Re: How Trump will affect climate change
« Reply #75 on: Dec 22nd, 2016, 09:39am »
It is entirely understandable that there are a lot of climate change deniers out there when we have BS like THIS going on. Arguing and fighting over funding for THIS pet program or THAT pet program (because of who donated to your OWN pocket) does not change the facts, does not change science, does not change the laws of physics.
Congress: Obama admin fired top scientist to advance climate change plans
By Adam Kredo Published December 21, 2016
A new congressional investigation has determined that the Obama administration fired a top scientist and intimidated staff at the Department of Energy in order to further its climate change agenda, according to a new report that alleges the administration ordered top officials to obstruct Congress in order to forward this agenda.
Rep. Lamar Smith (R., Texas), chair of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, released a wide-ranging report on Tuesday that shows how SENIOR OBAMA ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS RETALIATED AGAINST A LEADING SCIENTIST AND PLOTTED WAYS TO BLOCK A CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRY SURROUNDING KEY RESEARCH INTO THE IMPACT OF RADIATION.
A top DoE scientist who liaised with Congress on the matter was FIRED BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION FOR BEING TOO FORTHRIGHT WITH LAWMAKERS, according to the report, which provides an in-depth look at the White House’s efforts to ensure senior staffers toe the administration’s line.
The report also provides EVIDENCE THAT THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WORKED TO KILL LEGISLATION IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT IT COULD RECEIVE FULL FUNDING FOR ITS OWN HOTLY CONTESTED CLIMATE CHANGE AGENDA.
The report additionally discovered efforts by the Obama administration to CENSOR THE INFORMATION given to Congress, interfering with the body’s ability to perform critical oversight work.
Re: How Trump will affect climate change
« Reply #76 on: Dec 22nd, 2016, 2:24pm »
Meanwhile, out in the REAL world.......
Freakishly warm weather hits North Pole days before Christmas
Temperatures about 50 degrees above average for this time are set to hit the North Pole this week.
Doyle Rice , USA TODAY December 22, 2016
Santa's elves were likely a bit warm this week during final Christmas preparations.
Temperatures at the North Pole soared to the melting point of 32 degrees Thursday, according to data from a nearby weather buoy. That might not sound balmy, but it's some 40 to 50 degrees above average at what's typically an unimaginably cold, pitch-black point in mid-winter.
In fact, the average winter temperature at the North Pole is about 40 degrees below zero, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution said.
The warm spell was predicted by weather models earlier this week and marks the second straight December of freakish warmth spreading across the Arctic due to weird weather patterns. The cause this time around is a powerhouse storm east of Greenland, said Capital Weather Gang meteorologist Jason Samenow.
Counter-clockwise flow around the storm "is doing a wonderful job of (bringing) warm, moist maritime air over the Arctic sea ice and North Pole," WeatherBell meteorologist Ryan Maue said.
"It's clear that this warming event will be 'close enough' to freezing to be considered an extreme event like previous such warmings," Maue added.
The warmth should last for the next few days, before the "Siberian Express" takes over, bringing back typical cold over the region, he said.
A lack of sea ice appears to be playing a role: Record low levels of sea ice in the Arctic are contributing to the record high temperatures, noted Mashable's Andrew Freedman.
"On Wednesday, researchers released a study linking the abnormally high Arctic temperatures to human-caused climate change. Using simulations of the climate, both current and before widespread carbon emissions, they found that the likelihood of extreme temperatures like those that occurred this fall had increased to about once every 50 years from about once every 1,000 years."
Climate change expert sentenced to 32 months for fraud, says lying was a 'rush'
by Michael Isikoff
Dec 18 2013, 11:38 am ET
The EPA’s highest-paid employee and a leading expert on climate change was sentenced to 32 months in federal prison Wednesday for lying to his bosses and saying he was a CIA spy working in Pakistan so he could avoid doing his real job.
John C. Beale’s crimes were “inexplicable” and “unbelievably egregious," said Judge Ellen Huvelle in imposing the sentence in a Washington. D.C. federal court. Beale has also agreed to pay $1.3 million in restitution and forfeiture to the government.
Beale said he was ashamed of his lies about working for the CIA, a ruse that, according to court records, began in 2000 and continued until early this year.
“Why did I do this? Greed – simple greed – and I’m ashamed of that greed,” Beale told the court. He also said it was possible that he got a “rush” and a “sense of excitement" by telling people he was worked for the CIA. “It was something like an addiction,” he said.
Beale pled guilty in September to bilking the government out of nearly $1 million in salary and other benefits over a decade. He perpetrated his fraud largely by failing to show up at the EPA for months at a time, including one 18-month stretch starting in June 2011 when he did “absolutely no work,” as his lawyer acknowledged in a sentencing memo filed last week.
