NOAA makes it official: Extreme weather due to climate change

by Janet Ritz

In a report issued by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, a joint effort of more than a dozen government agencies which includes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the conclusion is that the extreme weather we've been experiencing will become both more extreme and is due to climate change.

WASHINGTON - Droughts will get drier, storms will get stormier and floods will get deeper with a warming climate across North America, U.S. government experts said in a report billed as the first continental assessment of extreme events.

Events that have seemed relatively rare will become commonplace, said the latest report from the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, a joint effort of more than a dozen government agencies.

This report has raised questions by those who point to this year's cooler temperatures in many parts of the world. That issue was addressed by the British Met Office's 2008 temperature prediction which cited an increased 2008 La Niña event; a cooling of a Pacific current - a periodic anomaly that was covered in this report: What's with the Weather? The La Niña-Tornado Connection.

Specific projections from the Climate Sciences report include:

* Abnormally hot d
ays and nights, along with heat waves, are very likely to become more common.
* Cold nights are very likely to become less common.
* Sea ice extent is expected to continue to decrease and may even disappear in the Arctic Ocean in summer in coming decades.
* Precipitation, on average, is likely to be less frequent but more intense.
* Droughts are likely to become more frequent and severe in some regions.
* Hurricanes will likely have increased precipitation and wind.
* The strongest cold-season storms in the Atlantic and Pacific are likely to produce stronger winds and higher extreme wave heights... Continued...

Oil prices were manipulated, government commission charges

by Janet Ritz

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the agency charged with "ensuring the integrity of the futures & options market," has accused the trading firm, Optiver Holding, of manipulating the prices of crude oil, heating oil and gasoline futures on the New York Mercantile Exchange, the first complaint announced since their recent investigation into the manipulation of oil prices began:

Washington, DC – The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) announced today its case against Optiver Holding BV, two of its subsidiaries, and three employees, charging them with manipulation and attempted manipulation of New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) Light Sweet Crude Oil, New York Harbor Heating Oil, and New York Harbor Gasoline futures contracts during March 2007.

The CFTC filed the civil enforcement action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Optiver Holding BV, a global proprietary trading fund headquartered in the Netherlands, and two subsidiaries – Optiver US, LLC (Optiver), a Chicago-based corporation, and Optiver VOF, a Dutch company. The complaint also names defendants Christopher Dowson (head trader of Optiver), Randal Meijer (head of trading and supervisor of Optiver and Optiver VOF) and Bastiaan van Kempen (Chief Executive Officer of Optiver).

In May, under the backdrop of record oil prices and calls from legislators to crack down on speculative oil trading and market manipulation, the CFTC announced a wide-ranging probe into oil price manipulation. The agency says it has dozens of investigations ongoing.

The CFTC began their probe into the manipulation of oil prices amid record prices increases in May. They say they have dozens of investigations underway. This was the first announced charge against a specific company. The implication is that there are more to follow.

According to the complaint, the defendants employed a manipulative scheme commonly known as “banging” or “marking”’ the close. “Banging the close” refers to the practice of acquiring a substantial position leading up to the closing period, followed by offsetting the position before the end of the close of trading for the purpose of attempting to manipulate prices.

[1] [2] read more =>

EPA Documents Bombshell: EPA Administrator's global warming warning withheld by White House

by Janet Ritz

Published on Reuters, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Huffington Post, Chicago Sun-Times, Fox News, IBS

The House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming subpoenaed documents that reveal EPA Administrator, Stephen Johnson, had sent regulatory recommendations to the White House last year in which he unequivocally stated that global warming was occurring and that vehicle emissions were a danger to public welfare.

WASHINGTON (June 24, 2008) – The Environmental Protection Agency was on its way towards finding global warming emissions to be a danger to public welfare, and that these emissions should be regulated in vehicles and fuels, according to a review of subpoenaed global warming documents by the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. The review of the documents follows a lengthy process of negotiation with the EPA and the White House, which started in January of 2008, and brings into serious question the administration’s u-turn on regulating global warming emissions.

The documents are the draft regulatory recommendations from December 5 and December 14 of 2007, and were sent to the White House and to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for approval before reports indicate all work was stopped on the recommendations. The White House is now in the process of completing an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR), which would be a step backwards in what the Select Committee has found to be an already advanced process towards regulating global warming emissions.

What makes this a bombshell: This is the same Stephen Johnson who denied California's request for higher emission standards waiver, stating that the lower Federal standard was enough -- the subject of an ongoing lawsuit between the EPA and at least 18 states plus environmental groups, resulting in a (different) subpoena for documents and eyewitness testimony by Henry Waxman (D-CA) to determine the extent of President Bush's intervention to lower those standards.

