Archive for March, 2010

A New ‘Champion’ for Anti-Climate Change

Wednesday, March 31st, 2010

By David L. Brown

We’ve railed for several years about the support of anti-global warming activists by self-interested corporations. Now, according to an article on Scientific American’s web site, here, there’s a new champion handing out money to shills for the energy companies that want to keep the Earth on the greenhouse gas merry-go-round.

The new villain in this tragedy is Koch Industries of Wichita, KS, which has surpassed even the mighty ExxonMobil as a source of funding for climate change deniers. The source of the news story is a report produced by the environmental organization Greenpeace. According to SciAm:

Koch subsidiaries own refineries, oil pipelines, fertilizer facilities, coal and cement transportation systems, and other industrial operations. The company also has several foundations through which it gave $24.9 million to conservative groups between 2005 and 2008, the report says.

“The combination of foundation-funded front-groups, big lobbying budgets, [political action committee] donations, and direct campaign contributions makes Koch Industries and the Koch brothers among the most formidable obstacles to advancing clean energy and climate policy in the U.S.,” Greenpeace says.

The energy conglomerate, which is 84 percent owned by brothers Charles and David Koch, helps support activities by individual purveyors of “junk science” and such conservative think tanks as the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, and the American Enterprise Institute.

Anti-climate change is an insidious endeavor that attempts to spread misinformation by picking at small details, many of them of no consequence or even non-existent, as illustrated here:

gwcriticsClimate scientists are ill-prepared to defend their work against this kind of attack. They work through a system of peer review, which means their ideas and data are evaluated by experts in their field, rather than by public opinion. Unfortunately, the press and the general public are pretty much unaware of how science works, and it seems perfectly natural to the average Joe Sixpack that any talking head on TV or even just some guy in a bar can have a say in the evaluation of scientific work. In fact, as I pointed out in my  essay “Science, Propaganda and Climate Change,” here, the anti-climate change activities are classic examples of the kind of deliberate misleading of the public that was practiced by the regimes of Adolf Hitler, Vladimir Lenin, and Mao Zedong.

The parallel with anti-evolutionary activity such as so-called “intelligent design” is apparent, but in that case the efforts to discredit science are based on the mistaken religious belief that evolution somehow invalidates their perception of a supernatural power. (Doesn’t it ever occur to them that if there were an all-powerful deity, evolution would logically be the method through which that deity works?)

No, the program of anti-climate change agitation is clearly based not on faith but on personal or corporate greed. In the case of those who work and spend millions to confuse the issue of greenhouse gas warming, the only apparent motivation is to allow themselves to continue to profit from the “development” and use of fossil fuels. Take away the profit, and there would be no incentive to make up stories and spread lies to muddle the issue.

The Koch Brothers obviously have every profit incentive to prevent the world from reducing emissions of greenhouse gas, and they are putting their money where their interests lie. According to the SciAm report, Koch Industries has supported misinformation campaigns purporting to prove that polar bears are not threatened; encouraged suspicions that climate scientists cherry-pick data and suppress findings that don’t suggest global warming is taking place; and financed studies that “misinform the public on renewable energy benefits.”

I find it ironic that the deniers, whose motivation is to make money from continued fossil fuel use, criticize those who push for alternative sources such as wind and solar power as greedy profiteers. This is a classic tactic well-known to Nicolai Machiavelli, Joseph Goebbels, and Saul Alinsky. There is an old saying about pots and kettles, but in this case perhaps the kettle isn’t even black, only the pot.

Will the confusion about global warming ever come to an end? Yes, it will, for nothing can go on forever. Unfortunately, this mess will probably come to a conclusion either when there is no more money to be made from exploiting fossil fuels, or when the Earth can no longer  support industrial civilization. These two conditions are not mutually exclusive, and the final scenario could include both factors.

As to the odds in favor of dramatic action by governments around the world to turn the tide against global warming, I can only suggest that the power of greed is mighty and the love of money and power is a sickness more terrible than any mere disease.

Global Warming Not Real? Ask a Canadian

Sunday, March 14th, 2010

By David L. Brown

Just as the global warming and climate change deniers proclaim that the whole thing is a hoax perpetrated by thousands of dodgy scientists, from Canada we learn that the winter just drawing to a close was the warmest ever in the country. From the Montreal Gazette:

Environment Canada scientists report that winter 2009/10 was 4 C above normal, making it the warmest since nationwide records were first kept in 1948. It was also the driest winter on the 63-year record, with precipitation 22 per cent below normal nationally, and down 60 per cent in parts of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario.

“It’s beyond shocking,” David Phillips, a senior climatologist with Environment Canada, told Canwest News Tuesday. Records have been shattered from “coast to coast to coast.”

“It is truly a remarkable situation,” says Phillips, noting that he’s seen nothing like it in his 40 years of weather watching. He also warns that “the winter than wasn’t” may have set the stage for potentially “horrific” water shortages, insect infestations and wildfires this summer.

