A Global Warming Wish List

The Nation: New Global Warming Committee Has Great Potential And Good Foundation

(The Nation)  This column was written by Katrina Vanden Heuvel.

---

Two weeks ago, Representative Ed Markey was appointed chair of the new Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. The committee has no legislative role — but it does have subpoena power, a $3.7 million budget, a team of investigators, and a two-year term. So there should be ample opportunity to powerfully illustrate the crisis and arrive at some smart policy recommendations. There are already strong legislative proposals out there, and Markey's committee could use these as a starting point for potential Congressional action. "Our job," Markey says, "will be to take these issues and translate them into a language that has political potency and is accessible to the public." Here then are some areas the Select Committee could explore in response to the global warming crisis.

1. Job Creation

There are many good groups doing work on the relationship between job creation and clean energy. The Apollo Alliance — a coalition of labor, environmental, civil rights, urban, farm, faith and business groups — has a plan that has won wide respect. It includes promoting renewables; upgrading existing energy infrastructure; improving efficiency in transportation, industry, and buildings; research in new clean technology; and Smart Growth for cities and suburbs. Joel Rogers, a member of Apollo's National Steering Committee and Director of the Center on Wisconsin Strategy, says, "We estimate that $300 billion spent on our plan would generate about 3 million new jobs…. It would generate a little over $1 trillion in additional GDP over its 10-year development. And, most important, it would reduce our energy costs by better than $300 billion annually. That would effectively… eliminate our dependence on the Middle East… [and] it should reestablish the American position in what is clearly going to be a gigantic world market for clean-energy technology…. Our plan has been out there for about two years now and nobody has seriously questioned any of these numbers."

Van Jones, Executive Director of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, has discussed a Clean Energy Jobs Bill with Speaker Nancy Pelosi that would help "create green pathways out of poverty." Jones says, "The bill would get hundreds of millions of dollars in green-collar job training down to community colleges, vocational colleges and public high schools across the country. It would establish Clean Tech Training Centers in at least one public high school in every U.S. city. And it would create a National Energy Corps, which would give America's youth the opportunity to help retrofit buildings and put up solar and wind farms." The Apollo Alliance and Campus Climate Action are working with the Ella Baker Center to advance these ideas. Elizabeth Martin Perera, Climate Policy Specialist at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), also notes that a cap on greenhouse gasses will open new markets for low-carbon fuels, low-carbon electricity, and renewables. Experts from the Economic Policy Institute have also done very good research in this area.

2. The Exorbitant Costs Myth

Republicans repeatedly responded to Al Gore's testimony on global warming this past week with predictions of exorbitant costs and massive job loss. The fact is clean energy done right can be a stimulus for jobs and economic growth. That is why the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (USCAP) — a coalition of U.S.-based businesses (including Alcoa, BP America, Caterpillar, Duke Energy, DuPont, FPL Group, General Electric, Lehman Brothers, PG&E, and PNM Resources) and environmental organizations — has called for quick legislative action to slow, stop and reverse greenhouse gas emissions. The group said any delay in mandatory, economy-wide climate protection "increases the risk of unavoidable consequences that could necessitate even steeper reductions in the future." This is the kind of private sector action that is needed — along with a concerted government effort — to address what Al Gore calls "the most dangerous crisis in American history." Markey would do well to bring in these business and environmental leaders to skewer the myth of catastrophic job loss and exorbitant costs.

3. The Economic Harm of Global Warming

The Apollo Alliance and other leading experts recommend that the Markey Committee work to establish a clear, definitive and scientifically defensible quantification of economic harm to the U.S. economy within 20 years, 50 years, and 100 years if a strong response to global warming isn't adopted. The Stern Report — which looks at the impact of global warming on the world economy, written by former chief economist at the World Bank, Sir Nicholas Stern — is useful in illustrating the consequences of doing nothing to curb global warming but an official federal analysis would provide new credibility for Congressional policymakers.