De Opresso Libre! I Have Been many Men, In Many Times, I Shall Be Again! \"The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.\" Plutarch
Re: How Trump will affect climate change
« Reply #81 on: Jan 4th, 2017, 6:10pm »
...and no, NASA is NOT "cooking the books".....
Forget About A Global Warming "Pause" — It Doesn't Exist
By Laura Geggel, Senior Writer January 4, 2017
Forget about the so-called climate change hiatus — a period beginning in 1998 when the increase in the planet's temperature reportedly slowed — it doesn't exist, according to a new study that found the planet's ocean temperatures are warming faster than previously thought.
The findings support similar results from a 2015 study published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the journal Science. However, doubters of climate change attacked that study, prompting the researchers of the new study to examine the data anew.
"Our results mean that essentially NOAA got it right, that they were not cooking the books," study lead author Zeke Hausfather, a graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley's Energy and Resources Group.
Climate change hiatus The climate change hiatus was more of a suspected "slowdown, not a disappearance of global warming," as the world's oceans were still warming, but at a lesser rate than previously predicted, according to Climate Central. However, many scientists acknowledged the slowdown, which allegedly took place from 1998 to 2012. Climate change doubters also took note, and used the slowdown as evidence that climate change was a hoax, the researchers of the new study said.
But in 2015, NOAA published an analysis showing that the slowdown wasn't real, and was the result of measurement errors. The modern buoys that measure ocean temperatures tend to report slightly cooler temperatures than older ship-based systems, even when measuring the same part of the ocean, the NOAA researchers found.
That's because in the 1950s, ships began to measure water piped through the engine room, which is usually a warm place. In contrast, today's buoys report slightly cooler temperatures because they measure the water directly from the ocean, Hausfather said.
"The observations have gone from 80 percent ship-based in 1990 to 80 percent buoy-based in 2015," the researchers wrote in the study. As this switch happened, it appeared that there was a warming slowdown in the ocean — largely because researchers didn't account for the ships' warm bias when combining the buoy and ship data sets.
When the NOAA researchers corrected for the bias, they found that the oceans had warmed 0.22 degrees Fahrenheit (0.12 degrees Celsius) per decade since 2000, a rate almost twice as fast as earlier estimates of 0.12 F (0.07 C) per decade. Moreover, the newfound rate matched estimates for the previous 30 years, from 1970 to 1999, the researchers said.
But once the NOAA study was published, a U.S. House of Representatives committee subpoenaed the scientists' emails, said Hausfather, who was not involved in the 2015 study. NOAA provided data and responded to scientific questions, but did not comply with the subpoena, as many said it would have a "chilling effect" on science, according to a UC Berkeley statement. Independent study In order to see whether the NOAA researchers got it right, Hausfather and his colleagues took an independent look at ocean temperatures by using data from satellites, robotic floats (called Argo floats) and buoys.
The approach is different than the one the NOAA took, which was an attempt to combine the old ship measurements with data from new buoys.
"Only a small fraction of the ocean measurement data is being used by climate monitoring groups, and they are trying to smush together data from different instruments, which leads to a lot of judgment calls about how you weight one versus the other, and how you adjust for the transition from one to another," Hausfather said in the statement. "So we said, 'What if we create a temperature record just from the buoys, or just from the satellites, or just from the Argo floats, so there is no mixing and matching of instruments?'"
In every scenario — whether the data was from the satellites, buoys or the Argo floats— the researchers found that the warming ocean trends matched those found in the NOAA study. Their findings provide more evidence that the oceans have warmed 0.22 F per decade over the past 20 years, the researchers said.
In other words, the rising trend in temperatures is seen in the last half of the 20th century and continued through the first 15 years of the 21st, meaning there was no hiatus, the researchers said.
"In the grand scheme of things, the main implication of our study is on the hiatus, which many people have focused on, claiming that global warming has slowed greatly or even stopped," Hausfather said. "Based on our analysis, a good portion of that apparent slowdown in warming was due to biases in the ship records."
Correcting biases Last year, NOAA published another study in the journal Science, which gave more weight to temperature measurements collected by buoys than by ships. NOAA also accounted for changing shipping routes and measurement techniques, all of which are valid ways to correct for measurement biases, the researchers of the new study said.
Hausfather and his colleagues are urging researchers who study ocean temperature trends to take the new data into account. For instance, the Hadley Climatic Research Unit in the United Kingdom, another repository of oceanic temperatures, didn't completely account for the measurement changes, and so their data show a slightly lower rate of warming than the NOAA and the new study's results, Hausfather and colleagues said.
"In the last seven years or so, you have buoys warming faster than ships are, independently of the ship offset, which produces a significant cool bias in the Hadley record," Hausfather said. In the new study, the researchers urge the Hadley center to fix this bias, he said.
