed with their working years, those proportions would be flipped, and so on.
3. Public employee unions will be forbidden from engaging in political activity, if not banned altogether. There are compelling reasons why government organizations should not allow their members to belong to a union – the job of the government is to look out for everyone, not just their own. The lack of competitive checks on government organizations, the guaranteed revenue, and the enormous power wielded by public bureaucrats creates too many conflicts of interest; an unbalanced field that cries for reform.

What if a wind turbine didn’t have a gearbox and electric generator in the nacelle, but instead a highly efficient air pump that sent compressed air down a pipe and into a storage network? That is the vision of General Compression, a privately held Massachussetts company that raised $8.1 million from 70 investors in April 2007.

When you consider the likelyhood of implementing utility scale electricity storage, the primary need would arise if wind power begins to take on a significant share of total electricity generating. When weather changes across an entire region that has huge wind generating capacity, it is possible several gigawatts of power can suddenly surge onto the grid. Currently this is handled quite effectively by grid management systems shutting down fossil fuel generating plants or deactivating hydroelectric turbines – so the need for massive storage solutions may be overstated. Denmark, for example, gets 30% of their electricity from wind turbines, but don’t have massive electricity storage systems. And as electric cars begin to proliferate in huge numbers, they will have smart systems that purchase electricity precisely when the wind is surging, when they can charge at a lower cost per kilowatt-hour.

Nonetheless, General Compression’s “Dispatchable Wind Power System” (DWPS) is a unique approach to buffering and storing wind energy. The conventional plan to use air storage for wind turbines is to have wind generators allocate surplus electricity to powering pumps to store air – the turbine itself is a generator. General Compression has an air pump in the wind turbine from the start, and any electricity that comes from their DWPS starts out as compressed air.

The complete scheme General Compression has come up with is rather elaborate. Each wind generator sends compressed air into a network of pipes, which then go to centralized pressure vessels, potentially augmented by using underground geologic features such as empty salt caverns or vacant hard rock mines. This compressed air is then used as grid demand requires to create mechanical or electrical energy.

According to General Compression’s website, they have “identified numerous locations around the world with outstanding wind resources but lacking local power demand and/or transmission capacity.” They believe with their DWPS system they can create not only wind power installations with the ability to store and deliver electric power onto the grid, but also create large scale off-grid industrial complexes.

The question probably comes back to cost and efficiency of the DWPS system compared to traditional wind generators. How much would all these pipes cost that transfer the pressurized air from the wind turbines to the centralized storage units and generating system? Is a General Compression’s decentralized pumping system and a centralized storage and generating system cheaper and more efficient than the conventional design consisting of decentralized generating systems and centralized pumping and storage? And will compressed air storage really be that necessary in the grid of the future?

Time will tell. General Compression expects to have operating prototypes by 2010, with commercial scale installations by 2012.

In the U.S., Memorial day is BBQ day, especially this year when gasoline prices make lots of folks prefer to stay home and have a cookout with friends instead of travelling somewhere. Get out that lighter fluid, squirt in on your mesquite charcoal briquettes, and fire up. Then grill those hamburgers, hot dogs, steaks, chicken, or whatever and enjoy. BUT WAIT! Grilling or frying any meats creates chemicals that when ingested in really, really high doses causes cancer in laboratory rats. What to do? I lived in Texas for a few years, a state in which proper BBQ (which includes slow smoking of meats in addition to grilling (both producing carcinogens) is a religion. Now I live in California, where many people actually worry about carcinogens in grilled meats.

This post was inspired by an article in my local newspaper, the Sacramento Bee, called “cue tips” http://www.sacbee.com/165/story/960506.html. The article gives advice about how to minimize exposure to these putative nasty chemicals when you grill. Unfortunately, if you follow their advice, the meat you cook will taste like cardboard! First they would have you use lean meats, trim off all fat, and flip the meat often. They would even have you microwave your steaks awhile before grilling. This is all supposed to reduce the amount of carcinogens formed. A dead Texan would be turning over in his grave reading the Bee article! You might as well cook the steak or burger in boiling water. They would even have you clean your grill with dish detergent!!!

