------------------------ Yahoo! Groups ----------------------------~-->
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
There are 17 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Ethanol Producers Encouraged by New Study
From: Tim Jones
2. Winter Warmest Ever on Record in Canada
From: Tim Jones
3. Oil, Gasoline Futures Climb
From: "janson2997"
4. Study Offers Preview of Ice Sheet Melting, Rapid Climate Changes
From: "janson2997"
5. Hydrogen Conference Starts Big With Schwarzenegger Welcome
From: "janson2997"
6. NASA Finds Stronger Storms Change Heat And Rainfall Worldwide
From: "janson2997"
7. Level of climate change gases hits record high
From: "janson2997"
8. Climate change: Only 10 years to act
From: "janson2997"
9. A Climate Change of Heart
From: "janson2997"
10. A Proposal for Hydrogen, Synthetic Fuels and the Halving of US
From: "janson2997"
11. Chernobyl: A poisonous legacy
From: "janson2997"
12. OT: Latin America and Asia are at last breaking free of Washington's grip
From: "janson2997"
13. Ice Retreats in Arctic for 2nd Year; Some Fear Most of It Will Vanish
From: "janson2997"
14. CHILLING
From: "janson2997"
15. GE: Bund will Wasserstoffautos mit 500 Millionen Euro fördern
From: "janson2997"
16. BMW to start serial output of hydrogen-powered car
From: "janson2997"
17. NASA scientists get the OK to talk
From: "janson2997"
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:37:09 -0600
From: Tim Jones
Subject: Ethanol Producers Encouraged by New Study
Considering that the world is turning food into fuel I wonder if
people are being reborn as automobiles.
Tim
Ethanol Producers Encouraged by New Study
March 14, 2006 - By Associated Press
WATERLOO, Iowa - Ethanol supporters say they're encouraged by the
results of a recent study refuting the notion that it takes more
energy to produce ethanol than the corn-based fuel saves.
Scientists at the University of California-Berkeley say there's a 20
percent net energy gain by using fossil fuels to make ethanol
compared to gasoline.
Ethanol producers say the study should be enough to convince skeptics
that cleaner-burning ethanol is good for both the environment and the
economy.
Consumers who were unsure about using ethanol-blended fuels may
become new customers, producers say, and Iowa could reap major
benefits as one of the nation's top corn-growing and
ethanol-producing states.
"The new study reaffirms what we already know: Ethanol is energy
positive, and it grows," said Bruce Rastetter, CEO of Hawkeye
Renewables in Iowa Falls.
The company has plans to produce 100 million gallons of ethanol at a
plant it's building in Fairbank, and it will double the size of its
Iowa Falls plant to the same capacity.
The study results are especially positive for supporters of E85, a
blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline.
Currently, very few vehicles on Iowa's roads are built to burn E85,
but advocates say the alternative fuel has too many positives for its
use to remain small-scale.
Supporters say ethanol-blended fuel tends to be less expensive than
regular unleaded gasoline, the auto industry has started marketing
more cars and trucks capable of using E85, Congress has passed
renewable fuel standards that increase the use of ethanol and grant
money is available to help install E85 pumps.
Iowa has 21 ethanol plants and six more are under construction or
expanding, according to the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association. The
state produces 1.1 billion gallons of ethanol, but that is expected
to soon increase by nearly 600 million gallons.
Lucy Norton, the association's managing director, said she hopes the
study puts the question of whether ethanol is worth producing to rest.
As farmers become more efficient and production methods improve, the
net gain in energy will only increase, she said.
Alex Farrell, co-author of the latest study, said previous research
didn't take into account ethanol byproducts such as distiller grains
and corn oil. Corn turned into ethanol also feeds animals and is used
for other purposes, he said, which displaces competing products that
require energy to make.
"Studies with a negative impact ignored that," Farrell said.
Since the latest research wasn't funded by any special interest group
and used the most up-to-date data, Farrell said his group's
information is the most accurate.
Just two percent of the gasoline sold in the United States in 2004 --
3.4 billion gallons -- was blended with ethanol. The study said
ethanol could supply 20 to 30 percent of fuel used nationwide.