"People don't get much credit for doing studies that replicate or independently validate other people's work," Hausfather said. "But, particularly when things become so political, we feel it is really important to show that, if you look at all these other records, it seems these researchers did a good job with their corrections."
Study co-author Mark Richardson, a climate scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, agreed.
"Satellites and automated floats are completely independent witnesses of recent ocean warming, and their testimony matches the NOAA results," Richardson said. "It looks like the NOAA researchers were right all along."
The study was published online today (Jan. 4) in the journal Science Advances.
Re: How Trump will affect climate change
« Reply #82 on: Jan 5th, 2017, 11:27am »
Will someone PLEASE convince Trump and Pruitt! Anyone who thinks we can nourish, protect, and provide energy to an ever-growing/developing world population without big strides in technology is, uh, intellectually challenged.....
Tenfold jump in green tech needed to meet global emissions targets
Green innovations must be developed and spread globally 10 times faster than in the past if we are to limit warming to below the Paris Agreement's 2 degrees C target
Date: January 3, 2017 Source: Duke University Summary: The global spread of green technologies must quicken significantly to avoid future rebounds in climate-warming emissions, a new study shows. Based on the new calculations, the Paris Agreement's warming target of 2 degrees C won't be met unless clean technologies are developed and implemented at rates 10 times faster than in the past. Radically new strategies to implement technological advances are needed.
Models of future CO2 emissions and temperature changes show the Paris Agreement's warming target of 2oC won't be met unless clean technologies are developed and implemented at rates 10 times faster than in the past to avoid future CO2 emissions. Credit: Duke University
The global spread of green technologies must quicken significantly to avoid future rebounds in greenhouse gas emissions, a new Duke University study shows.
"Based on our calculations, we won't meet the climate warming goals set by the Paris Agreement unless we speed up the spread of clean technology by a full order of magnitude, or about ten times faster than in the past," said Gabriele Manoli, a former postdoctoral associate at Duke's Nicholas School of the Environment, who led the study.
"Radically new strategies to implement technological advances on a global scale and at unprecedented rates are needed if current emissions goals are to be achieved," Manoli said.
The study used delayed differential equations to calculate the pace at which global per-capita emissions of carbon dioxide have increased since the Second Industrial Revolution -- a period of rapid industrialization at the end of the 19th century and start of the 20th. The researchers then compared this pace to the speed of new innovations in low-carbon-emitting technologies.
Using these historical trends coupled with projections of future global population growth, Manoli and his colleagues were able to estimate the likely pace of future emissions increases and also determine the speed at which climate-friendly technological innovation and implementation must occur to hold warming below the Paris Agreement's 2o C target.
"It's no longer enough to have emissions-reducing technologies," he said. "We must scale them up and spread them globally at unprecedented speeds."
The researchers published their peer-reviewed findings December 29 in the open-access journal Earth's Future.
The analysis shows that per-capita CO2 emissions have increased about 100 percent every 60 years -- typically in big jumps -- since the Second Industrial Revolution. This "punctuated growth" has occurred largely because of time lags in the spread of emission-curbing technological advances, which are compounded by the effects of rapid population growth.
"Sometimes these lags are technical in nature, but -- as recent history amply demonstrates -- they also can be caused by political or economic barriers," Manoli explained. "Whatever the cause, our quantification of the delays historically associated with such challenges shows that a tenfold acceleration in the spread of green technologies is now necessary to cause some delay in the Doomsday Clock."
Manoli, who is now on the research staff at ETH Zurich's Institute of Environmental Engineering, conducted the new study with Gabriel G. Katul, the Theodore S. Coile Professor of Hydrology and Micrometeorology, and Marco Marani, professor of ecohydrology. Katul and Marani are faculty members at Duke's Nicholas School of the Environment with secondary appointments in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Duke's Pratt School of Engineering. ________________________________________ Story Source: Materials provided by Duke University. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.
________________________________________ Journal Reference: 1. Gabriele Manoli, Gabriel G. Katul, Marco Marani. Delay-induced Rebounds in CO2 Emissions and Critical Time-Scales to Meet Global Warming Targets. Earth's Future, 2016 DOI: 10.1002/eft2.2016EF000431
Re: How Trump will affect climate change
« Reply #83 on: Jan 5th, 2017, 9:38pm »
China to plow $361 billion into renewable fuel by 2020
Global Energy News
by Josephine Mason Thu Jan 5, 2017
China will plow 2.5 trillion yuan ($361 billion) into renewable power generation by 2020, the country's energy agency said on Thursday, as the world's largest energy market continues to shift away from dirty coal power towards cleaner fuels.