The reason I must post this BBQ blasphemy is because these cautions are just another example of our national obsessive fear-mongering about anything that might be enjoyable. For more information, readers should read my essay from a few years back on Ecoworld entitled “Chemophobia” http://ecoworld.com/home/articles2.cfm?tid=366. Toward the end of the article I describe research I did on benzo-a-pyrene, a rat carcinogen formed during the frying of meats. Although the fear mongers will say otherwise, NOBODY will EVER get cancer simply from eating fried or grilled meats. I know of no epidemiology study that has compared cancer rates in people who eat lots of BBQ meats vs. those who perhaps eat their meat prepared otherwise (perhaps raw?). If anyone can show me one that purports to show that BBQers have an increased risk of some cancer, please send it to me for critique. For more about how “scientific” studies are abused, read “Studies Show” http://ecoworld.com/home/articles2.cfm?tid=458.

The green land and blue sea of planet earth. Big Sur, California

The Pacific, greatest of oceans. Will climate change arouse her to unprecedented fury?

Arctic summer sea ice registers the smallest aerial extent in history, Greenland and Antarctica ice is melting at accelerating rates, paleoclimate proxies indicate current warming is unprecedented for thousands of years, and your community will be under water by the end of the century. We are within a decade of the tipping point of irrecoverable warming.

These sample headlines in recent months can compel the unknowing to follow the leading alarmists’ cries for CO2 action. Even agnostics and some cynics resign themselves to heed these cries as an insurance policy just in case there is some chance of climate impact. We are bombarded every day with alarmist global warming headlines, giving credence to scientific consensus and draconian mitigation policies. Are these headlines distorting reality? Yes. And worse, they are often completely false.

Furthermore, the media fails completely to report the gathering research which contradicts anthropogenic (man-made) global warming hypotheses. The last year, in particular, has been a landmark year for research and observational data advancing the theory that natural forces, over anthropogenic forces, are far more responsible for the global warming we have experienced in the last thirty years. I will give examples of what has been overlooked. These recent studies begin to shed light on how tentative the science is behind man-made global warming theories.

Why do these studies go unreported and non-discussed? There are three reasons. One, environmentalists and some leading scientists are pushing global warming as a moral issue. The media are loath to be portrayed as apostates. Two, global warming mitigation policies give public policy makers and advocates means to expand their power base. Three, perhaps most importantly, the U.S. government’s global warming science grant budget is approximately $5 billion a year. Scientists and other vested colleagues are afraid of losing money. If their research does not support the pursuit of populist global warming studies, they can lose grants, tenure, publishing space and more.

I will give examples of recent compelling research that gives a completely different perspective on global warming. There is a healthy debate on man versus natural effects on climate, and there is no scientific consensus on global warming.

Amidst all the talk about the last couple decades being the warmest for thousands of years, little attention has been made to what global temperatures have been for the last several years. Since the big El Nino year of 1998, the average global temperature has not risen. An interesting example is to take this past January’s global temperature and note the difference between this temperature and the temperature from January of 2007. Next, note the temperature difference between December of 2007 and December of 2006. Repeat for each previous month. Once a year’s worth of temperature differences is noted, calculate the average difference. Comparing yearly average temperature differences, the data reveals that the earth has been cooling since 2001. 1998 has been the warmest year, the global temperature since 1998 has been relatively flat! I am the first to admit that looking at a decade’s set of data is not statistically significant enough. We probably need another seven or eight year’s worth of temperature data to be statistically significant. However, the trend is clearly not at an alarming or uncontrolled warming rate.

Will these rocks be submerged beneath rising seas?

It is possible that we are headed for a cooling, let alone worry about warming. The earth is embarking upon solar cycle 24.