"We focused on energy, not the farmer," Farrell said. "It's crystal
clear transparent that it (the study) may help Iowa farmers."
Source: Associated Press--
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:46:24 -0600
From: Tim Jones
Subject: Winter Warmest Ever on Record in Canada
Winter Warmest Ever on Record in Canada
March 14, 2006 - By Associated Press
TORONTO - The winter of 2005-2006 has been Canada's warmest on record
and the federal agency Environment Canada said Monday it was
investigating whether it's a sign of global warming.
Between December and February, the country was 3.9 degrees above
normal -- the warmest winter season since temperatures were first
recorded in 1948. Environment Canada climatologist Bob Whitewood said
it smashed the previous record set in 1987 by 0.9 degrees.
"We saw it coming from mid-January on that we were seeing something
quite remarkable," Whitewood said.
The experience has been similar south of the border where the U.S.
National Climatic Data Center said the winter has been the fifth
warmest on record. December through February are considered
meteorological winter.
It was especially balmy in Alberta, Saskatchewan and the Northwest
Territories, where temperatures were 6 to 8 degrees above normal.
Whitewood said the last 10 winters have been warmer than normal and
along with this winter reflect a trend that could be explained as
global warming. He said Environment Canada would spend the next year
examining the data to see if it's an aberration or evidence of a
trend.
While some Canadians have been delighted by the milder winter, many
are disappointed about thinner ice for ice skating and hockey and
less snow in the ski resorts. Several islands off Nova Scota were
inundated by thousands of pregnant seals forced to give birth on
shore by unusually mild weather that has prevented the Gulf of St.
Lawrence from freezing.--
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:08:25 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: Oil, Gasoline Futures Climb
Oil, Gasoline Futures Climb
WASHINGTON, Mar. 14, 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
(AP) Gasoline and crude oil futures prices jumped Tuesday on word of
a large refinery snag.
Gasoline futures rose 7.67 cents to $1.82 a gallon in afternoon trade
on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
A spokesman for Amerada Hess Corp. said Tuesday that over the weekend
it unexpectedly shut a gasoline producing unit at a refinery in St.
Croix that it co-owns with Petroleos de Venezuela SA. The spokesman
said repairs to the unit, which refines 150,000 barrels of crude per
day, could take up to two weeks.
Also putting some upward pressure on prices were analysts'
expectations that U.S. government data released Wednesday would show
a decline in gasoline inventories from a week ago.
Light sweet crude for April delivery gained 48 cents to $62.25 a
barrel on Nymex.
Meanwhile, the International Energy Agency, a watchdog for the
world's energy consumers, on Tuesday lowered its 2006 oil demand
estimate by 290,000 barrels per day because of persistently high fuel
prices and slowing consumption in Southeast Asia.
Nymex oil prices had surged $1.81 on Monday to settle at $61.77 on
nagging concerns about unrest in Nigeria and the possibility of U.N.
sanctions against Iran, the No. 2 producer within OPEC, for its
nuclear ambitions.
In Nigeria, recent attacks by militants on pipelines and oil
facilities have left the country's production down by about 400,000
barrels a day.
"We would expect the potential for further chaos in Nigeria to
provide a floor for prices around $60 a barrel, and we expect Nigeria
will continue to be a major issue in terms of supply security up to,
and probably beyond, next year's elections," wrote Barclays Capital's
analysts in a research note.
In other Nymex trading, heating oil futures climbed more than 5 cents
to $1.789 per gallon, and natural gas futures rose 7.3 cents to $7.08
per 1,000 cubic feet.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/14/ap/business/printableD8GBH87
O0.shtml
http://tinyurl.com/n3obr
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:51:39 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: Study Offers Preview of Ice Sheet Melting, Rapid Climate Changes
Study Offers Preview of Ice Sheet Melting, Rapid Climate Changes
The retreat of a massive ice sheet that once covered much of
northern Europe has been described for the first time, and
researchers believe it may provide a sneak preview of how present-day
ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica will act in the face of global
warming.
