I’m in the midst of an astoundingly busy week, but I thought I’d drop by to point out that the new UN report on climate change is out!
It’s sad. Apparently, literally thousands of scientists have now banded together and put their political agendas in front of their professional integrity. I’m not sure why they feel the need to jump to conclusions about so-called human-made climate change, but there has to be a reason. Something about bringing down the US economy, destroying our way of life, and hating us for our freedoms, I’d guess.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to hop into my car and drive four miles just to have a cup of coffee with a couple of colleagues. I wish I was kidding. On the bright side, the return journey will be mostly downhill, which according to the White House Environmental Task Force, will completely offset my journey there from a carbon standpoint. They also recommend “a complete boycott on the procedure known as ‘carbon dating.’” I may publish their full report soon - it’s full of helpful hints that won’t squeeze your pocketbook but will help prevent that thing that isn’t happening anyway.





39 comments
Ann
April 6, 2007 at 2:46 pm
1Those damned scientists. They’re in league with evildoers who want to CUT YOUR HEAD OFF! Never forget that.
Never mind carbon dating. I’d be happy with carbon-life-form dating. (Insert cymbal clash here)
But how could we know how old the earth really is without carbon dating? I’m confused.
Dale
April 6, 2007 at 4:38 pm
2I wonder if there are moderate terrorist groups that only want to
Dale
April 6, 2007 at 4:41 pm
3AACK ! I did not press submit! Okay, it´s not originally what I was going to write, but now I´m wondering if there are terrorist groups that want to cut my sentences off.
Jason
April 6, 2007 at 5:16 pm
4Have those scientists been in my neck of the woods in the past few days with the weather we’ve been having? Temps in the 30s in early April oughta give them pause…
SeattleDan
April 6, 2007 at 6:53 pm
5Is there no one who doesn’t want to CUT MY HEAD OFF? I’m gettin’ real paranoid here.
Got up to 81 today here in the Emerald City (yeah, we stole it). The Mariners went to Cleveland to play and got snowed out.
According to the report, the drys will get drier and the wets will get wetter. Gets wet enough, SeattleTammy and I will have beach front property.
Fran
April 6, 2007 at 7:31 pm
6And the land that Lillian and I moved from will soon be another dust bowl. Nothing but cheerfulness on all fronts.
Linkmeister
April 6, 2007 at 10:59 pm
7Is KBR gonna get contracts to build seawalls around all those atolls in the Pacific, I wonder?
Fortunately I’m about 500 feet above sea level and two miles from Pearl Harbor.
SeattleDan
April 6, 2007 at 11:04 pm
8300 feet is what we hear if the Polar ice caps melt. Looks like you have beach front property, too, Link!
Surfs up!
Linkmeister
April 7, 2007 at 11:32 am
9When I went to UofA in Tucson we’d make ironic jokes about surfing off the coast of Yuma when “the Big One” hit the San Andreas fault. Looks like it may not need an earthquake to cause that.
Landis
April 7, 2007 at 12:28 pm
10Funny, the IPCC report was a text book for a Climate class I took at Berkeley. But it was the IPCC 1995 report. It said pretty much the same thing. Thousands of scientists banding together saying we had to do something. It worked so well then….
Interestingly enough, doing something actually benefits those who do something. Replace incandescent lights with fluorescents and you end up saving money, not just energy. If big business could actually get this through their head we’d be much better off.
Murray
April 7, 2007 at 12:52 pm
11That was one of the reasons I chose the mountains to MD’s Eastern Shore (One of the first to go). Besides it’s too hot there now already.
And unless you poach a deer on your neighbors land, no one here wants TO CUT YOUR HEAD OFF!
K. Trout
April 7, 2007 at 2:37 pm
12“And The Winner Is!!!…”.
Planet Earth in the year 2089. The climate change is everything they said it would be back in the Aughts. Sea levels had risen; drier dries; wetter wets; but the Ozone Hole did seem to finally be healing itself after everyone south of Montevideo, Uraguay was forced to evacuate into the Amazon, sparking World Food War IX and resulting in the taming of the biodiversity in Brazil. Famines, pestilence and disease had mowed down huge swathes of humanity. All carbon fuels were banned in 2021. NASA and the space program were shelved and satellites ceased to function and fell out of orbit - one of the Soviet models (as big as 3 buses) hit in the city center of Mumbai, but fortunately the plague had already wiped out the all but 3% of its citizens and only 30,000 died. Civilizations and economies crumbled.