We are experiencing the end of solar cycle 23. Solar cycles track the sun’s magnetic activity through sun spot activity. The intensity of the solar cycles correlates to the number of sun spots. Sun spots modulate the solar irradiance that that reaches the earth and each solar cycle is on average, eleven years duration. Solar cycles, which have been tracked since the mid eighteenth century, are typically strong and short, indicating more solar irradiance on the earth, or weak and long, indicating less solar irradiance on the earth. Solar cycles 21 and 22 (from the late 1970s to the late 1990s) had high numbers of sun spots and lasted less than eleven years. In conjunction, the earth experienced higher temperatures with these more intense solar cycles. Solar cycle 23, ending now, is at least thirteen years long. This, along with current very low sun spot activity (sometimes zero sun spots) harbingers a very long and weak solar cycle 24. Compelling research has been published within the last year correlating the earth’s temperature with the number solar cycle sun spots: the more sun spots the higher the temperature. The bottom line is that soon we will experience a real cooling!

Temperature measurements are even under scrutiny and reevaluation. No scientist is arguing that we have not been experiencing a warming, but there is emerging questioning on how much we have warmed, particularly in the last thirty years. Pat Michaels and Ross McKitrick last year came out with a paper critiquing the IPCC (the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) temperature data base it uses (from 1979 to 2002). One of the big debates in climate science (yes, there are many debates in global warming science and no universal consensus) is how much to ascribe socio-economic effects into temperature measuring algorithms. As an example, urbanization through streets, concrete, steel, etc. causes a profound temperature increase. This is the urban heat island effect. Socio-economic impacts are non natural impacts on temperature.

Land use change, fossil fuel consumption, irrigation, population growth are other examples of socio-economic impacts on temperature. A robust temperature measurement algorithm should have no data dependent on socio-economic variables. The current database the IPCC uses employs an questionable algorithm to cross correlate neighboring temperature grid cells and applies a mere 0.05 C bias for the urban heat island effect. Michaels and McKitrick employed a more robust socio-economic analysis to conclude that the IPCC database not only underestimates socio-economic impacts on global temperature, but inflates temperature measurements two times! Up to one half of today’s observed global warming may just be an artifact of the measuring methods. It is difficult to argue with their results because they compared their temperature measurement data and the IPCC measurement data with socio-economic variables. Michaels and McKitrick discovered that the IPCC data set has correlations with socio-economic trends while their data set has no dependence.

Last year, Craig Loehle published a paper which reassessed temperature paleoclimate proxy data sets going back 2000 years. One of the big debates in climate science is proof of the existence of significant temperature swings designating the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), 1000 years ago, and the Little Ice Age (LIA), 300 years ago. This debate is highly significant, particularly related to the existence of the MWP. If the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age did not occur, or only experienced minor temperature fluctuations, then, as the man made global warming protagonists contend, today’s temperature level is the warmest we have experienced for at least a couple thousand years. This supports the theory that the global temperature is inherently stable and today’s temperature level is unprecedented, on the precipice of a runaway condition (refer to the infamous hockey stick temperature graph).

If the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age did occur, then, as the skeptics contend, this would validate the theory that earth’s climate and temperature are naturally cyclical and variant, with the MWP having been a couple degrees Celsius warmer than it is now. The proxy data sets that show no MWP and LIA are highly dependent on tree ring data. Tree ring proxies are the most controversial of all temperature measurement data sets because of the requirement of significant subjective interpretation tree ring growth influences.

Loehle’s paper extracts robust temperature proxy data sets. Loehle takes 18 data sets selected to give a geographical distribution of the earth. Each of the data sets comes from data that was published in peer reviewed journals. Each of the data sets comes from disparate paleoclimate proxies, such as ice cores, boreholes, stalagmites, etc. And, most importantly, the data sets contain no tree ring proxies. Loehle tried to create an objective case as possible. His analysis, indeed, yields the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age temperature cycles. It seems the only way to eliminate the MWP and LIA is to include data dependent on tree ring proxies. Steven McIntyre of Climateaudit.com has done extensive research on temperature proxy data and shows how all graphs that eliminate the MWP and LIA have a core set of similarly interpreted tree ring proxy data. Loehle’s analysis further lends credence to the theory that global temperatures are naturally cyclical.