4. ‘The Experts of the Land'

Lorraine Peter of Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation in Old Crow, Yukon (a town of about 300 aboriginal people north of the Arctic Circle), spoke at Climate Crisis Action Day in Washington, D.C. this week. She has traveled to D.C. for 25 years to stand with her Canadian and Alaskan brothers and sisters impacted by decisions made in the U.S. capital. "Listen to the experts of the land — they are the ones who can tell us," she said. According to Peter, the hunters and trappers who live subsistence lifestyles see the changes every day. They see a Porcupine Caribou Herd that has thrived for thousands of years with her ancestors — and which the community still depends on for food, clothing, and crafts — suddenly dwindling in the last 10 to 15 years. And Robert Thompson, an Inupiaq Eskimo wildlife guide (and Vietnam veteran) from the 300-person village of Kaktovik on the edge of the Arctic Ocean, spoke of unusual February rains, and the Yukon Flats burning in September. "We don't need more science," he said.

[williemcdonald]

The Truth about Global Warming -The Apocalypse
The first page of this seven page report is the condense version. Pages 2 thru 7 is a more detailed explanation for global warming. My purpose is to gain support for this report. Global warming-the apocalypse can be stopped, with your help. If not stopped the sun?s heat will dominate this planet?s weather, and generate unusual weather patterns, to the point where the only thing to eat will be other people. The real reason for global warming is the earth?s orbit around the sun is decaying, in other words the earth is moving closer to the sun, and it has nothing to do with green house gases, hole in the ozone, aerosol propellant, cfc, etc.
The earth is a planet that functions like a machine. In fact Its more like a machine, than a planet. Like a car, truck, aircraft, or rocket. The earth has a fuel system, an engine, a generator, and exhaust system. A car?s engine system generates torque, an aircraft?s engine systems generates thrust, and the earth?s engine system generates a powerful magnetic field, and the earth?s magnetic field protects all life on this planet, and beneath the oceans. The earth? magnetic field keeps the earth at a safe distance from the sun, and the core is the earth?s engine
Earth?s fuel system is referred to as oil wells/ crude oil reservoirs. They are actually self pressurizing fuel cells. Like any machine, if you were to shut off fuel to the engine, the engine will stop operating. The oil companies crude oil extraction process compromises the earth?s fuel system, and shut off fuel to the earth?s engine (the core), by releasing pressure out of the earth?s fuel system ( oil wells). Normally the pressure in a crude oil well/ reservoir is tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of pounds per square inch.
Under normal circumstance the core (the engine) stays at a constant 5000 to 7000 degrees celsius, and that?s hot enough to melt steel, and the pressure in the core is hundreds of thousands to over a million pounds per square inch. The oil is ignited long before it reaches the core, and enters the core as flames. Crude oil a hydrocarbon is capable of generating those temperatures. Hydrocarbons are used to melt, and manufacture steel. The higher the temperature in the core, the stronger the earth magnetic field. The cooler the core, the weaker the earth?s magnetic field. The earth?s engine is being fuel starved, and it is slowly cooling. As the core cools the earth?s magnetic field weakens, and the earth is being pulled closer to the sun.
The only way to reverse global warming-the apocalypse is for the oil companies to re-pressurize the earth?s fuel systems. One way this can be accomplished, by igniting the methane gas in them. The ignited gas will expand, and create the pressure need to force the remaining crude oil (fuel) into the core. This is the real cause for global warming, and the only way it can be reversed. Volcanoes are the earth?s exhaust system. Volcanoes are designed to rid the core (the earth?s engine) of spent fuel, debris, and they regulate the pressure in the core, which is generated by the combustion of crude oil. The pressure that?s release from volcanoes, carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide, etc are ejected from volcanoes, these are all crude oil by-product. This prove crude oil is being burned in the core.
The earth, and conditions on it are changing, and not for the better. 12 noon use to be the hottest part of the day, now it 3 o?clock in the after noon, The winters are getting sunny, and warmer from latitude ( zero )to latitude (29-N, or 29-S) during winter, Both polar ice caps are melting, and the oceans are rising, The earth has shifted on it?s axes by15 degrees, the earth is moving away from the moon at 2 to 4 cm each year, floods, and tornadoes are developing in winter, instead of snow storms, 2 leap seconds had to be added to the atomic clock, because the earth rotation is slowing down, and it gets noticeably hotter every 15 to 20 years. Our grand children are in grave danger! These things have nothing to do with green house gases.
Written by: Willie McDonald: [e-mail]: 832-889-2058.

[zoroastor]

(Part I)

Yeah, okay, the greenpeace site probably couldn't be considered unbiased by anyone. Their claim is that the information comes straight from Exxon doccuments. I'm sure that most of the information is verifiable in some way. However, I'm not going to pretend I have done so.
However, the Singer thing... He has accepted money from big oil to fund his research. That doesn't necessarily mean his reasearch is unobjective, but it does give me cause to doubt. I checked the wiki listing you cited. It states that he claimed he had NO financial ties to big oil, when in fact he does.

