Archive for June, 2006

« Older Entries

To Save Energy … Turn Off the Lights!

Friday, June 30th, 2006

By David L. Brown

As anyone interested in astronomy is aware, much of our planet’s nighttime sky is lit up like a proverbial Christmas tree. Images from space reveal that blobs of glowing light cover vast areas of land like mold on rotten cheese, particularly in sprawling metropolitan areas that seem to blend into each other to almost completely cover the landscape as seen from satellites at night. To see an image of the United States that illustrates this point (you should be able to pick out your town), go here at darksky.org. For a worldwide view, take a look at this composite image from NASA:
The image “http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0011/earthlights2_dmsp_big.jpg” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

Not surprisingly, all that light is a significant user of energy. That fact is confirmed by the first ever worldwide survey of lighting and energy costs, conducted by the Paris-based International Energy Agency. According to a news release from the IEA (read it here):

“Without rapid action the amount of energy used for lighting will be 80% higher in 2030 than today; however, if we simply make better use of today’s efficient lighting technologies and techniques, global lighting energy demand need be no greater at that time”, said Claude Mandil, Executive Director of the International Energy Agency today in Paris during the launch of a new publication, Light’s Labour’s Lost: Policies for Energy–efficient Lighting.

“This important work shows that the potential for energy savings in lighting is simply enormous and can be achieved with technologies that not only are readily available in the market but economically-competitive during the life cycle of the product. Moreover, more efficient lighting also results in lower CO2 emissions”, Mr. Mandil added.

If more efficient lighting systems were put in place, that could “slash 38 percent from the world’s lighting bill by 2030,” according to the report.

“In the current lighting environment there are enormous sources of waste. Light is routinely supplied to spaces where no one is present,” Mandil said.

(more…)

Posted in Diversity Loss, Energy Technology | 1 Comment »

Greenland’s Glaciers in Exponential Melting?

Thursday, June 29th, 2006

by Val Germann

The Wabash “Cannonball” train used to run through my hometown and as a little kid I would occasionally get to see it pass. The Cannonball did not slow down for our little burg and would blast through our highway crossing at about 75 miles-per-hour, much faster than any other train. We would first see it in the far distance, down the Missouri River valley, its apparent motion deceptively slow. But as it approached more closely we began to notice its speed, which would rapidly increase just before the super-express exploded down on us, only a few dozen feet away if we were closest to the signal lights. The effect was impressive, even frightening, a startling demonstration of the exponential increase in both the size and apparent velocity of a rapidly approaching object.

This effect could also be deadly, as I saw first-hand one summer afternoon as our family car approached the Wabash tracks from the river valley side. There on the front of the train station was a huge scar, with a streak of what looked like white paint running horizontally for at least ten feet. There was also another mark on that wall, a reddish one, that looked for all the world like blood.

(more…)

Posted in Climate Change, Melting Planet | Comments Off

Experts Weigh In On Biomass Insanity

Wednesday, June 28th, 2006

By David L. Brown

My associate Val Germann and I have discussed the issues of ethanol and biofuels fairly often here on Star Phoenix Base. It is not necessarily that this subject is of unusual interest to us, but more because there is a mad rush of “irrational exhuberance” concerning this subject. It all seemed to start with President Bush’s State of the Union address when he spoke of “switchgrass” as the future replacement for imported petroleum … an unlikely idea that has apparently encouraged vast numbers to jump on board this perceived profit bandwagon.

Of course, the production of ethanol from corn has been going on for some time. This is a fairly well established, if none too efficient process. It has its start during the 1970s, when overproduction of agricultural products, and in particular field corn, was a problem and OPEC was squeezing the West by creating artificial oil shortages. Surplus corn could be used to make alcohol, which could replace oil. Brilliant!

But massive grain surpluses are no longer a problem; quite the contrary as agricultural production is bumping up against steadily rising demand (in case you weren’t watching the world population has approximately doubled since the 1970s). That fact makes it rather troubling that there is now surging interest in converting food grains and devoting agricultural lands to the production of a rather second-best alternative to gasoline.