The study, which appears in the current issue of the journal Science,
was led by researchers from the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and
Oregon State University and contributed to by scientists from eight
European institutes. They conclude that ice sheets in different parts
of the world can react quite differently as the Earth warms.
"When we look at the Scandinavian Ice Sheet, we sometimes see it
actually growing larger and sometimes rapidly disappearing, depending
on whether increased snow offsets melting effects or not," said
Vincent Rinterknecht, a post-doctoral research scientist at Lamont-
Doherty Earth Observatory who is the study's lead author and who
conducted much of the research while he was a doctoral student at
Oregon State. "Our work showed that it actually grew for a long
period while the climate was warming but still very cold, and then
rapidly disintegrated once the climate warmed even further."
The authors say the same dynamics of climate change and ice sheet
growth may be at work today and probably mean that in the face of
future global warming, ice across large portions of Antarctica may
actually increase volume, but not at a rate that will counterbalance
projected losses to the massive Greenland ice sheet. By itself, and
without any offsetting mechanisms, a collapse of the Greenland ice
sheet would raise global sea levels by about 20 to 25 feet. There is
also concern that the rapid injection of large amounts of fresh water
into this part of the North Atlantic Ocean may interfere with the
ocean circulation system that is responsible for keeping much of
Europe warm.
The timing of the ice sheet's retreat has, until now, been poorly
understood because of the relatively few radiocarbon dated sites in
the region. In their study, the researchers used a technique to
determine the time that rocks have been exposed to cosmic rays from
outer space, which pass through the Earth's atmosphere but cannot
penetrate ice to any great depth. Using the method, known as
cosmogenic surface exposure dating, Rinterknecht and his colleagues
measured the amount of an isotope of the element beryllium, 10Be,
formed when cosmic rays strike the surface of a rock. Knowing the
rate at which 10Be forms and decays allowed the scientists to
accurately determine how long a rock surface has been exposed and,
therefore, when the ice sheet likely retreated.
The huge Scandinavian Ice Sheet the scientists studied once covered
much of Northern Europe and formed during the most recent Ice Age,
which lasted from about 100,000 to 10,000 years ago. At its peak it
was about 6,000 feet thick and, after the ice sheet in North America,
was the largest in the Northern Hemisphere. The researchers combined
climate information, largely obtained from ice cores drilled in
Greenland, with sea level records and records of deep-sea sediments
to create a larger picture of how the ice sheet fluctuated within a
changing climate.
The study was supported by the National Science Foundation's
Paleoclimate Program and the French Institut National de Physique
Nuclèaire et de Physique de Particules and Institut National des
Sciences de l'Univers.
Source: The Earth Institute at Columbia University
This news is brought to you by PhysOrg.com
http://www.physorg.com/printnews.php?newsid=11754
http://tinyurl.com/l6xr2
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:05:09 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: Hydrogen Conference Starts Big With Schwarzenegger Welcome
Hydrogen Conference Starts Big With Schwarzenegger Welcome
(Comtex Business Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge)LONG BEACH, Calif., Mar
14, 2006 (U.S. Newswire via COMTEX) --Yesterday, the National
Hydrogen Association opened its 17th Annual Hydrogen Conference and
Hydrogen Expo US in Long Beach, Calif., highlighted by personal
greetings from the state's chief executive, the President of French
Polynesia, and several high- ranking Californian environmental
officials. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger addressed over 1,000 delegates
by video satellite feed from the State Capitol, declaring his
administration's commitment to protect California's environment and
encourage the use of clean energy technologies like those using
hydrogen.
"California is investing millions of dollars to line our freeways
with hydrogen fueling stations so that low emission cars can travel
up and down our wonderful state," said Gov. Schwarzenegger. "With
more and more businesses proving that hydrogen power is practical,
clean and here to stay, we are well on our way to a hydrogen future.
California is committed to clean air and the health and economic
benefits that go along with it."
Following the Governor's address, delegates watched the live ribbon-
cutting ceremony for California's latest hydrogen fueling station in
Oakland, about 400 miles to the north. The station, built by Chevron,
will support AC Transit's fuel cell buses, as well as Hyundai
hydrogen cars.