The investment will create over 13 million jobs in the sector, the National Energy Administration (NEA) said in a blueprint document that lays out its plan to develop the nation's energy sector during the five-year 2016 to 2020 period.
The NEA said installed renewable power capacity including wind, hydro, solar and nuclear power will contribute to about half of new electricity generation by 2020.
The agency did not disclose more details on where the funds, which equate to about $72 billion each year, would be spent.
Still, the investment reflects Beijing's continued focus on curbing the use of fossil fuels, which have fostered the country's economic growth over the past decade, as it ramps up its war on pollution.
Last month, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the country's economic planner, said in its own five-year plan, that solar power will receive 1 trillion yuan of spending, as the country seeks to boost capacity by five times. That's equivalent to about 1,000 major solar power plants, according to experts' estimates.
The spending comes as the cost of building large-scale solar plants has dropped by as much as 40 percent since 2010. China became the world's top solar generator last year.
"The government may exceed these targets because there are more investment opportunities in the sector as costs go down," said Steven Han, renewable analyst with securities firm Shenyin Wanguo.
Some 700 billion yuan will go towards wind farms, 500 billion to hydro power with tidal and geothermal getting the rest, the NDRC said.
The NEA's job creation forecast differs from the NDRC's in December that said it expected an additional 3 million jobs, bringing the total in the sector to 13 million by 2020.
Concerns about the social and economic costs of China's air pollution have increased as the northern parts of the country, including the capital Beijing, have battled a weeks-long bout of hazardous smog.
Illustrating the enormity of the challenge, the NEA repeated on Thursday that renewables will still only account for just 15 percent of overall energy consumption by 2020, equivalent to 580 million tonnes of coal.
More than half of the nation's installed power capacity will still be fueled by coal over the same period.
Re: How Trump will affect climate change
« Reply #87 on: Jan 8th, 2017, 10:26am »
Man walks barefoot through Tallahassee on cross-country trip
Ashley White, Democrat staff writer Jan. 7, 2017
Matt Baumer's feet. He is walking barefoot cross-country to raise awareness for climate change. (Photo: Ashley White/ Democrat)
It was near freezing in Tallahassee on Saturday. Temperatures reached 35 degrees and the wind chill made it feel like it was 24 degrees.
Despite the cold, and even the rain that pelted the Big Bend Friday, Mark Baumer walked barefoot through the capital city.
The 33-year-old left his home in Providence, Rhode Island, in October and is on a cross-country mission to raise awareness about the environment. He decided to make the trip sans-shoes because he believes in the barefoot movement, which states it is healthier to walk around barefoot.
“The big overall goal is raise awareness and fight climate change,” Baumer said while wearing shoes in a coffee shop. “The more specific goal of that is to raise awareness and funds for an organization back in Rhode Island that’s fighting climate change.”
The goal is to raise $10,000 for the FANG Collective, a Providence-based environmental organization. The group is locally fighting the creation of a power plant but has also sent a helping hand to Standing Rock. Baumer has raised almost $7,000, which is immediately transferred to the organization.
Baumer received a poetry fellowship through the state of Rhode Island that awards recipients $5,000 to work on their creative project.
“I figured this would be the best chance I would have,” Baumer said.
He took a leave of absence from his job at the library, which allows employees to take unpaid leaves of absence for special occasions, and set out for California.
He decided he needed to raise awareness for the environment after becoming more aware of his personal impact on it. He started using less plastic, taking shorter showers and even switched to a plant-based vegan diet.
“It turned into a game trying to figure what else I can do,” Baumer said.
The trip wasn’t originally supposed to bring him through the Sunshine State. Baumer was walking through Ohio when it started to snow. He decided to take a bus to Jacksonville and continue his walk to Los Angeles from there. He expects the trip will take him another three or four months.
Baumer wakes up at about 4 or 5 a.m. He posts video from the previous day, creates a blog post, answers email and eats. Then, he starts walking. He stops at grocery stores to stock up on more food. Sometimes people stop and ask him if he needs shoes, food or water. Sometimes they ask why he’s walking. When it’s dark, he stops walking. He uses a Bivy sack, which is a waterproof shelter, an inflatable mat and sleeping bag.
“I just find a spot out of the way that has some cover and the ground is flat,” Baumer said. “I can basically sleep anywhere with the shelter.”
While walking, Baumer will walk on the shoulder of a road or the grass. If there isn’t a shoulder or sidewalk, he’ll walk in the road, making sure he’s visible.
“The best surface is usually the white line because it’s painted and really smooth,” Baumer said. He also said walking on newly paved roads is also nice.
To contribute to Baumer’s goal to raise money for the FANG Collective, visit youcaring.com/barefoot. To keep up with Baumer on social media, visit barefootacrossamerica.com.