The remaining two cultures that survived formed a coalition to come up with a way to speed evolution, so humans would adapt to the new environment before all was lost. The leaders consulted scientists, geneticists, philosophers and anthropologists to come up with the best way to solve the problem. Each discipline was given an island to populate with small numbers of similar human types - the geneticists developed humans with no opposable thumbs, to limit toolmaking mischief; the philosophers populated their island with the mentally retarded looking for the same end result; anthropologists found a culture in Central America that had sex in public but would only eat the privacy of their own homes. These were put on an island as well. And so on.
After several generations of inbreeding between only the inhabitants of their own island, an evaluation was made of the resulting off-spring. The decision of the best adapted human was to be made at the end of Lent, which with all the famines, was very nearly impossible to determine when that might be.
Unknown to the citizens of Earth, in 2043 a brown dwarf star, which was so dim that Hubble and all the other telescopes had missed it, traveled close enough to the Oort Cloud that 57 comets were nudged into a new orbit, an orbit that put our planet in the cross-hairs of 8 of the comets. Since humans no longer ventured into space or studied the heavens, they were clueless of the coming disaster. Just as the best human was to be chosen, the final Ice Capades came to town, striking all populated regions of the Earth. Fires burned for decades, trillions of tons of ash and dirt were exploded into the atmosphere. When the fires burned out, a new Ice Age began and lasted for 25,000 years. At last the ice cover began to recede. A brown German cock-roach pushed the last bit of ash out of the way and emerged onto the surface. Earth once again was a paradise. He turned around and signaled to 1,000,000 of his closest friends to come on up. Life was good.
Linkmeister
April 7, 2007 at 4:08 pm
13Landis, I just put four of the fluorescent bulbs into a fixture in the bathroom; the slight lag time between flipping the switch and actually getting light in the room is still disconcerting.
Harold
April 7, 2007 at 6:11 pm
14My family and I have been replacing incandescents with fluorescents for years - sorry, decades -, even before they were really affordable. But they still have their drawbacks. Their light is harsh, even in the lowest-wattage bulbs. It tends too much to the blue or the green, even in the “yellowest” ones that I’ve found. They can’t be used with timers, light or motion sensors, or other things that automatically turn them on - something to do with the ballast, I suspect, though I’ve never gotten an adequate explanation. They can’t be used with dimmers, either, because they don’t work like that. And the almost infrasonic buzz they emit makes my skin crawl. Add to that the added mercury waste in landfills from disposed tubes and environmental costs from manufacturing them, and fluorescents are an imperfect and partial solution at best.
Just like I’m going to keep driving my 35+ mpg Tercel as long as I can rather than jumping into a hybrid or electric, I’m going to still be using a few incandescents until something better than fluorescents comes along to completely replace them - LEDs, perhaps, once they’ve cracked the white-light spectrum problem (which will probably involve an array of different colored LEDs rather than a white LED that produces a pleasing white.)
siobhan
April 7, 2007 at 7:07 pm
15Harold, I thought I was the only one who heard that damned buzz. We’re an all CF household (okay, I cop to a conventional bult in the fridge and stove, but still) now, but I think we’ll probably start moving to LED soon. I’ve already replaced some of my task lamps with LED (and we made the switch on Christmas lights this past year).
siobhan
April 7, 2007 at 7:08 pm
16…. conventional BULB, not bult….
(I wish I could blame it on pinot typing.)
Marc
April 7, 2007 at 7:59 pm
17Harold, I’ve been replacing incandescents with cfl’s for years, too, but with a twist. I’m REALLY fanatical about the buzz and the color and have done a bunch of research. Long story short, most of my cfl’s now are totally buzzless and I’ve bought ones with only a pure white color (5400K daylight) with at least a CRI of 90 or more (the higher the Color Rendition Index, the richer and fuller the spectrum emitted). My personal philosophy is that if I want color in my house, it will be from my furnishings, decor and paint, not my light bulbs. Also, there are now cfl’s that can be dimmed.
But the real story is about the new LED’s being developed with a Lumens per Watt efficiency of 70 or more, which is better than the best fluorescents. Less heat, no mercury, just about any color you want, lasts over 30 years… Caramba!
hedera
April 7, 2007 at 8:44 pm
18My experience with the cfl’s is that they aren’t as bright as they say they are - and I’m getting so I really need that 150W on the top level of the 3-way bulb to read, sigh. The “50-100-150″ cfl has a top of about 100 watts. They work great in undimmed ceiling lights, though. Marc, these wondrous cfls with no buzz sound interesting, but I bought a pure white one and then couldn’t stand the contrast with the orange incandescents. If you live in a house with a lot of wood trim, the pure white light just looks cold. I’ll have to check out the LEDs.