[zoroastor]

(Part II)
I'm all in favor of companies like ExxonMobile working in alternative energy fields. I know they do spend some money on it. I have always wondered though, what is the percentage spent vs. spent in new oil exploration, etc. And I've also felt that the efforts put into finding alternative energy are like the ad campaigns by Phillip Morris against smoking. It makes a fine PR talking point, but doesn't amount to much, and doesn't account for much of their budget. I could be wrong here, as I've never researched EOM's work in that field.
Too bad you and I aren't in charge, as I'm sure we could find some middle ground that didn't flatly ignore and deny the other point of view. I'd just be happy if a panel conducted a 1 or 2 year inquiry. The members should be chosen by both parties. The results should be made public in entirety and recommendations should be followed and some mandated. Every few years as new technology and research finding become available, the issue should be revisited.

[co2max]

Hey!!!!
You gave me a Greenpeace link to tell me about Exxon???
Do you expect me to accept that as an unbiased review of that company's activity? I don't think it presents a realistic picture of anything except an activist organization's point of view, wherein they seek to go against anything that represents modern progress, technology or big business.

[co2max]

(continued)
He did do consultative work on the Kuwaiti oil fires during the aftermath of the Persian Gulf War and downplayed (probably correctly) the environmental (global) hazards they posed.
His arguments in the tobacco industry fight about 2nd-hand smoking involved making sure that real science was used to prove the point that smoking and its 2nd-hand effects could be quantitatively evaluated. He wanted to be sure that any litigation and regulation therefore would be drawn from confirmable studies, rather than be the result of mainly passionate outcries from people like myself who absolutely DESPISE smoking.

Receiving funding from an oil company does not in itself mean that he is corrupt. Anybody who receives funding from whatever source is still responsible for telling the truth. If there is evidence that Singer has lied, slandered someone or any entitity or mislead the public, he'll have to be call to account for it. Anybody on either side of the issue has a responsibility to be honest. Environmental groups with money pay big groups to sponsor their experts too. There is no difference here.
You should find out more about Exxon, in particular. We'll have alternative fuels in the future much faster because of the research currently being done by companies like XOM, than without them. Think about it. Check it out.

[co2max]

Zoroaster (sir):

Fred Singer continues to stand with dignity in my portfolio. Wikipedia, for openers provides his career run-down:
Career
In the 1940s and 50s Singer was involved in designing instruments used in satellites to measure cosmic radiation and ozone. [9]

Previous government and academic positions:

Director of the Center for Atmospheric and Space Physics, University of Maryland (1953-62)
Special advisor to President Eisenhower on space developments (1960)
First Director of the National Weather Satellite Service (1962-64)
Founding Dean of the School of Environmental and Planetary Sciences, University of Miami (1964-67)
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water Quality and Research, U.S. Department of the Interior (1967- 70)
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Policy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1970-71)
Professor of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia (1971-94)
Chief Scientist, U.S. Department of Transportation (1987- 89)
-------------------------------
(continuation on the way...)

[zoroastor]

Check out www.exxonsecrets.org

Uh... Now lemme see here. I gots Exxon, who makes about a billion a day, on one had. They're gonna lose big time if we take this global warmin' stuff serious. And on the other hand I gots some nameless, faceless, vague conspiracy that is in some unknown way gonna profit from global warmin. Exxon pays a bunch of science guys to "research" why there ain't no global warmin, and another bunch of independent science guys says there is. hmmmmmm. Yeah, well, uh, I guess I'm gonna go with the guys who say there ain't no global warmin. Their argument sounds more convincin'. In fact, I just heard my ditto head buddy on the radio the other day, say that even if it's true, warmer weather is nice. And he also said that there won't be no rise in sea level or nothin' cause of somethin called "displacement". Ice cubes meltin' in yor glass don't make it overflow. That's how Rush 'splained it. Gorsh he shore is a smart fella."

[zoroastor]

And then, singer, like any good neo-con lied about getting any money from the oil industry, in spite of documentation to the contrary.

