You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Climate’ category.

I’ve been posting about it here for the ten years I have been here: Pound for pound, biodiesel, from production to consumption, puts more carbon into the atmosphere than refined petroleum diesel. Just another “feel good” hoax, and waste of taxpayer subsidies to those who shouldn’t receive them. Ethanol is why your car runs like shit, chokes out when idling at a stop, gets ten to twelve percent less fuel mileage, and the town stinks like a pissy diaper.

As usual, I am right: A new study finds that biofuels—which are derived from plants like corn or soybeans and sometimes considered to be carbon-neutral—may actually be worse for the climate than gas.

University of Michigan (UM) Energy Institute research professor John DeCicco analyzed all the greenhouse gas emissions created in the supply chains of various fuel types. For gas, that meant starting with extraction and transportation, among other parts of the process; for biofuels, it was farming and fertilizer use, but not tailpipe pollution, due to the presumed carbon dioxide offset, the Detroit Free Press explains:

global_temperature_anomalyUsing U.S. Department of Agriculture cropland production data, determining the chemical composition of crops and accounting for all of the carbon from the plants, DeCicco created a “harvest carbon” factor. Over the past decade, as the consumption of corn ethanol and biodiesel more than tripled in the U.S., the increased carbon uptake by the crops only offset 37 percent of carbon dioxide emissions from biofuel combustion, DeCicco said.

Mathematically speaking, “When it comes to the emissions that cause global warming, it turns out that biofuels are worse than gasoline,” he said.

By casting doubts on the efficacy of biofuels, the study has brought on some harsh critiques from those who believe they will help transition to a low-carbon world. Some critics pointed out that the study was funded by the American Petroleum Institute (API), which has a “vested interest” in the failure of the biofuel industry, the Free Press notes.

But the plant-based energy source has come under fire before. A study published last year by the World Resources Institute found that dedicating crops and farmland to the creation of bioenergy “will undercut efforts to combat climate change and to achieve a sustainable food future.”

Andrew Steer, president of the World Resources Institute, told the New York Times at the study’s publication that “many of the claims for biofuels have been dramatically exaggerated. There are other, more effective routes to get to a low-carbon world.”earth-day_im_with_stupid

Timothy Searchinger, a Princeton researcher and biofuel critic, toldClimate Central on Thursday that the UM study provides “additional calculation” for the argument that the energy is not, in fact, carbon-neutral.

“The U.S. is not coming close to offsetting the carbon released by burning biofuels through additional crop growth.”

Anthropogenic Atmospheric Disruption, Climate Change, is World War Three.

We are losing. You are a clear and present danger to my grandchildren’s survival.

Climate change is happening, fools, so put down the Ambien, Prozac, Viagra and Megyn Kelly crotch-shots on Fox Kool-Aid and pull your heads out of your asses because The Earth Just Experienced the Hottest Month on the BooksPeriod.

Global Warming is World War Three, and we are losing.

Cp6rnONW8AAEoW6

Not only are you a clear and present threat to my grandchildren’s survival, but you are less than sufficiently evolved, less than human.

Six billion people on a planet that can barely sustain one.

Do the math…

there-is-no-planet-B-photo-by-Freya-Schork-2013
There is no Planet “B”.

Best pull your heads out of your asses, because as the atmosphere continues to deteriorate, so will many’s quality of life, and they will seek to improve upon that elsewhere. There will be War. There will be pestilence. Millions, perhaps billions will die mean unseeming deaths. Your fucking Jesus isn’t going to save you.

You are a clear and present danger to my grandchildren’s survival. Fear me.

Complex but right

Sad, but Sanders has turned out to be little more than an amusing distraction in the grander scheme of things, though an enlightening but alarming study of the democrat id. There was never any question in my mind the Wall Street choice, the media darling “because it’s her turn” Clinton would be the democrat nominee, why else would the Retards run yet another clown against her? That decision has already been made and all of this is naught but kombutki theater to leave the rubes feeling as if they were somehow participant. But the degree with which her surrogates turned on fellow democrat as well as independent Sanders supporters, many though not all young perhaps first time voters who have no stake in the status quo, no stake in more of the same, has been really rather stunning.