And K. Trout is perfectly right about the whole climate change business. Everyone is running around screaming that the earth will be destroyed by climate change. No, it won’t. Our ability to live on the earth, as comfortably as we have so far, may be; but the earth itself? It’ll still be there, just as Stephen Schwartz and Leonard Bernstein described it in MASS:
… dark are the cities, dead is the ocean
silent and sickly are the remnants of motion
world without end turns mindlessly round
never a sentry, never a sound…
We need the world; but the world doesn’t need us. Only our arrogance makes us think so.
SeattleDan
April 7, 2007 at 11:01 pm
19It’s spring time, a time we should be contemplating the renewal of life, the joy of it all. So, I posted this link at the General’s website and wanted to share it with those of you who don’t visit there. But it’s Tom Lehrer, and who can complain?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=xtXCZ58TeyA
Murray
April 8, 2007 at 7:36 am
20I haven’t bought an incandescent bulb in over 12 years. I can’t hear the buzzing and the color seems fine to me. You can buy dimmers that work with the cf bulbs and I’ve had a cf lamp on a timer for at least a decade. When you buy the bulbs in a three pack they aren’t that expensive, and you don’t have to buy them that often.
Two years ago I spent a week at my youngest son’s house and I switched out all the bulbs I could. It was expensive but I know that his energy bills are less now.
cooper
April 8, 2007 at 8:03 am
21Good for you, Murray and all the other cf’ers out there. I stuck my toe into the waters for the first time last year and my wife’s first reaction was “The Look”, but she’s over that now.
Well, it’s good to be back. Looks like you carried on fine without me. We came back to a very cold house and it hasn’t gotten much better since. I called the repairman and he said the control panel blew out (again!). Mayhaps, I should purchase a new furnace this year, seeing as that one is 19 years old now - the very first thing we bought for the house when we moved in. We have gas logs, so the inside temp is a bit higher than outdoors. A bit. This cold snap should be over in a day or two and I’ll have all summer to decide what to do about the furnace.
Speaking of summer, I started the garden about 10 days ago. Peas, lettuce and, though a bit early as it turns out, green beans - all up and growing, slowly, during this brief reminder of winter. Now if I can just keep the cats from digging in it (and doing what they do with a hole in the ground).
Dan, I’m happy for your good weather fortune. Rub it in while you can - I always do.
Steve
April 8, 2007 at 2:10 pm
22I just bought a couple of the new energy saving fluorescent bulbs.
Of course, they came in enough indestructible plastic packaging to offset any possible energy savings well into the next century, so go figure.
Murray
April 8, 2007 at 2:17 pm
23Hedra,
You are right.
Global warming doesn’t hurt the earth, it doesn’t care.
Earth doesn’t care if it’s like Mars or Venus, it doesn’t care if it’s verdant or desolate. The animals don’t care if they are the last ones alive. The plants don’t care. The only thing that CAN care is us, only we have the capacity.
When the Right says that ”enviros” don’t care about people, that they just care about plants, animals and the earth, they are full of shit. (Not that they aren’t already full of shit).
If we screw up the environment, the world will just adjust as it has numerous times in the past. Other, better suited organisms will take over. Life will go on. It will just be different.
It just won’t be good for us. A drastic change in climate, flora and fauna will be very detrimental. When there is a huge shift in human population, when vast areas become too dry or too wet to sustain the current occupants, when low lands are flooded, the people won’t go away quietly. (Would you?) Our way of life is what is at stake, not the plants, not the animals, not the earth.
This is what puzzles me. When you get down to it, the Rich Right are as much at risk as the Hoi Paloi. Yet they are the ones who are the least concerned about the consequences of climate change. Sure there will be winners and losers, but there will be more losers than winners. You would think that those who have a lot would want to save things as they are for their offspring, not leave a big dark question mark.
Then the question becomes, are they so greedy that their current monetary advantage, outweighs the damage to their progeny?
Apparently so.
For the vast majority of people, offsetting the prospects of global warming (using less energy and being better stewards of the earth) provides immediate monetary benefits (extra insulation saves money, hot water solar collectors pay for them selves in several years, solar pool heaters pay for them selves in months). Only those who directly benefit financially from increasing CO2 output are hurt. (A very small number of people). But the Rich Right have convinced their minions to fight this one the way they have convinced people who live in trailer parks to oppose an inheritance tax.
Chaney said that if there were a 1 % chance of a terrorist attack that the government should treat it as a certainty. Shouldn’t we do the same with something that our Pentagon says is our biggest potential threat?
