Revealed: Bin Laden’s Secret Climate Change Plan
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/03/29/revealed-bin-ladens-secret-climate-change-plan/…
Ford introducing cars that make you obey the speed limit
Global CO2 Emissions Have Been Flat For Four Years. What Does This Mean For The Future?
CO2 Emissions Have Been Flat For Four Years. What Does This Mean For The Future?
The CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has been steadily increasing since regular measurements began at the Mauna Loa Observatory. This increase is partially driven by fossil fuel use but the year to year rate of increase is driven by ocean temperature. This was discussed in October 2012 here. The International Energy Agency (IEA) tracks fossil fuel use and has reported here that emissions due to fossil fuels have flatlined for the last two years. Actually, it has nearly flatlined for the last four years according to their own figures. The increase from 2011 to 2012 was less than 0.5%, and from 2012 to 2013 it decreased by 0.03%. Figure 1 is a plot of annual world fossil fuel CO2 emissions since 1980 from IEA. In that time, CO2 in the atmosphere has grown from 338 parts per million (ppm) to 398 ppm. In the next figure, that quantity has been converted to metric tonnage. Figure 2 is the accumulated emissions compared to accumulated CO2. Note that only about half the emissions have stayed in the atmosphere. The remainder has been absorbed somewhere else. Figure 3 is a plot of annual Carbon Dioxide emissions, the annual uptake by the biosphere, and the resulting atmospheric CO2 concentration, with projections of each into the future. Figure 4. Estimated changes in vegetative cover due to CO2 fertilization between 1982 and 2010 (Donohue et al., 2013 GRL). For a discussion of this image and other similar images see Roy Spencer here. The “somewhere else” is the biosphere, the “greening” of global photosynthetic life along with absorption by the oceans. Each year, on average, those sinks take up 251.35 million extra metric tonnes of CO2 as the biosphere pulls things back into balance. That sounds like a lot, but keep in mind that the atmosphere contains more than 3 trillion tonnes of CO2, land based vegetation about 4 trillion tonnes, the surface ocean something like 5 trillion tonnes, and the deep ocean 150 trillion tonnes. The total annual flux from atmosphere to the biosphere and back is about 400 billion tonnes. So that annual difference is only about 0.5%. (I am using the American counting system: 106 is a million, 109 a billion, 1012 a trillion. I’m also using the weight of CO2, not just the carbon atoms.) The uptake …
The warmer it gets the more ice breakers we need
The warmer it gets the more ice breakers we need
http://iceagenow.info/2015/03/warmer-ice-breakers/
Demand for ice-breaking capability is only growing, as several recent cases have demonstrated, says Coast Guard chief. This warning was issued by Admiral Paul Zukunft, commandant of the USCG, in his annual state of the coastguard address on February 24. The heavy ice breaker USCGC Polar Star off Marble Point, Antarctica, on 23 Jan 2014. Photo – US Coast Guard Polar-class USCGC Polar Star (WAGB 10), a 39-year-old cutter that has been reactivated, remains the United States’ sole heavy ice breaker, with sister ship USCGC Polar Sea laid up in disrepair. The 16,000-tonne medium ice breaker USCGC Healy is also in service. The Polar Star in mid-February steamed 900 miles and broke through 150 miles of ice to rescue a 207-ft fishing vessel, Antarctic Chieftan, that had become stranded in the southern polar region, Adm Zukunft pointed out. “What concerns me even more,” said Adm Zukunft, “is that the United States has no rescue capability whatsoever had it been Polar Star who suffered a catastrophic [mechanical] casualty and become beset in ice.” http://www.janes.com/article/49582/us-coast-guard-still-wrangling-with-ice-breaker-shortage Thanks to Ron994 for this link
— gReader Pro…
Ted Cruz: I don’t believe in climate change because I ‘follow the science’
Ted Cruz: I don’t believe in climate change because I ‘follow the science’
http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com/2015/03/ted-cruz-i-dont-believe-in-climate.html
One-on-one Interview with Ted CruzTed Cruz:You mention global warming: I’m a big believer that we should follow the science and follow the evidence. If you look at global warming alarmists; they don’t like to look at the actual facts and the data. The satellite data demonstrate that there has been no significant warming whatsoever for 17 years.Now that’s a real problem for the global warming alarmists because all of the computer models on which this whole issue was based predicted significant warming and yet the satellite data show it ain’t happening.Interview interjects a lame question based on the “Precautionary Principle” (addressed here) in short: “Why not do everything we can to reduce our carbon (dioxide) footprint?”To which Ted replies: I read this morning from a Newsweek article from the 1970s, talking about global cooling, and it said; “The “Science” is clear, it’s overwhelming, we are in a major cooling period and it’s gonna cause enormous problems world-wide and the solution for all the advocates in the 70s for “Global Cooling” was massive government control of the energy sector, of our economy and aspects of our lives.The data proved to be not backing up that theory so that all the advocates of “global cooling” suddenly shifted to “global warming” and they advocated; “It’s warming” and the solution interestingly enough was the exact same solution: government control of the energy sector and every aspect of our lives.But then the data don’t back that up so if you notice the term has shifted; and now suddenly it’s “climate change.” And Climate Change and again the solution is: government control of the energy sector and every aspect of our lives and when some-one keeps proposing the same solution regardless of the problem, you start to think – maybe they just like: government control of the energy sector and every aspect of our lives.Ted Cruz sums up: I am the child of two mathematicians and scientists. I believe in following evidence and data. On the Global Warming Alarmists: Anyone who actually points the the evidence that disproves their apocalyptical claims – they don’t engage in reasoned debate. What do they do? They scream: You’re a denier! They brand you a heretic.
— gReader Pro…