Steven Milloy of Junkscience.com describes the interesting example of the cyclical nature of our climate. From January to July, the earth warms by four degrees Celsius. This four degree rise is much greater than the 0.75 degrees Celsius rise the earth experienced during the 20th century. However, the earth does not reach a state of uncontrolled warming, it naturally cycles cooler from July to December with its natural feedback systems.

The debate is on!

In further reports I will provide examples of what the mass media is not reporting to you and how recent studies are discrediting anthropogenic global warming hypotheses.

Icebergs at Cape York, Greenland Will they all melt into a warm and angry ocean?

Additional EcoWorld features on Global Warming:

• The Debate Goes On, Marc Morano
• A Case Against Climate Alarmism, Dr. Richard Lindzen
• 35 Inconvenient Truths, Lord Christopher Monckton
• Interview with Roger Pielke, Sr., EcoWorld Exclusive
• Glacial Acceleration, Paul Brown
• Global Warming Priorities, Dr. Edward Wheeler
• Rebuttal to Inconvenient Truth, Marlo Lewis
• Inconvenient Skeptics, D. James Guzy
• Global Warming Facts, Dr. Richard Lindzen
• Is There a Basis for Global Warming Alarm?, Dr. Richard Lindzen
• Global Warming Alarm, Dr. Edward Wheeler

It’s always nice to know along with extremely high worker productivity and a very hard working people, America’s heavy industry is still able to deliver manufactured goods that compete and are sold on the global market. What better combination of brawn and brains than a modern green locomotive, and in Erie, Pennsylvania, that is exactly what is flying out of the factory and into the world.

General Electric has recently delivered their 1,000th production line “Evolution” series locomotive, an ultra-modern 4,500 horsepower unit that sets high standards for efficiency and emissions reductions. Overall the Evolution locomotive has 40% lower emissions compared to earlier locomotives.

GE’s “Evolution” Series Locomotive. (Photo: General Electric)

Not only did GE work with American regulators to make certain their new locomotive met new more stringent emissions requirements, but at the same time they were able to improve the efficiency of the engine by 3%, which saves 10,000+ gallons of diesel fuel per year for the average engine.

GE’s Evolution locomotive also has lower lifecycle costs than earlier locomotives because it has been engineered to require longer time intervals between running maintenance stops and major overhauls.

According to an online interview with Pete Lawson, one of the Product Line Managers for Evolution freight locomotive in North America, “not only can we address the significant environmental concerns with our product, but we can do that by delivering value to our customers.” There are customers all over the world for the GE Evolution locomotive, including those in China, Kazakhastan and Mexico – and elsewhere – who choose them at least partly because they have lower emissions even though emissions are not required to be that low in their countries.

Getting 4,500 HP from an engine that’s cleaner, uses 3% less fuel per HP, and relies on 12 cylinders instead of 16 may not be a breakthrough, but it’s the cleanest, greenest locomotive yet devised. Global rail requires moving a lot of heavy metal, and the more clean and efficient we can get it the better. That counts for something, in our biggest and cleanest century yet, in this combustion fueled renaissance of world civilization.

It’s not hard to understand why food on-the-go is so appealing. Pull a car full of hungry kids into the drive-through at your local burger joint and everyone leaves full and happy. In the mood for a coffee or egg sandwich on the way to work? It wouldn’t be a surprise with dozens of 50ft billboards advertising blended coffees or hot snacks. Plus, it’s quick and easy. Unfortunately, the plastic or Styrofoam containers last much longer than the sandwiches, drinks, burgers or fries that are devoured in a few minutes.

Non-biodegradable plastics will last indefinitely and plastic is everywhere:
According to the EPA “In 2006, the United States generated about 14 million tons of plastics in the municipal solid waste (MSW) stream as containers and packaging, over 6 million tons as nondurable goods [such as diapers and trash bags], and almost 9 million tons as durable goods [appliances].”

Recycling is definitely not eliminating plastics in the environment. The Epa continues to explain that “overall recovery of plastics for recycling is relatively small — 1.4 million tons, or 3.9 percent of plastics generation in 2003”

With this in mind, companies like the BiodegradableStore develop containers made from biodegradable materials. Corn Plastics (PLA) and Bagasse (sugarcane) make up containers that will decompose in 35- 60 days in proper composting conditions.