[zoroastor]

CO2Max,

Your buddy Zoro here. Did you actually DO the google search on singer? You were very indignant the other day when I compared the "global warming is a fairy tale" crowd with those who don't believe cigarettes cause cancer. Yet, you defend a man who not only believed it, but wrote books to that effect.
Singer does indeed have financial ties to oil. As he does to big tobacco.
hmmmm.

[cjhr43]

I think Al Gore is the one with the "fever"

[pepperwood2]

Critics of Global Warming Receive Threats

A scientist who expresses doubt over man's impact on global warming reports said he has received death threats.

Timothy Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg in Canada, described the threats as %u201Cnasty and personal.%u201D

"It has got really nasty and personal. I can tolerate being called a skeptic because all scientists should be skeptics,%u201D he told the UK Telegraph, %u201Cbut then they started calling us deniers, with all the connotations of the Holocaust.%u201D

Richard Lindzen, a professor of Atmospheric Science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their funding disappear and their work derided.

"Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence,%u201D he said, %u201Ceven when they fly in the face of the science."

[co2max]

Fred Singer is a professor emeritus of physics. He is NOT on the oil industry payroll!
You people make the same stupid claim about anybody with credentials who is able to bash the human causality of global warming theory.

It just doesn't hold up.

[jimfinster]

pghlady3:

Fred Singer has no credibility on this issue. You should go google his name. He is a paid representative of the fossil fuel industry.

[pghlady3]

people need to learn to read, and not believe everything the media tells them. Per Dr. Fred Singer, President of the Science and Enviromental Policy Project, "the bulk of temperature rise in the 20th century took place before the 1940's, the increase of CO2 took place after the 1940's, whic coincided with a climate cooling between 1940 to 1975" Mr Gore is telling half truths or no truths.

[frankly6]

Marine_One

Are you a climatologist or just another ignorant parrot of the pundits?

Read the science. It's overwhelming.

Educate yourself beyond merely confirming your bias.

[marine_one]

The ocean level has been rising for eons. For those who actually listened in high school physical science, there used to be a land bridge between Alaska and Russia. Why? Because the oceans had much less water back then when we were in the middle of an ice age. And by the way, the earth has been warming up ever since, and not as a result of carbon emissions from factories and SUVs.

And why are BP America, GE, and other energy companies so willing to jump on the band wagon? Because if we do move to alternate sources of energy, they'll be the ones who'll be providing the whole nation with energy-efficient and alternative fuel systems.

This committee is just another example of the abuse of our taxes.

[hypnotoad72]

1. Who's going to be qualified, what's the pay, and all I keep hearing from executives is that there is no research for the sake of research -- which is stupid because some "wastes of time" prove to be beneficial later on. Just ask the inventors of the GUI and Java (Xerox and Sun respectively)...

2. In which country(ies) will we see these jobs? Betcha it won't be America. :(

3. Good luck. Most businesses only give a flibble about here-and-now. As with "brain drain", anything postulated by future and/or theorized events (once again, "research for its own sake") is spat upon. It's about large growth... often to compensate for something very small, probably...

4. We will always need science. Science may have gotten us into this possible mess; but it sure as heck can get us out if we try. I'll volunteer. Now look back at point #1.

5. Hah! All they do is bicker and blame each other on everything except for the following list:

* giving themselves raises.

There. That's the list. #5 was surely a joke?

6. Good luck. Most people hoarde their knowledge out of a not-quite-paranoid fear of it being misused, abused, stolen, or hijacked. They do not wish to become expendable. Maybe it's about time we all learned how to share again; that's resolve this for good.

7. ALL of our lives; including the uber-wealthy who must surely realize no amount of wealth would save them?

8. If it melts...

9. See point #5.

[fizzal-2009]

cut the parking lots in half and in effect force car pooling.

[seafang]

Hopefully, exveep Algore testified under oath before the Congress; why wouldn't he be under oath, after all what does he have to hide.
But Washington also "has a fever"; a mysterious malady where nobody ever gets charged with a crime; but they get investigated for the non crime, and if they forget what really happened, then they go to jail for the rest of their lives for lying under oath; and all over the investigation of no criminal act.

So with nothing to hide, surely old al was under oath so he can go to jail for lying to congress; and he diud lie in his testimony before the Congress; after all, the Arctic ocean sea level is falling at 2 mm per year, and not rising to flood the earth 20 ft deep as Al would have the Congress believe. But he would like to be President first before going to jail.