President Bush invoked executive privilege last week to avoid answering that subpoena.

“This administration has shown its contempt for Congress, its contempt for the rule of law, and this administration’s handling of the Massachusetts v. EPA decision has shown its contempt for science,” said [committee] Chairman [Edward] Markey (D-MA). “The president has a short amount of time to alter his legacy as running the most environmentally-unfriendly administration in history, and he can start by listening to his own climate scientists and take action on global warming.”

Among the findings in the documents:

* EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson determined that man-made global warming is unequivocal, the evidence is both compelling and robust, and the administration must act to prevent harm rather than wait for harm to occur before acting.

* EPA found that global warming risks include severe heat waves, sea level rise, reduced availability of water, increased wildfire and insect outbreaks, an increase in heavy precipitation events, an increase in regional ground-level ozone pollution, and changes in the range of vector-borne diseases.

* EPA proposed that regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles be implemented in order to achieve the equivalent of a 35 mpg car and light truck fleet average by 2018 (with the car fleet averaging 38.4 mpg by 2018 and the truck fleet averaging 29.5 mpg by 2017).

* When EPA used the EIA 2007 high gasoline price projections of $2.75 in 2017 to $3.20 in 2030 to calculate standards, it found that the car fleet could achieve a standard of 43.3 mpg by 2018 and light trucks could achieve a standard of 30.6 mpg by 2017.

This comes just after President Bush evoked executive privilege to withhold information on his intervention in the EPA's lowering of rural and California smog standards...

[1] [2]

NOAA makes it official: Extreme weather due to climate change

by Janet Ritz

Published on Reuters, The Huffington Post, IBS, Fox News, USA Today


In a report issued by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, a joint effort of more than a dozen government agencies -- including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration -- the conclusion is that the extreme weather we've been experiencing will become more extreme and is due to climate change.

WASHINGTON - Droughts will get drier, storms will get stormier and floods will get deeper with a warming climate across North America, U.S. government experts said in a report billed as the first continental assessment of extreme events.

Events that have seemed relatively rare will become commonplace, said the latest report from the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, a joint effort of more than a dozen government agencies.

Specific future projections include:

* Abnormally hot days and nights, along with heat waves, are very likely to become more common.
* Cold nights are very likely to become less common.
* Sea ice extent is expected to continue to decrease and may even disappear in the Arctic Ocean in summer in coming decades.
* Precipitation, on average, is likely to be less frequent but more intense.
* Droughts are likely to become more frequent and severe in some regions.
* Hurricanes will likely have increased precipitation and wind.
* The strongest cold-season storms in the Atlantic and Pacific are likely to produce stronger winds and higher extreme wave heights.

The report, issued by the Department of Commerce in accordance with Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 was produced to be in compliance with that act in conjunction with NOAA.

For purposes of compliance with Section 515, this CCSP Synthesis and Assessment Product is an “interpreted product” as that term is used in NOAA guidelines and is classified as “highly influential.”

Which means the report cannot require regulatory action, though it can (and should) influence it. From the NOAA press release:

The U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research today released a scientific assessment that provides the first comprehensive analysis of observed and projected changes in weather and climate extremes in North America and U.S. territories. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change previously evaluated extreme weather and climate events on a global basis in this same context. However, there has not been a specific assessment across North America prior to this report.

Among the major findings reported in this assessment are that droughts, heavy downpours, excessive heat, and intense hurricanes are likely to become more commonplace as humans continue to increase the atmospheric concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

That's official. The extreme weather the U.S. has been experiencing is due to climate change and is expected to become more extreme in the future.

[1] [2]

U.S. Floods a Sign of Things to Come

by Environmentalist Staff

Reprint of article originally published on 3/21/08 forecasting current floods

Cross-posted on Reuters, USA Today, FoxNews, IBS, Atlanta Journal-Constitution

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has issued a report that states the flooding we're seeing in the U.S. heartland is a sign of things to come.

Major floods striking America’s heartland this week offer a preview of the spring seasonal outlook, according to NOAA’s National Weather Service. Several factors will contribute to above-average flood conditions, including record rainfall in some states and snow packs, which are melting and causing rivers and streams to crest over their banks. This week, more than 250 communities in a dozen states are experiencing flood conditions.