Several recent articles and an editorial in Science Magazine discussed the “bright future” for ethanol and biofuel programs. We felt these articles were a bit too optimistic to say the least, and apparently there are others who agree with us. Those articles have generated quite a few letters to the editor of Science that point out some of the false assumptions and misguided reasoning behind the biofuel mania. A number of those letters appeared in the current issue.

Many of the points raised by correspondents have already been made here, but for the enjoyment and edification of our readers we are pleased to pass on excerpts from some of those letters. First here is a passage from a letter signed by five Danish agricultural scientists:
(more…)

Posted in Age of Oil, Agriculture Issues, Economics, Energy Technology, Ethical Issues | Comments Off

Tasty, Mesquite-Flavored Ethanol on the Way

Wednesday, June 28th, 2006

by Val Germann

Yes, it’s true! Someday before too long a gas station near you may feature tasty, Texas-Mesquite ethanol. It’s an idea whose time has no doubt come, as a recent article on the TERRADAILY website indicates:

The dense mesquite-covered mid-section of Texas could provide fuel for about 400 small ethanol plants, according to one Texas Agricultural Experiment Station researcher.

How about that, ethanol from mesquite, of which there seems to be a Texas-sized supply in, well, in Texas. And this is just in time to power the Longhorn State back into the energy fast lane, considering that it’s being passed by Alberta as an oil-producing region. Yes, ethanol sounds like a true energy bonanza to me.

Of course, as always, there are a few blips on the radar, like:

A patented process to convert the wood into ethanol is being tested in a prototype plant in Mississippi, Ansley said.

Well, that’s a lock, I’d say! No problem there. And I’m sure it’s a low-emission, no-waste process that will leave that beautiful Texas landscape as pure as the driven snow.

And there may be another small cloud:

A commercial refinery producing 5 million gallons of ethanol per year will require about 30,000 acres to sustain it, an approximate four- to five-mile radius if the refinery is located near the middle of the mesquite stand, Ansley said.

That’s a fair sized area, I’d say. But it is Texas, after all, so maybe that’s not so large a swath as it seems. But the mesquite will have to be harvested, with some kind of machine, which likely does not exist yet. But it just so happens, luckily, that someone has already thought of that:

Working with private cooperators, Ansley has helped design a harvester that is in the patent-pending stages. He hopes to have it ready for demonstration at an Oct. 5 field day at the Vernon station.

Wait a minute, isn’t this Ansley fellow the same researcher who has been driving the academic end of this whole thing?

Working with a Mississippi company, Ansley is studying the supply, harvest technologies, ethanol conversion rates and ecological effects of mesquite-to-ethanol production.

Yes, Ansley is! And he’s going to evaluate everything, from the energy available in mesquite all the way to the ecological effects, which I’m sure will be small. Sounds like a slam dunk to me, especially if there’s government money involved.

A State Energy Conservation Office grant has allowed his team to study harvest of different regrowth rates, as well as develop a mechanized system of harvesting mesquite.

Well, that’s it, then, all sewed up. A new ethanol process that will scour the Texas desert over hundreds of thousands of acres, and is being powered by taxpayer money, has every prospect of “success.”

This writer’s admiration knows no bounds.

Hook ‘em, Horns!

Read the entire article here.

**

Posted in Agriculture Issues, Desertification and Soil Loss, Economics, Energy Technology, Satire, Irony, and Humor | Comments Off

Scientific Gradualism Losing Warming War

Tuesday, June 27th, 2006

by Val Germann

Scientists are gradualists by temperment, believers in a “rule of law” creating a universe that is consistent across vast stretches of both time and space. Abrupt changes in natural systems upset this general theme and throw monkey wrenches into the operations of scientific law. But the evidence is accumulating, every day, that gradualism is not the correct model for the Earth’s climate at this time. No, something else is in charge and gradual it is not.