They are as drunk on the Ambien, Prozac, Viagra and Megyn Kelly crotch-shots on Fox Kool-Aid as their counterparts the Retards, barely literate bare-footed rubes sprawled drooling Pavlovianly across a “couch” the backseat out of a nineteen and seventy Chevy Suburban blindly following a charismatic “leader” to suicide… dragging the rest of us with them. Skillfully herded to attack all who disagree.

We have to stop doing what we are doing. Now!

Jill Stein 2016

images

Built upon the rubble, the detritus, resulting from the collision of two continental plates, Cascadia is no more a part of North America than it is “Pacifica”.

It is A Place Apart.

There is nothing east of The Rockies we need.

Tesla founder Elon Musk explained the idiocy of fossil fuels that even a climate change denier can’t deny:

image

“If we don’t find a solution to burning oil for transport, when we then run out of oil, the economy will collapse and society will come to an end,” Musk said this week during a conversation with astrophysicist and Cosmos host Neil deGrasse Tyson.

“If we know we have to get off oil no matter what, we know that is an inescapable outcome, why run this crazy experiment of changing the chemical composition of the atmosphere and oceans by adding enormous amounts of CO2 that have been buried since the Precambrian Era?” he added. “That’s crazy. That’s the dumbest experiment in history, by far.” [emphasis added]

Asked if he could think of “a dumber experiment,” Musk replied:

“I honestly cannot.”

Today We Celebrate The Earth. Tomorrow, Business As Usual

earth-day_im_with_stupid

You are a clear and present danger to my grandchildren’s future. Fear me.

John Upton writes: Councilmembers of an island town in Georgia met in a police station near sandy beaches last week to mull a plan for coping with worsening floods. The meeting followed unprecedented king tide floods in the fall that inundated the island and nearby Savannah, and shut down the highway that connects them.

wp-1449064543102.jpeg

“We’ve had more frequent flooding in areas that haven’t flooded before,” said Jason Buelterman, mayor of the beach town on the eastern shore of Tybee Island, where the population of a few thousand residents swells each summer with vacationers. “In November, water was coming into people’s garages and stuff. It had never happened before.”

The meeting was held eight days before world leaders were due to converge in New York this Friday to ratify a United Nations treaty, aiming to avert the worst impacts of climate change. If the treaty succeeds, Tybee Island and other coastal communities may flood terribly in the coming decades, but will most likely remain mostly above sea level, recent Antarctic modeling suggests. Vast scientific uncertainties, however, mean even that cannot be assured.

Mayors from small towns, planners from the world’s largest cities and U.N. diplomats are being guided on the details of a looming coastal crisis by sea level projections compiled by a U.N. science panel. The panel’s work includes warnings about the amount of flooding that could be caused by melting in Antarctica, and those warnings have been growing bleaker.

The barren continent — the planet’s greatest reservoir of ice — remains shrouded in frigid mystery, and a lack of scientific knowledge about its ice sheet means scientists can’t yet predict how much flooding it could cause as temperatures continue to climb. A recent study, though, added to concerns that it could begin disintegrating, inundating coastal neighborhoods around the world, unless the heady goals of the new U.N. climate pact are achieved.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s most recent findings, from three years ago, appear to have underestimated the potential seriousness of the Antarctic problem, with sweeping implications for the urgency of pollution cuts — and for the futures of coastal communities like Tybee Island’s.

Instead of the anticipated several feet of sea level rise this century if current pollution rates continue, the latest modeling-based science warns that melting could lead to twice that amount. That sobering estimate is a rough one.

Other than those people (who survive) are going to end up moving here, I don’t necessarily see rising sea levels as a bad thing. Flush out all the trash, cull the less-than-human, reboot the species. Think of it as an evolutionary iteration.

So put down the Ambien, Prozac, Viagra and Mygan Kelly’s crotch-shots on Fox Kool-Aid and turn off the television, because the planet is a big, wobbly top, and melting ice is changing how it spins.

Imagine it like a top. Spinning a top with a bunch of pennies on it will cause wobble and drift in a certain pattern. If you rearrange the pennies, the wobble and drift will be slightly different.

That’s essentially what climate change is doing, except instead of pennies, it’s ice and instead of a top, it’s the planet. Suffice to say, the stakes are a little higher.