“We expect rains and melting snow to bring more flooding this spring,” said Vickie Nadolski, deputy director of NOAA’s National Weather Service. “Americans should be on high alert to flood conditions in your communities. Arm yourselves with information about how to stay safe during a flood and do not attempt to drive on flooded roadways – remember to always turn around, don’t drown.”

The heavy precipitation may be related to the La Nina effect, as reported by the British Met(eorological) Office in this report. NOAA gives these reasons for the flood conditions:

1. Above-normal flood potential is evident in much of the Mississippi River basin, the Ohio River basin, the lower Missouri River basin, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, most of New York, all of New England, and portions of the West, including Colorado and Idaho.


2. Heavy winter snow combined with recent rain indicates parts of Wisconsin and Illinois should see minor to moderate flooding, with as much as a 20 to 30 percent chance of major flooding on some rivers in southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois.


3. Current snow depth in some areas of upstate New York and New England is more than a foot greater than usual for this time of the year, which increases flood potential in the Connecticut River Valley.


4. Locations in the mountains of Colorado and Idaho have 150 to 200 percent of average water contained in snowpack leading to a higher than normal flood potential.

NOAA has also updated their Spring Drought Outlook with the following...

Read More

Texas oilman planning huge wind farm

by Janet Ritz

T. Boone Pickens, Jr., the Texas billionaire oilman, is planning to put billions into a 4,000 megawatt wind farm in Texas with the capacity to power 1.3 million homes.

Pickens said he will be purchasing GE Turbines to install in central Texas from 2010 to 2015 on a royalty share basis with landowners in order to obtain access to wind.

"The Department of Energy came out with a study in April of '07 that said we could generate 20 percent of our electricity from wind. And the wind power is -- you know, it's clean, it's renewable. It's -- you know, it's everything you want. And it's a stable supply of energy.

It will be located in [the] central part of the United States, which will be the best from a safety standpoint to be located. You have a wind corridor that goes from Pampa, Texas, to the Canadian border. And it has -- the wind, it's unbelievable that we have not done more with wind. Look at Germany and Spain. They have developed their wind way beyond what we have, and they don't have as much wind as we do. It's not unlike the French have done with their nuclear. They're 80 percent power generated off of nuclear, we're 20 percent.

A turbine will generate somewhere around 20,000 [dollars] a year in royalty income [some of which to benefit those who put them on their land]. And on a 640-acre tract, you can put five to 10 of these on the tract. And you don't have to have them if you don't want them."

This is an important offering from Pickens, the chairman of the BP Capital Management hedge fund, known as the "Oracle of Oil" with a personal net worth (in 2007) of 3 billion dollars...

[1] [2]

The Gas Tax 'Holiday' Shell Game

by Janet Ritz

Cross-posted on The Huffington Post, Reuters, FoxNews

Senators Hillary Clinton and John McCain have challenged Senator Barack Obama over his refusal to support their proposal that would suspend the .18 Federal gas tax for three months this summer.

The problem?

A near-unanimous chorus of protests from experts, economists and environmentalists, all of whom support Senator Obama's position that the 'holiday' would net less than thirty cents a day for consumers -- if indeed any net at all -- since, historically, oil companies have absorbed the savings without passing them on, while gutting the transportation infrastructure trust fund that is the source of income for thousands of American workers and the safety net for our highways and bridges that are currently crumbling.

Environmentalists have also added that it would likely lead to more gasoline usage as at time when we need to reduce our carbon footprint due to the impact of climate change.

The lone 'expert' in support of Senators Clinton and McCain in this scenario so far?

Spokesman for the Clinton campaign and SHELL OIL LOBBYIST, Steve Elmendorf.

To which, Senator Obama responded:

“In a moment of candor, her advisers actually admitted that it wouldn’t have much of an effect on gas prices. But, they said, it’s a great political issue for Senator Clinton. So this is not about getting you through the summer, it’s about getting elected,” Obama argued. “This is what passes for leadership in Washington, phony ideas, calculated to win elections instead of actually solving problems.”

The environmental organization, Friends of the Earth, has endorsed Senator Obama, citing the gas tax issue as false and lauding the Illinois Senator for standing up to political pressure to tell the truth about it. Newspapers across the country have also weighed in with their criticism, including this quote by one of Senator Clinton's own supporters:

“I was appalled by Hillary going with the gas tax,” said Alice M. Rivlin, a budget director under former President Bill Clinton who supports Mrs. Clinton for the nomination. It “looked like pandering,” Mrs. Rivlin said.