At the opening session, the assembly also heard from the Governor's
special assistant Terry Tamminen; former Secretary for Environmental
Protection Alan Lloyd; and South Coast Air Quality Management
District board member Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta. President Oscar Temaru
of the Tahitian Islands also spoke about the need for building a
hydrogen economy in his country and presented a special gift to Mr.
Tamminen who accepted the antique Polynesian war weapon on behalf of
Gov. Schwarzenegger. Earlier in his address, Schwarzenegger said he
is an "environmental warrior."
The country's largest hydrogen conference features nearly a week of
hydrogen-related speakers and events, including an exposition with
over 90 exhibitors. Delegates in attendance represent 24 nations,
including Germany, South Africa, China, India and Brazil and 44 of
the 50 U.S. States. Today's plenary session on "International
Progress" featured five high-ranking officials from Iceland, Canada,
the People's Republic of China, Germany and the European Commission.
"Today's speakers demonstrated how global the hydrogen movement is
today," said Jeff Serfass, president of the National Hydrogen
Association. During the session, China announced plans to have 20,000
hydrogen fuel cell buses in operation by 2010.
The NHA Conference also features 17 hydrogen-powered vehicles which
are available today to the public for test drives to attendees as
well as dozens of products on display in the Expo Hall.
About the National Hydrogen Association
The National Hydrogen Association (NHA) is the Nation's premier
hydrogen trade organization led by over 100 companies dedicated to
supporting the transition to hydrogen. Efforts are focused on
education and outreach, policy, safety and codes and standards. Since
1989, the NHA has served as a catalyst for information exchange and
cooperative projects and continues to provide the setting for mutual
support among industry, research and government organizations.
http://www.HydrogenAssociation.org.
http://www.usnewswire.com
http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2006/03/14/1457366.htm
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:09:06 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: NASA Finds Stronger Storms Change Heat And Rainfall Worldwide
NASA Finds Stronger Storms Change Heat And Rainfall Worldwide
Studies have shown that over the last 40 years, a warming climate has
been accompanied by fewer rain- and snow-producing storms in mid-
latitudes around the world, but the storms that are happening are a
little stronger with more precipitation. A new analysis of global
satellite data suggests that these storm changes are affecting
strongly the Earth's water cycle and air temperatures and creating
contrasting cooling and warming effects in the atmosphere.
Comma-shaped storm systems in the mid-latitude regions, like the one
shown here on the Pacific Northwest coast, produce our everyday
weather but also determine the radiation, heat, and water budgets of
those regions. This image was taken from the Geostationary
Operational Environmental Satellite, Thurs. March 2, 2006. (Credit:
NOAA)The mid-latitudes extend from the subtropics (approximately 30°
N and S) to the Arctic Circle (66° 30" N) and the Antarctic Circle
(66° 30" S) and include pieces of all of the continents with the
exception of Antarctica.
George Tselioudis and William B. Rossow, both scientists at NASA's
Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) and Columbia University,
New York, authored the study that appears in the January issue of the
American Geophysical Union's journal, Geophysical Research Letters.
"There are consequences of having fewer but stronger storms in the
middle latitudes both on the radiation and on the precipitation
fields," Tselioudis said. Using observations from the International
Satellite Cloud Climatology Project (ISCCP) and the Global
Precipitation Climatology Project (GPCP), Tselioudis and Rossow
determined how the changes in intensity and frequency of storms are
both cooling and warming the atmosphere around the world.
Fewer and stronger storms in the mid-latitudes affect the radiation
field, that is, the solar energy being absorbed and the heat
radiation emitted by the Earth. There are two things happening with
storms and energy. The first is that sunlight is reflected back into
space from the tops of the clouds, creating a cooling effect at the
Earth's surface. Conversely, clouds also act to trap heat radiation
and prevent it from escaping into space, creating a warming on the
Earth's atmosphere.