PLA products look and feel exactly like regular plastic, but since they are made from corn, these items are 100% compostable. The added benefit of corn products is that corn stalks are known to grow quickly and are a renewable resource.

Bagasse, is more heat tolerant than corn plastics (which deteriorate at temperatures above 115 degrees (F)) and is made from sugarcane stalk pulp. Bagasse is comparable to thick paper and is ideal for serving hot drinks. It is even microwaveable. Bagasse takes advantage of sugarcane stalks that are typically discarded during the sugar making process.

There are many incentives for food and beverage distributers to start handing out these products with meals. Consumers will be happier knowing that the countless cups, plates, napkins and even bags, will return to nature and this would be a positive thought to dwell on while the food has left everyone feeling uncomfortably full.

A company that is quietly competing to possibly become the biggest manufacturer of thin film photovoltaics on earth is Optisolar, headquartered in Hayward, California. Optisolar already has a manufacturing plant at their Hayward headquarters, and has just signed a lease to construct a 600,000 square foot manufacturing plant in Sacramento, California. (ref. Sacramento Housing & Redevelopment Agency Press Release of March 25, 2008, “Agency Welcomes Optisolar”) According to Optisolar’s EVP Phil Rettger, “we have signed a long term lease for the facility, and construction is going on now to support manufacturing lines later this year.”

Along with developing manufacturing lines, Optisolar is developing and plans to operate solar farms, taking the unusual step of being one company performing two very distinct functions. As solar farm developers, they have been active in Ontario, with over 200 megawatts of solar farms planned, and they have recently announced a 550 megawatt solar farm to be installed on the Carissa Plains in Central California. This gigantic solar farm will consume 9.5 square miles, and according to an Optisolar press release dated April 24, 2008, “Topaz Solar Farm on Carissa Plains,” construction is targeted to begin in 2010, after completing the local approval process.

These are big numbers. If Optisolar develops a 600,000 square foot manufacturing facility and already has a backlog of 750 megawatts – and they are already manufacturing at their facility in Hayward – they are on track to become the biggest manufacturer of thin film photovoltaics in the world. And not only are they one of the few – if not the only – vertically integrated photovoltaic manufacturers in the world, they are one of the few examples of a company doing utility scale photovoltaic farms anywhere.

We reported on Optisolar once already, back in March 2008 in our post “Utility Scale Photovoltaics.” And as reported there, the largest photovoltaic installation in the world to-date is the 12-megawatt Erlasee solar park in Germany. Optisolar’s Ontario projects break the mold, and their plans for California break the mold yet again. This company is really thinking big.

In a subsequent post we hope to report on how Optisolar intends to profitably develop utility scale photovoltaic in California, where the financial incentives, while attractive, cannot match the $.42 per kilowatt-hour feed in tarif in effect in Ontario. Obviously vertical integration helps lower costs, but another factor could be the better sunlight in California. In our last post, we calculated that Optisolar’s Ontario solar farms would deliver 28 megawatts per square mile (based on the initial agreement calling for 40 megawatts on 902 acres). At 550 megawatts on 9.5 square miles, production would come up to 58 megawatts per square mile. These are very rough numbers, of course. Put another way, if Optisolar’s panels delivered 5 watts per square foot in full sun, the maximum output would be 139 megawatts per square mile, implying (at 5 watts per square foot), their planned 9.5 square mile facility would have panels occupying about 41% of the space.

Also as noted in the previous post on Optisolar, there are advantages to thin film that don’t accrue to monocrystaline photovoltaic or solar thermal solutions. Unlike monocrystaline PV, thin film requires far less polysilicon, which ought to reduce manufacturing costs significantly. And while thin film PV is not as space efficient as moncrystaline, it does perform better in indirect light which helps make up the difference. And compared to solar thermal energy, the installation, operations and maintenance costs of thin film are relatively minor – no tracking devices, no plumbing, no pressure accumulator, no turbine, and no condenser. If you are going to build a utility scale solar farm, don’t write off thin film.