An open letter signed recently by more than 100 economists said the proposed tax holiday would do little to reduce gas prices. In part, that is because a fall in prices would lead to more demand, which would cause prices to return to their earlier level. The result would be that overseas oil-producing governments would get money now flowing to the United States government in gas taxes.

What is also being lost in this pandering: the fact that this idea was first floated by John McCain and then picked up by Senator Clinton...

[1] [2]

Bush Speech Shakes Up Paris Climate Talks

by Stormchaser John

At the U.S. sponsored climate meeting in Paris this week (third in a series), everyone was abuzz with the news that President Bush had chosen to offer his approach to greenhouse gases as the Paris talks opened:

The Bush speech was aimed largely at a domestic audience. Bush's aides said it was aimed at heading off a "train wreck" of varying legislation in the U.S. Congress.

Timed for Paris but not about Paris, a meeting that is the result of the U.S. inability to sort climate change at the Bali meeting in December, which led to the follow-up meetings taking place parallel to the UN meetings on the replacement for the Kyoto Accord.

Confused yet?

Confusing and frustrating because not enough is being done and now President Bush, in his Rose Garden declaration, insists he has a better idea of how to lower greenhouse gases before it's too late, when the consensus is that the policies he's proposed are too little too late:

The meetings are part of a U.S.-sponsored series of negotiations on global warming. They involve representatives from the countries that produce 80 percent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, blamed for heating the planet — including the United States, the 27-nation European Union, China and India.

Schalkwyk said Bush's speech "takes us backward," because it did not call for mandatory emissions cuts. Such cuts are central to U.N. negotiations on a follow-up plan to the Kyoto Protocol. Delegates from the European Commission and the EU presidency found Bush's strategy "disappointing," said the chief U.N. climate change official, Yvo de Boer.

Two weeks ago, I flew to London and then on to Scotland to find it covered in snow -- all of the UK. Which, of course, has been fodder for deniers who don't understand that climate change means climate instability and the cooler La Nina year we're experiencing will not necessarily be kind enough to repeat itself in 2009...

READ MORE

Carnegie Study: Climate Requires Near-zero Emissions

by Janet Ritz
and The Environmentalist Staff

Scientists at the Carnegie Institution have just completed a study that has concluded the only way to stabilize the climate is to reduce carbon emissions to a near-zero level:

In the study, to be published in Geophysical Research Letters, climate scientists Ken Caldeira and Damon Matthews used an Earth system model at the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology to simulate the response of the Earth’s climate to different levels of carbon dioxide emission over the next 500 years. ~snip~

The scientists investigated how much climate changes as a result of each individual emission of carbon dioxide, and found that each increment of emission leads to another increment of warming.

With emissions set to zero in the simulations, the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere slowly fell as carbon “sinks” such as the oceans and land vegetation absorbed the gas. Surprisingly, however, the model predicted that global temperatures would remain high for at least 500 years after carbon dioxide emissions ceased.

In our earlier article, Everything but the Oceans' Sink, we explored the connection between global warming and the inability of the Southern Ocean to absorb C02. Caldeira and Matthews' study further points to the connection between carbon sinks and the impact on climate stability.

Matthews and Caldeira found that to prevent the Earth from heating further, carbon dioxide emissions would, effectively, need to be eliminated...

THERE'S MORE

Congress grills Big Oil on prices

by Janet Ritz

and The Environmentalist Staff

Cross-posted on Reuters, IBS, USAToday, FoxNews


The top five oil companies, testifying before Representative Edward Markey's (D-MA) Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, insisted that their 125 billion dollar profit last was "in line with other industries."

Representative Markey's take on the profits:

“On April Fool’s Day, the biggest joke of all is being played on American families by Big Oil, while using every trick in the book to keep billions in federal tax subsidies even as they rake in record profits,” said Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass. [video]

As reported in this article, Congress to drill for answers on oil prices, both the House and the Senate are holding hearings this week regarding the record profits by oil companies. The House hearings are focusing on the actual profits by the big five oil companies; Exxon Mobile, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP and Royal Dutch Shell.

The Senate investigation will be on the impact of investors on rising prices.

Lawmakers were looking for answers to the soaring fuel costs a day after the Energy Department said the national average price of gasoline reached a record $3.29 cents a gallon and global oil prices remained above $100 a barrel although supplies of both gasoline and oil seemed to be adequate.
~snip~

In November, 2005, Hofmeister and the top executives of the same companies represented Tuesday, sat in a Senate hearing room to explain high prices and their h&uge profits. The prices are of concern, Hofmeister said at the time, adding a note of optimism: "Our industry is extremely cyclical and what goes up almost always comes down," he told the skeptical senators on a day when oil cost $60 a barrel.