David
April 8, 2007 at 2:36 pm
24I have begun the cfl journey, but I’m at the novice stage.
The highest point in Florida, near Lakewood in North Florida, is about 360 feet. Orlando is 50 feet above sea level. I think the Green Swamp is about 150. Seafront property in Florida will be along the interior Georgia and Alabama state lines. The Swamp, home of the national champion Florida football team, will belong to the sharks again. Fascinating.
Meanwhile, William Gray has called Al Gore an alarmist, and the WaPo editorial page (Bob Woodward, I assume) has trashed Nancy Pelosi for trying to help avert WWIII. Fuck the both of them and the arrogance they rode in on. Also, Go You Mighty Gators ‘07-’08.
And women’s gymnastic team is currently #1 (eventually they will have to learn coordinated swimming routines, I guess).
cooper
April 8, 2007 at 2:49 pm
25Hey, sportsfans. Ann Coulter is coming to nearby Matthews, NC for a fundamentalist love-in this May. Now if I buy several dozen tomatoes now, they should be about the proper hurling consistency…
cooper
April 8, 2007 at 6:21 pm
26Hey, anybody else doing their own taxes this year? Jesus Christ on a crutch!
It's Pat!
April 8, 2007 at 7:28 pm
27Well Cooper, I’ve done my taxes, but I sure have not planted a garden yet. It’s still just a bit chilly here in Minne-so-brown-ta. The daffodils are coming up, but the geese keep flying north and south, they can’t figure out what the heck is going on. Maybe they are conservative, confused, and conflicted.
hedera
April 8, 2007 at 8:17 pm
28Murray, I think the real issue is the human race’s ability to convince ourselves that It Can’t Happen To Me. Americans especially have spent the past several decades convincing themselves that Those Rules Don’t Apply To ME (watch any jaywalker, red light runner, city bicyclist, etc. - Murray, I give you the credit of assuming that YOU obey the traffic laws when you ride on the street, but believe me, you are in a minority). It doesn’t surprise me that they’re currently convinced that global warming Won’t Apply To Them either. Unfortunately by the time they wake up to reality it may be too late.
I actually think some people are waking up to the facts; I regard the current movement toward earth stewardship among evangelical Christians as very promising. There are a lot of them, and they have good political connections. America’s biggest problem right now is the Awl Bidness’ lock on the White House. Two more years (sound of teeth grinding)…
siobhan
April 8, 2007 at 8:31 pm
29“This is what puzzles me. When you get down to it, the Rich Right are as much at risk as the Hoi Paloi.”
Via my job, I watch them in action. They plan to buy their way out of it. They don’t realize that it’s actually not an option.
Murray
April 9, 2007 at 8:58 am
30Hedra, I know what you mean about cyclists. As the owner of a bicycle touring company, getting along with cars is very important. When a cyclist blows through a stop sign or light in front of a bunch of cars, he makes a lot of enemies. Then the cyclist wonders why the drivers try to run them off the road and throw things. Yes people who think they can get away with things flaunt the rules. It is a bad strategy for cyclists and humans avoiding the problems of global warming.
waterfowler
April 9, 2007 at 9:32 am
31Mr. Cooper, gas logs? You must have money to burn, not only for gas but for the carbon offsets too. Two of my neighbors had gas logs installed and now they don’t use their fireplaces. Not that we use them that often anyway.
Also, yes I’m doing my own taxes this year. But J.C. was on a cross.
David, when Gray predicts lots of storms, y’all like to say “see”…, but when he ridicules Gore, he’s an idiot. My point exactly…again.
If y’all’d do a little diggin’, I think you might be surprised to find that most “green” energy & products are very inefficient. We actually use more energy to make some of this stuff, so that y’all can feel we are saving the earth. I love corn farmers, but ethanol sucks. I’m all for biofuels, but they can’t get there yet. Y’all have already summed up cf bulbs, like some more mercury in your fish? Even if Al/Chicken were king, he couldn’t provide the energy of oil & gas. Sorry Murray, but it goes back to the science.
The wren are doing great. Still not sure if it’s 1 or 2. I’ll peek again later.
cooper
April 9, 2007 at 1:42 pm
32Mr. Fowler, actually it’s the first time this winter that we’ve used the gas logs. They are the ventless type (yes, I have a CO monitor.) and actually made a big difference in the end. I’m talking to a HVAC representative tomorrow night. Might git me on’a dem “Green” furnaces. No offense meant by the J.C. crack. I’ll find a different way of venting in the future.
your pal, cooper
SpottedDog
April 9, 2007 at 1:59 pm
33I think it would be more prudent to focus our efforts on preparing for environmental change rather than spending too much energy on arguing about which ‘green’ products to buy. By preparing for changing coastlines, drought, famine, floods, disease and whatever other effects a changing climate might have we can avoid or at least temper many of the possible problems. Also, even if Global Warming is being overhyped, preparing for such disasters is, arguably, still a good idea.
