The Last Frost

The US Department of Energy has released a forcast for the World's increased CO₂ emissions by 2030. Admittedly they omitted a few things from the calculation including current and future regulations and obligations to reduce emissions. So basically this is just an imaginary number that gives us a glimpse of how bad things will get if we don't act.

So seriously, if we're emitting 75% more emissions in 24 years than we are today we're going to be in some pretty deep shit, in my humble opinion. Of course we really don't know for sure, but I guess we'll find out!

World CO2 Emissions To Rise 75% by 2030 »   [The Star Online]

A proposed ethanol plant in Illinois will require 200 million gallons of water per day to generate the 100 million gallon per year capacity. So some simple math, every day this plant will use double it's yearly ethanol production capacity in water. So the ratio of water to ethanol is 730:1. So it takes 730 gallons of water to produce one gallon of ethanol. Damn. Oh and this doesn't include the amount of water used in the growing of the raw material, usually corn.

Ethanol isn't looking so good these days with concerns over it's impact on biodiversity, questionable CO2 reductions, and it's huge consumption of water. According to this site, the facts about ethanol, the US has the capacity to make 4.5 billion gallons of ethanol a year, meaning it consumes 3.2 trillion gallons of water to do it. That's a lot of water.

Ethanol's water demands a concern » [Niagara Gazette]

Although not really about global warming, this article is about the Ozone scare that began in the 1980's. When people realized that CFC's were causing the damage, prompt human action was required. That action was taken and now the ozone layer which repairs itself naturally is making a nearly full recovery.

I've heard people equate the global warming argument with the ozone argument. The problem with this comparison is that we as a society are not taking prompt action to curb the effects of climate change. The ozone dilemna showed us what we can do when there's the will. Why are we all dragging out feet on this new climate crisis? 

Safe Zone » [Chron.com]

With increased attention towards the issues surrounding human induced climate change, the nuclear option has been steadily gaining support. The reason is that the nuclear plants themselves produce nothing but steam as a byproduct… oh except for that pesky nuclear waste. 

Nuclear waste remains toxic to living things for 250,000 years. Think about that… a quarter million years. How do you manage something that toxic for a quarter million years? Who knows… we still haven't found a solution. Sure we could store it in a geologically quiet mountain for that time period but who will guard that mountain for 250,000 years? How will we ensure it doesn't fall into the hands of terrorists in that quarter million year time period (now I'm just being silly)? The nuclear waste problem is a ridiculously good example of the limits of human ingenuity meeting pure human stupidity.

50 years ago scientists dove head first into the nuclear power trend figuring that we could store the stuff in tanks for 50 years until we figured out a permanent solution to the problem. "Surely in 50 years we will have figured it out" they thought.  Well we still haven't figured it out. We now are stuck with leaking nuclear waste dumps all over our planet because of it, and it's a risk to us all.

Until we find a real solution for the nuclear waste issue we have no business making the waste problem bigger than it already is. Oh and the article barely mentions the waste as an issue, they attack the amount of greenhouse gases that are produced during the mining, refinining, and enrichment of the fuel that these so called clean power plants use. Read on, but know this… nuclear power sucks. 

Not green clean or cheap »   [True Local]

Bush did a good thing, he has declared the Northwestern Hawaiian islands a national monument. This will be the largest national monument in the world. Over 140,000 square miles, bigger than 46 of our 50 states. This is great news for the wildlife that calls this stretch of land home. 

Here comes the cynicism.

The only problems with Bush's declaration is that for one, it's clearly a publicity stunt to put some polish on his otherwise appalling environmental record. But we can overlook that, the end result is still good, the real problem is that Bush has trouble admiting global warming is a real problem. He just doesn't believe it's happening, or at least he isn't willing to admit it. The problem is that just a little over a week ago scientists have concluded that this same sancuary may be submerged by 2100 due to rising sea levels from global warming. 

So Mr. Bush, if you're so concerned about this swatch of land, why don't you address the concerns of global warming so that you can really protect it? Oh wait, they will be submerged after 2008, guess he doesn't need to worry about it then. 

A small increase in global temperatures could cause the Alaskan and Siberian permafrost to melt. In addition to the damage that this would do to buildings and roads in the area , it could release huge amounts of carbon dioxide and methane into our atmosphere. Scientists estimate that there are about 500 gigatons of carbon and methane stored in the permafrost. 90% of which could be released due to the currently projected increase in global temperatures due to global warming.

So we increase greenhouse gas levels slightly by burning fossil fuels which causes a modest increase in global temperatures, thus melting the permafrost layer. The melting releases HUGE amounts of greenhouse gases into our atmosphere which further boosts the greenhouse effect. On and on and on it goes where it stops… nobody knows. That's a feedback loop, let's keep our fingers crossed for that powerful negative feedback loop hiding somewhere in nature.

Global warming could release permafrost carbon »   [LiveScience]

Global warming is effecting animals in some interesting ways. One animal now hibernates about 5 1/2 weeks less than it did two decades ago. Some animals are loosing weight as well as they struggle to adapt to changing climates. 

Just look at the baby Aye Aye in the photo here. The Aye Aye was not one of the animals mentioned in the article, but look at the thing; it looks like it hasn't slept in weeks!

Animal's lose sleep over the environment » [ANSA.it]

Ah, electrolysis… the wonderful process of splitting water into Hydrogen and Oxygen. Now if only it didn't take so much damn energy to do it, we would be that much closer to my dream of a hydrogen based economy.

GE may have figured out how to electrolyse water on the cheap creating hydrogen at a comparable cost to gasoline. They have a working prototype of the machine but hope to lower the costs of the machine and bring it to market as soon as a few years.

Hydrogen on the cheap » [Popular Mechanics]

This article has shown us the need for an 'obvious' category.

Stephen Hawking has said that humans must leave Earth if we are to have any hope of survival. The interesting thing is what he mentions in his list of what might do us in if we stay. Top of the list, according to Sploid, is sudden global warming. 

Whenever people discuss global warming effects they either speak of the relatively minor effects we see now, or the still relatively minor effects we will see in the 'next century'. Anyone who's studied climate science for more than 15 minutes should know that when it comes to our planet's future climate, we don't know jack. Go see the Day After Tomorrow and realize that although that movie is based on Hollywood silliness, that magnitude of change is more than possible, maybe not overnight but certainly less than a century from now. The potential for destruction simply makes the issue of global warming too risky to ignore.

We. Must. Leave. Earth. » [Sploid] 

Scientists have recently determined that while daytime jet flights reduce the effects of global warming (due to the contrails reflecting light away from the Earth's surface), nightime flights have the opposite effect with up to twice the intensity. At night the jet contrails reflect heat from the Earth's surface back to the surface.

According to Reuters, the warming effect only accounts for about 3.5% of all the warming due to human activity, yet this effect will increase as air travel increases.

It's interesting to realize that we could reduce our climate impact simply by rescheduling global flights to occur during the day time, thus minimizing the warming effects and maximizing the cooling effects. Red eye flights just got that much worse.

Fewer night flights could cut climate change impact » [Reuters]