Climate change is messing with the axis upon which our fair planet spins. Ice melting has caused a drift in polar motion, a somewhat esoteric term that tells scientists a lot about past and future climate and is crucial in GPS calculations and satellite communication.Before 2000, Earth's spin axis was drifting toward Canada (left globe). Climate change-driven ice loss in Greenland, Antarctica and elsewhere is pulling the direction of drift eastward.
Before 2000, Earth’s spin axis was drifting toward Canada (left globe). Climate change-driven ice loss in Greenland, Antarctica and elsewhere is pulling the direction of drift eastward.NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Polar motion refers to the periodic wobble and drift of the poles. It’s been observed for more than 130 years, but the process has been going on for eons driven by mass shifts inside the earth as well as ones on the surface. For decades, the north pole had been slowly drifting toward Canada, but there was a shift in the drift about 15 years ago. Now it’s headed almost directly down the Greenwich Meridian (sorry Canada, no pole for you, eh).

Like many other natural processes large and small, from sea levels to wildfires, climate change is also playing a role in this shift.

 “Since about 2000, there has been a dramatic shift in this general direction,”Surendra Adhikari, a researcher at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said. “It is due to climate change without a doubt. It’s related to ice sheets, in particular the Greenland ice sheet.”That ice sheet has seen its ice loss speed up and has lost an average of 278 gigatons of ice a year since 2000 as temperatures warm. The Antarctic has lost 92 gigatons a year over that time while other stashes of ice from Alaska to Patagonia are also melting and sending water to the oceans, redistributing the weight of the planet.

Adhikari and his colleague Erik Ivins published their findings in Science Advances on Friday, showing that melting ice explains about 66 percent of the change in the shift of the Earth’s spin axis, particularly the rapid losses occurring in Greenland.

 

 

It’s a huge, mind boggling process on the global scale, but imagine it like a top. Spinning a top with a bunch of pennies on it will cause wobble and drift in a certain pattern. If you rearrange the pennies, the wobble and drift will be slightly different.

That’s essentially what climate change is doing, except instead of pennies, it’s ice and instead of a top, it’s the planet. Suffice to say, the stakes are a little higher.

Ice loss explains most but not all of the shift. The rest can mostly be chalked up to droughts and heavy rains in certain parts of the globe. Adhikari said this knowledge could be used to help scientists analyze past instances of polar motion shifts and rainfall patterns as well as answer questions about future hydrological cycle changes.

Ice is expected to continue melting and with it, polar motion is expected to continue changing as well.

“What I can tell you is we anticipate a big loss of mass from West Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets and that will mean that the general direction of the pole won’t go back to Canada for sure,” Adhikari said.

If it continues moving down the Greenwich Meridian or meanders another way remains to be seen, though.

“This depends highly on the region where ice melts, or if the effect of ice melt would be counterbalanced by another effect (for example sea level rise, increased water storage on continents, changes of climate zones),” Florian Seitz, the director of German Geodetic Research Institute, said in an email.

In the here and now, polar motion shifts matter for astronomical observations and perhaps even more importantly for the average person, GPS calculations.

Whatever Bernie Sanders thinks of Hillary Clinton’s presidential qualifications, the former secretary of state is “uniquely unsuited” to the task of stopping climate change, author and activist Naomi Klein writes in a new op-ed for The Nation .

imagesCombating climate change “requires a willingness to go head-to-head with the two most powerful industries on the planet—fossil fuel companies and the banks that finance them,” she writes. “Hillary Clinton is uniquely unsuited to this task.”

Among all the uncertainties in the presidential race this year, one thing is certain, Klein says: “The Clinton camp really doesn’t like talking about fossil fuel money.”

As Klein explains at The Nation, that’s exactly where Clinton falls short:

While Clinton is great at warring with Republicans, taking on powerful corporations goes against her entire worldview, against everything she’s built, and everything she stands for. The real issue, in other words, isn’t Clinton’s corporate cash, it’s her deeply pro-corporate ideology: one that makes taking money from lobbyists and accepting exorbitant speech fees from banks seem so natural that the candidate is openly struggling to see why any of this has blown up at all.

Clinton’s historically “pro-corporate ideology” speaks for itself.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.