Nowhere is this more obvious than among the tropical glaciers of our planet, as this quote from today’s Washington POST clearly shows:

Earth’s climate is undergoing an abrupt change, ending a cooler period that began with a swift “cold snap” in the tropics 5,200 years ago that coincided with the start of cities, the beginning of calendars and the biblical great flood, a leading expert on glaciers has concluded.

Note the strong implication here that civilization itself is somehow tied to climate, a view that if upheld would cast a pall over the whole planet, if the fortunate weather of the last few millennia really is coming to an end. Or as Lonnie Thompson, who has been studying glaciers and climate for about a quarter-century, says:

“There are thresholds in the system,” Thompson said in an interview in his lab at Ohio State University. When they are crossed, “there is the risk of changing the world as we know it to some form in which a lot of people on the planet will be put at risk.”

So they will, so they will, and it becomes more and more apparent every day that something has to be done about this, and soon. The price for inaction now may be incalculable later.

Read the entire article here.

**

Posted in Climate Change, Melting Planet | Comments Off

Supreme Court to Hear Suit on CO2 Emissions

Monday, June 26th, 2006

By David L. Brown

In what could be a landmark case in environmental law, the Supreme Court today agreed to consider a suit asking for the U.S. government to recognize CO2 emissions as pollutants and to regulate them. The Bush administration has taken the position that voluntary methods are sufficient, and the EPA’s top lawyer, in a ruling that reversed a Clinton-era finding, has declared that the regulation of CO2 is not legal under the Clean Air Act.

The case, brought by a group of states, cities and environmental organizations, is a complex one with significant ramifications for the nation’s future direction on climate change. Lower court judges were split on the issue, but leaned toward supporting the administration. According to an Associated Press report this morning (read it here as reported on FOXNews.com):

A federal appeals court sided with the administration in a sharply divided ruling.

One judge said the EPA’s refusal to regulate carbon dioxide was contrary to the clean air law; another said that even if the Clean Air Act gave the EPA authority over the heat-trapping chemical, the agency could choose not to use that authority; a third judge ruled against the suit because, he said, the plaintiffs had no standing because they hadn’t proven harm.

Positions are quite diverse. Here is one point of view from the Sierra Club:

“This is the whole ball of wax. This will determine whether the Environmental Protection Agency is to regulate greenhouse gases from cars and whether EPA can regulate carbon dioxide from power plants,” said David Bookbinder, an attorney for the Sierra Club .

And here is what a spokesman for the American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry trade association, had to say:

“Fundamentally, we don’t think carbon dioxide is a pollutant, and so we don’t think these attempts are a good idea,” said John Felmy, chief economist of theAmerican Petroleum Institute, a trade group representing oil and gas producers.

The case is Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 05-1120. Massachusetts was joined by California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington, as well as a number of cities including Baltimore, New York City and Washington D.C., the Pacific island of America Samoa, the Union of Concerned Scientists, Greenpeace, and Friends of the Earth.

The issue goes beyond possibly ordering the EPA to set standards and regulate emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases (GHG), because the decision of constitutionality will impact on-going local initiatives by states and municipalities to regulate and enforce carbon emissions. These initiatives are one of the bright spots in the gloomy outlook for climate change action in the U.S. A Supreme Court decree that regulation of GHG emissions is unconstitutional would be a significant setback for any progress on facing up to the real problem of GHG buildup in the atmosphere and the resulting climate change.

The announcement that the court will hear this case comes just a few days after the release of a report from the National Research Council confirming that global warming is real and that human activity is a cause. (See my article “NRC Committee: Global Warming Is Real,” posted 22 June.) The issue of global warming should be viewed as one that goes far beyond the niddling details of the law with its questions such as what the meaning of “is” is, and recognized as a social and moral issue of the gravest importance. We need an end to self-interested foot dragging and to get on with addressing what is with little doubt the greatest threat and challenge ever to face humanity. Let’s hope the Supreme Court justices are more enlightened than the lower court judges who have ruled indecisively on this issue and favored the administration’s head-in-the-sand position.