I think it is interesting that the general focus still seems to be on what we can do to prevent environmental change. I think it is too late for that if it was ever even possible. We would be better off preparing for the changes that we foresee.
hedera
April 9, 2007 at 7:13 pm
34But what you suggest, SpottedDog, while well considered, would require the human race to admit that climate change is out of its control. The human race, and particularly the subset of it that lives in the United States, doesn’t ever want to admit that anything is out of its control, no matter how irrational that might seem.
SpottedDog
April 9, 2007 at 9:59 pm
35Hedera- good point, but perhaps our fearless and wise leaders could encourage us to exercise control over the future by preparing for it. On the other hand, it has also just occurred to me that attempting to prevent global climate change by purchasing ‘green’ products justifies shopping, so maybe that is the better approach. Isn’t that what we were encouraged to do after 9/11? I remember an ex-grilfriend claiming that shopping was a cure-all. Perhaps she was more wise than I thought.
Murray
April 10, 2007 at 7:39 am
36“I think it would be more prudent to focus our efforts on preparing for environmental change rather than spending too much energy on arguing about which ‘green’ products to buy.”
Wouldn’t that be like deciding which hospital to go to before the accident rather than try to avoid the accident in the first place?
No we don’t need to spend our way out of this problem. Quite the contrary, conservation is about cutting back. On the other hand when you need to buy something new, getting the most efficient is always a good strategy.
The MOST cost effective way to save energy is passive solar which only requires orienting the house properly and moving most of the windows to the south side. If you go to the further step of adding thermal storage and thermal shades you can get 1/4 to ¾ of the energy needed to heat your house free. No sacrifice is needed, just a little thought when the house is in the planning stage. This even works in the South
waterfowler
April 10, 2007 at 11:08 am
37Murray, do you have any idea how much oil is required to produce solar panels?
I’m w/ SpottedDog. And Hedera nailed it. It is vanity to think we can control our environment. Sure, we can dirty it, change it, clean it up…but we don’t have the power to destroy or restore it to what we would like it to be.
Murray
April 11, 2007 at 9:38 am
38What kind of solar panels? Domestic hot water? Pool? Photovoltaic? The photovoltaic panels made by the BP (formerly Solarex) plant in Fredric MD uses only photovoltaic panels to power their plant. So the answer at that plant is 0 oil is used. The amount of electric used to create solar panels is minute versus the amount of energy produced over a lifetime. The solar collector on my shop is made of, coil stock about 1/3 the amount needed to trim a house, 200′ of copper tubing and 2 4X7 glass panels. For the next 40 years this collector will provide about 75% of my hot water needs, and it does so by pulling heat OUT of the atmosphere, not by making heat from long dead plants and animals.
Claiming that producing solar panels uses more energy than they produce, is laughably wrong and is as much a subterfuge as is the constant name calling of those who want to point out the danger of screwing up the only earth we have.
Rather than argue a losing position better to just heap scorn on the other person.
David
April 15, 2007 at 5:17 pm
39waterfowler,
I’m with you on your criticism of some of the green alternatives that aren’t, and ethanol from corn is one of the worst mistakes. But I don’t cheer William Gray for predicting more hurricanes. I just don’t much respect a scientist who would call someone who has succeeded in lighting a fire under our Scarlet O’Hara asses regarding the reality and very plausible causes and consequences of global warming an alarmist. So is the fucking bell that goes off when the building is on fire.
And while we cannot control nature, we can profoundly alter our environment. The most immediate, dramatic example would be a dozen or so 50-megatonners detonated here and there about the planet. Greenhouse gasification has been like a very long-term mortgage. At first there is no sign of a payoff, and for quite a long time very little sign, but then the progression takes its course at an ever increasing clip until Voila! It is done. Who knows, of course, what done will ultimately mean, but it won’t be pretty for humans and other current species. Best we can do is get really serious about ameliorating to whatever extent we can the consequences of our lack of stewardship of this incredible home in the vastness.
Would that Gators were saltwater adaptive. Then we really could kick ass into the distant future. Florida crocodiles are, but a croc ain’t a Gator. C’est la vie.