Oil recently reached a high of $111 a barrel.

The increase in the price of gasoline is hitting all sectors of the American economy. Truckers, dependent upon high diesel prices, have been particularly hard hit, leading to an increase in the inflation index for the products they carry. This ranges from milk to hardware to the price increase announced by Delta Airlines today due to high fuel costs...

THERE'S MORE

Congress to drill for answers on oil prices

by Janet Ritz
and The Environmentalist Staff

Congress will hold hearings this week where they will question the five biggest oil companies, Exxon Mobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP and Royal Dutch Shell, about tax subsidies, high prices and record profits.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Under the backdrop of record gas prices and record profits, Congress is set to grill executives Tuesday from the world's five biggest publicly traded oil companies.

Lawmakers are expected to focus their questions on why the cash-rich industry needs $18 billion in tax breaks over ten years with some in Congress looking to take them away and use them to subsidize renewable energy projects.

The hearings are set to open Tuesday before the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming chaired by Congressman Edward Markey (D-MA):

On Tuesday, April 1, 2008, Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) will bring top-level executives from the five largest oil companies to discuss the current state of oil and gas prices, oil company profits, and the need for clean, renewable fuels to ease demand for oil and cut global warming pollution. The Select Committee will hear from the number two officers worldwide for the three United States-based oil companies and the presidents of U.S. operations for the foreign companies.

Set to testify:

* Mr. J. Stephen Simon, Senior Vice President, Exxon Mobil Corp.
* Mr. John Hofmeister, President, Shell Oil Company
* Mr. Robert A. Malone, Chairman and President, BP America, Inc.
* Mr. Peter Robertson, Vice Chairman, Chevron
* Mr. John Lowe, Executive Vice President, ConocoPhillips

The hearing will start at 12 pm EST, Tuesday, April 1, 2008, at 210 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC and on the web at globalwarming.house.gov. On Thursday, the Senate committee on Energy and Natural Resources will hear testimony Thursday regarding the role investment money has on oil prices...

There's more

Giant Antarctic Ice Shelf Collapses

by Janet Ritz
and the Environmentalist Staff

The National Ice and Snow Institute (NISDC) has released a report documenting a dramatic and troubling collapse of a large portion (nine times the size of Manhattan) of the Wilkins Ice Shelf in Antarctica.

Satellite imagery from the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder reveals that a 13,680 square kilometer (5,282 square mile) ice shelf has begun to collapse because of rapid climate change in a fast-warming region of Antarctica.

The Wilkins Ice Shelf it's a broad plate of permanent floating ice on the southwest Antarctic Peninsula, about 1,000 miles south of South America. In the past 50 years, the western Antarctic Peninsula has experienced the biggest temperature increase on Earth, rising by 0.5 degree Celsius (0.9 degree Fahrenheit) per decade. NSIDC Lead Scientist Ted Scambos, who first spotted the disintegration in March, said, "We believe the Wilkins has been in place for at least a few hundred years. But warm air and exposure to ocean waves are causing a break-up."

The ice shelf began its visible collapse on February 28th, when a huge iceberg (41 x 2.5 kilometers - 25.5 by 1.5 miles) broke away, triggering a wider collapse of 405 square kilometers (160 square miles) of the shelf.



The edge of the shelf crumbled into the sky-blue pattern of exposed deep glacial ice that has become characteristic of climate-induced ice shelf break-ups such as the Larsen B in 2002. A narrow beam of intact ice, just 6 kilometers wide (3.7 miles) was protecting the remaining shelf from further breakup as of March 23.

"The Wilkins disintegration won't raise sea level because it already floats in the ocean, and few glaciers flow into it." Scambos said. "However, the collapse underscores that the Wilkins region has experienced an intense melt season. Regional sea ice has all but vanished, leaving the ice shelf exposed to the action of waves."

Scientists have tracked this event with great interest, both for the indications of warming, the loss of habitat and the concern that other ice shelves, similarly impacted, do have the potential to significantly raise sea level. NASA's Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) and data from ICESat alerted scientists to the ice shelf's collapse in mid-March...

Photo Credit (1): National Snow and Ice Data Center; Photo Credit(2): National Snow and Ice Data Center/NASA

read more

Cats may lower heart attack risk

by Janet Ritz
and The Environmentalist Staff

Cross-posted on Reuters, FoxNews

A new study from the University of Minnesota has discovered that people with cats have a 40% lower risk of heart attack than their non-feline friendly counterparts.