For its own part, in light of the NRC report putting in no doubt the real threat of climate change, the administration should dramatically reverse its position and put the full force of the government behind efforts to reduce GHG emissions from the world’s No. 1 source, America. If present law does not recognize CO2 and other GHGs as “pollution,” then those laws need to be changed and changed now. There is no longer any reason to raise doubts or continue to take a wait-and-see approach to this vital issue.

Posted in Age of Oil, Climate Change, Law and Regulatory Issues, Politics, Pollution | Comments Off

Fertilizer + Rainforests = More Carbon Emissions

Sunday, June 25th, 2006

By David L. Brown

What could nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer, drought in Africa’s Sahel region along the southern edge of the Sahara Desert, the Amazon Basin rainforest, and carbon emissions have in common? Well, quite a lot apparently and this is an interesting example of the unforeseen connections of nature that are being routinely disrupted by human activity and the on-going effects of global warming.

According to a news item in the 21 June 2006 issue of New Scientist magazine, when fertilizer is added to rain forests, a disproportionately large release of carbon results. Two scientists with the University of Colorado at Boulder added phosphorus fertilizer to a test plot in a tropical forest in Costa Rica for two years. They found that the amount of CO2 released was 18 percent higher than before. Adding nitrogen fertilizer to another plot had a similar result, raising emissions by 22 percent. A mixture of the two yielded a 14 percent increase in emissions.

The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, noted that “since tropical forests contain 40 percent of the world’s terrestrial carbon, the impact on global warming could be large” if more of that carbon is released into the atmosphere as greenhouse gas.

So what’s the connection with the Sahel region of Africa and the Amazon? Here is the explanation as reported in the New Scientist news story, which is titled “Fertilizers Give the Lungs of the Planet Bad Breath”:

Although no one deliberately adds fertiliser to rainforests soils, the amount of airborne phosphorus and nitrogen reaching tropical forests is increasing because of human activity, especially agriculture.

“Easterly winds carry significant quantities of phosphorus-containing dust from Africa to the Amazon basin, and are increasing due to desertification of the Sahel,” says [Cory] Cleveland [who did the study along with Alan Townsend]. Levels of nitrogen in the air are rising because of increased fossil fuel and fertiliser use. The researchers suggest that even small amounts of fertiliser can have a damaging effect. (Read article; subscription may be required.)

We have written before about how the complex interactions of nature make the Law of Unintended Consequences an important consideration in trying to figure out the future of climate change (see my article “Actions and Reactions in Nature,” posted June 14, 2006). This latest revelation about the effect of windborne nitrogen and phosphorus is merely another small but potentially important example of just how interconnected the global ecosystem is, and how changes in one place can have unexpected consequences elsewhere.

Taken as a whole, the influence of human activity on our planet’s environment is creating widespread disruption in natural balances of nature that have developed over millions of years. To predict the final result is far beyond our knowledge, and there are no doubt a vast number of effects of which we are not even yet aware. It does seem safe to say that there are many ominous trends and surprises awaiting as humankind continues to go boldly and blithely into the future.

Posted in Climate Change, Desertification and Soil Loss, Melting Planet, Pollution | Comments Off

The Kyoto Treaty: Scandal in the Making?

Saturday, June 24th, 2006

By David L. Brown

The Kyoto treaty on greenhouse gas (GHG) emission has been touted as a brave step toward a reduction in global warming. But, according to an article in the 22 June 2006 issue of New Scientist magazine, many of the nations that have signed on to the Kyoto program are cheating by claiming they emit less GHG than they actually do.

According to the article, entitled “Kyoto Promises Are Nothing But Hot Air” (read it all here):

… two teams that have monitored concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere say they have convincing evidence that the figures reported by many countries are wrong, especially for methane. Among the worst offenders are the UK, which may be emitting 92 percent more methane than it declares under the Kyoto protocol, and France, which may be emitting 47 percent more.