You may remember hearing that the managers of the Winter Olympics had to haul in hundreds of tons of snow for the athletes to slip and slide upon. Interesting harbinger of that “cooling” world the deniers claim is upon us. Think there’s no global warming? Ask a Canadian. Even better, ask this guy:

polar-bear1

Despite everything you hear from climate idiots and naysayers, it was a mild winter here in the U.S. as well. All that snow in the Eastern regions of the nation were not signs of global cooling, but the result of warmer-than-usual temperatures. You see, warmer air can hold more moisture, thus potentially delivering more snow. On average, January, 2010 was the warmest such month on record in the U.S.

Global warming is an undeniable fact, and not subject to the results of opinion polls. Speaking of which, I saw one today that showed a larger number of Americans now doubt global warming. So, here’s how it goes: The deniers with the help of the media put out a huge cloud of misinformation, confusing the issue for ordinary people. Then, pollsters call and learn that more people doubt the facts of climate change (“facts” of which the ordinary person much less journalist or TV talking head has much if any awareness). It’s a classic example of misinformation at work, just as I outlined here in my essay titled “Science, Propaganda & Climate Change.”

The problem faced by global warming deniers is that baseless opinions and made-up “facts” cannot change reality. If you’re sitting on a hot stove, all the propaganda in the world is not going to convince you that your own personal rump roast is no longer “rare” but turning medium-well. Do you continue to listen to the blathering purveyors of disinformation, or get off before it’s time to stick a fork in it?

If as reported the Canadian winter was 4 degrees C. warmer than usual (that’s about 7 degrees F.), and precipitation was down as much as 60 percent in leading agricultural areas of the nation, what does it bode for the upcoming crop season? With little or no snow cover on fields, the soil will be dry. And if the warming trend continues into summer, it could be devastating for wheat and barley crops.

According to the news report, climatologist Phililps credits some of the warming to the El Nino cycle in the Pacific, but points to the melting of Arctic sea ice as a major influence. The article states [as of March 9]: “Spring has now arrived in many parts of Canada with cherry trees in full bloom on the West Coast, and Phillips says, ‘crocuses already blossoming in Labrador’.”

If Canadians can’t enjoy a real, old-fashioned, freeze-your -toes-off winter, who can? Well, soon, perhaps nobody. Stay tuned.

Sushi — Or Not Sushi? That Is the Question

Thursday, March 4th, 2010

By David L. Brown

How can we tell when a species is endangered? One clue is when people are willing to pay an arm and a leg to eat the unfortunate few remaining members.

tuna-sushiRecently a 511 lb. northern bluefin tuna, one of the most sought-after fish in the world for sushi, was sold at Tokyo’s Tuskiji fish market for $175,000. By that afternoon, customers at Kyubey, a nearby star-rated restaurant, were chowing down on the tuna’s fatty belly meat. The story was reported by Scientific American on-line, here.

The idea that a single fish could be worth $342.50 a pound is astonishing, especially considering the number of people on Earth who go to bed hungry each night. It is a fact that many struggle to survive on as little as a dollar a day. For one of those unfortunate individuals, (should they become immortal) $175,000 could equal their income for 480 years, or about 20 generations. Or, conversely, it would be equal to the income of 480 impoverished people for an entire year. Just one fish.

There is growing evidence that the norhern bluefin may be in danger of extinction. The SciAm article reported on a move toward banning harvest of the increasingly rare fish, one of the top predator species of the ocean. Only the northern bluefin would be affected, not the Pacific and southern varieties—but it appears the northern bluefin is the one most loved by diners, especially in Japan which imports 80 percent of the bluefin catch in the Atlantic and Mediterranean.

Markets and the effects of greed and avarice are more powerful than nature, common sense, and human self-preservation all added together, at least for the time being, so with demand for bluefin sushi so high that it can support stratospheric prices it seems likely that protecting the fish will be difficult or impossible. One problem is that even experts have difficulty telling the difference between the three varieties of bluefin (although sushi eaters apparently can, or at least believe they can).

Listing as an endangered species does not necessarily have much effect. The demand for rhinoceros horns for dagger handles among Arabs and potions among aging Chinese and Vietnamese has forced many rhino species to the very edge of extinction. Modern-day poachers hunt rhinos with AK-47s and sometimes from helicopters, quickly removing the horns with chainsaws and leaving the bodies to rot. The market for rhino horns has continued to thrive even though several major rhino varieties have been  placed on the world endangered species list (CITES) and even China banned the sale of rhino horn 17 years ago.

In a similar way, it seems likely that greedy fishers, fish mongers, and restaurant operators will find ways around a bluefin tuna ban. After all, the mindset of our present world economy seems to be that money is the root of everything that is good and the environment be damned. The plundering of nature will continue apace as long as humans have a yen (or dollar, euro or pound) for rare delicacies from the sea.