Researchers looked at nearly 4,500 adults and found that cat ownership was related to a 40% lower risk of suffering a fatal heart attack. The team speculated that having a cat may reduce stress and anxiety, and so protect against cardiovascular disease.

The study, led by Professor Adnan Qureshi at the University of Minnesota, suggested that even those who no longer owned a cat benefited from these protective effects...The benefits held true even after the researchers adjusted for cardiovascular risk factors such as blood pressure, diabetes, smoking and high cholesterol.

The study's authors do not recommend getting a cat in response to the findings, as more research needs to be done and, as one researcher suggested, it may be that the temperament of a cat-lover is more conducive to heart-health than those who did not share their feline affinity.

This study did not examine the benefit of dog ownership, although a previous study did find benefits of keeping dogs beyond taking their companions out for walks.

The study did not indicate whether cats were present in the household or how the dogs felt about their feline counterparts.

Both studies indicate pets are good for humans, which will come as little surprise to the many humans who now have a scientific basis to support their claims that they are healthier for their canine and feline companions.

Read More

President Bush Intervenes on EPA Smog Ruling

by Janet Ritz
with Environmentalist Staff

Cross-posted on Reuters

George W. Bush personally intervened on the new EPA smog ruling by pushing them to lower the standards more than the EPA wanted, to standards already lower than the recommended limit:

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency agreed to weaken an important part of its new smog requirements after being told at the last minute that President Bush preferred a less stringent approach, according to government documents. They show tense exchanges between the EPA and the White House Office of Management and Budget in the days before the smog air quality standard was announced Wednesday. ~snip~

The disagreement concerned the amount of protection from ozone, or smog, that should be afforded wildlife, farmlands, parks and open spaces. This "public welfare" or "secondary" smog standard is separate from a decision to tighten the smog requirements for human health, which the EPA decided to do by reducing the allowable concentrations of ozone in the air from 80 parts per billion to 75 parts per billion.

The lowering of ozone to 75 parts per billion is far less than recommended by scientists, environmentalists and other experts for immediate human health. The 'secondary' smog standard is there to protect the environment over the long term...

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

Al Gore: The Dangers of "Sub-Prime Carbon" (UN Summit on Climate Risk)

by Janet Ritz

Cross-posted on Reuters, Fox

Al Gore, addressing a United Nations summit on green investment, warned business leaders about the consequences of investment in technologies that did not reduce the carbon footprint, given the associated costs to both society and business of climate change:

UNITED NATIONS - Al Gore advised Wall Street leaders and institutional investors Thursday to ditch businesses too reliant on carbon-intensive energy — or prepare for huge losses down the road.

"You need to really scrub your investment portfolios, because I guarantee you — as my longtime good redneck friends in Tennessee say, I guarandamntee you — that if you really take a fine-tooth comb and go through your portfolios, many of you are going to find them chock-full of subprime carbon assets," the former vice president said.

Gore's remarks took place at the under-reported but significant United Nations Investor Summit on Climate Risk where leading United States and European institutional investors released their climate change action plan:

Co-hosted by the United Nations Foundation, Ceres and the United Nations Fund for International Partnerships, the event was attended by over 450 investors, financial and corporate leaders from around the world. The signatories to the action plan included state treasures, controllers, pension fund leaders, asset managers and foundations, collectively managing over $1.75 trillion in assets. Press Release.

The Summit included commitments to direct significant and growning portions of investment funds into green technologies and included Denise Nappier, State Treasurer, Connecticut, Alex Sink, Chief Financial Officer, Florida, Bill Lockyer, State Treasurer, California, John Chiang, State Controller, California, Donald MacDonald, Pension Trustee Director, British Telecom...

Read more

Where to Buy Fair Trade Chocolate

by Janet Ritz

Cross-posted on The Huffington Post , FoxNews

A Valentine's Day reminder, given chocolate's status as a conflict substance, that ethical (and tasty!) chocolate is readily available. Why is this important? With Fair Trade chocolate:

• Forced and abusive child labor practices are prohibited
• Farming families earn a price that is adequate to meet their basic human needs
• Environmentally sustainable production methods are required

Where to buy Fair Trade chocolate and other Fair Trade goods?

Read more

Climate 'Clearly Out of Balance'

by Janet Ritz
Stormchaser John

The American Geophysical Union (AGU) has updated its policy on climate change with the pronouncement that changes to the Earth's climate system are "not natural."

The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century...

Read more