One of the climate scientists, Peter Bergamaschi of the European Commission Joint Research Centre at Ispra, Italy, used a “top-down” technique to study actual emissions across Europe, allowing his group to monitor GHG emissions independently of official government reports. Bergamaschi’s calculations are supported by a similar study led by Euan Nisbet of Royal Holloway University of London.

(more…)

Posted in Climate Change, Essays and Opinion, Ethical Issues, Politics | Comments Off

Al Gore Film on Global Warming Is a Must-See

Friday, June 23rd, 2006

By David L. Brown

This afternoon I attended a showing of the new film about global warming, “An Inconvenient Truth,” featuring Al Gore. It is an extremely effective film that takes on global warming with no holds barred. I recently wrote a positive first-impressions review of the companion book of the same title, and the film is an excellent complement.

The documentary basically is a dramatization of a “slide show,” as Gore calls it, that he has been putting on for years. In reality the presentation is a very sophisticated multi-screen animated PowerPoint presentation. Much of the movie documents Gore’s live presentation, interwoven with personal vignettes about his past and present life. He estimates that he has given his “slide show” more than 1000 times, all around the world. One segment shows him addressing a Chinese university student audience.

Among those of us who have long been aware of the dangers of global warming, it has always been difficult to understand why others do not recognise what Gore calls the “inconvenient truth.” He addresses this question, and his conclusion is what I have always assumed: That politicians and industry leaders cannot admit the problems of global warming exist because they do not have answers, and they know that solutions will be demanded if the problems are recognized. It is a “don’t ask, don’t tell” approach to keeping the public from becoming aware of the truth.

(more…)

Posted in Climate Change, Melting Planet | Comments Off

NRC Committee: Global Warming Is Real

Thursday, June 22nd, 2006

By David L. Brown

It’s official. Global warming is real and human activity is a significant cause. That word comes today from the official scientific advisory agency of the United States government.

In a report prepared at the request of Congress, a committee of the National Research Council has concluded that the Earth is warmer today than it has been for at least the last 400 years, and quite likely for thousands of years. Chartered by Congress, the Council is part of the National Academies of Sciences.

According to a news release issued by the Academies today:

The committee pointed out that surface temperature reconstructions for periods before the Industrial Revolution — when levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases were much lower — are only one of multiple lines of evidence supporting the conclusion that current warming is occurring in response to human activities, and they are not the primary evidence.

The new report was requested to address controversy surrounding a study published by climate scientists Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley and Malcolm Hughes which concluded that the globe was the warmest for at least 1000 years, that the 1990′s was the warmest decade, and that 1998 was the warmest year on record. [Ed. note: Today 2005 is recognized as the warmest year.] Their graph showing a steep rise in temperatures after a long period of stability became known as the “hockey stick.”

Today’s news release said the committee study judged “the Mann team’s conclusion that warming in the last few decades of the 20th century was unprecedented over the last thousand years to be plausible,” adding that evidence is certain only for years since 1600. But the report stated that “recent warmth is unprecedented for at least the last 400 years and potentially the last several millennia.”

According to an Associated Press, “the report was requested in November by the chairman of the House Science Committee, Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y., to address naysayers who question whether global warming is a major threat.”

According to the AP story, Boehlert said “there is nothing in this report that should raise any doubts about the broad scientific consensus on global climate change.”

The findings of Mann and his associates had been attacked by poliicians and industry spokespersons who deny that global warming is real, and that human activity is a cause. For several years the broad general consensus among scientists has been that global warming is a demonstrated phenomenon.

Divisive arguments on this issue have had the unfortunate result of delaying action that might help mitigate the potentially devastating effects of climate change. Let us hope that this clear message from the National Academies will help end the pointless squabbling and create the resolve needed to begin seeking solutions.

Posted in Climate Change, Melting Planet | 3 Comments »

« Older Entries