A 1998 study of precipitation data for the continental U.S., showed
an increase in more extreme rainfall and snowfall events over the
previous 70 to 90 years. Further, climate model studies that
Tselioudis and others performed in the last few years indicate that
additional levels of carbon dioxide will lead to fewer but more
potent storms as has been the case in the last 50 years.
In the present study, when a storm change prediction by a leading
climate model was examined, the radiation effects of stronger storms
were found to be greater than those produced by the related decrease
in the number of storms. Fewer storms mean less cloud cover to
reflect sunlight and that adds heat to the Earth. However, more
intense storms tend to produce thicker clouds which cool the
atmosphere. Tselioudis and Rossow looked at both of those factors,
and calculated that the cooling effect is larger than the warming in
all months except June, July and August, when the two effects cancel
each other.
In terms of precipitation from these storms, the effects of
increasing storm intensity also surpass those of decreasing storm
frequency. In the northern mid-latitudes, the stronger storms produce
0.05–0.08 millimeter (mm)/day (.002-.003 inch/day) more
precipitation. Although this number seems small, the average
precipitation daily in the northern mid-latitudes is only around 2
mm/day (.08 inch/day), implying that the strengthening of the storms
produces a 3-4% precipitation increase that comes in the form of more
intense rain and snow events.
The long-term changes in sunlight and heat produced by the storms
have been hard to observe because scientists only have observations
for the last 25 years. Also, there are other things that affect how
much sunlight is being reflected and absorbed by the Earth, and those
are constantly changing. For example, when black soot falls on snow,
the black soot absorbs heat from the sun, whereas the white ice would
have reflected most of it.
This study presents a method that uses current climate relationships
and climate change model predictions to arrive at more complete
estimates of radiation and precipitation changes that may occur in a
warmer climate.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/03/060312211757.htm
http://tinyurl.com/pdsd9
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:10:36 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: Level of climate change gases hits record high
Level of climate change gases hits record high
By Fiona Harvey, Environment Correspondent, in London
Published: March 15 2006 02:00 | Last updated: March 15 2006 02:00
The atmosphere's level of greenhouse gases associated with climate
change is hitting record highs, two prominent scientific
organisations said yesterday.
A bulletin on greenhouse gas levels by the World Meteorological
Organisation (WMO) said there were 377 parts per million of carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere in 2004, up from around 280ppm before the
industrial revolution.
One of the highest year-on-year rises ever in the level of carbon
dioxide was recorded at 1.8ppm.
But the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, using a
slightly different methodology, said last year's rise was even
greater at 2.6ppm, and overall carbon dioxide levels were at 381ppm.
Carbon dioxide - produced by burning fossil fuels - is the most
abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, and is the gas that most
concerns climate scientists, because of its warming effect on the
earth.
But levels of methane and nitrous oxide, both of which have a much
greater effect on the climate but are present in the air in much
smaller quantities, have also risen.
Nitrous oxide is a potent greenhouse gas, the concentration of which
hasbeen rising by about 0.8 parts per billion per year since 1988.
At least a third of the amount of the gas in the atmosphere is the
resultof human activities such as fuel combustion, biomass burning,
fertiliser useand some industrial processes.
But the levels of methane - produced by human activity such as oil
and gas production and agriculture, as well as some natural
processes - were showing signs of reaching a plateau, the WMO said.
Tony Juniper, director of the campaigning group Friends of the
Earth,said urgent action was needed to curb emissions: "If we take
action now we can still avoid the worst impacts of climate change by
investing in clean renewabletechnology and energy efficiency.
"The attempts by government and business to reduce emissions have
lacked ambition and there hasn't been the effort put in that is
needed."
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/8c3ca6b4-b3c9-11da-89c7-0000779e2340.html
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:12:27 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: Climate change: Only 10 years to act
Climate change: Only 10 years to act
HAMISH MACDONELL SCOTTISH POLITICAL EDITOR
NEW figures show urgent action must be taken to avoid climate change
becoming unstoppable within ten years, a leading environmentalist
warned yesterday.
The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is at a record high
after a significant rise, according to the figures.
Data from the United States shows that levels are now at 381 parts
per million (ppm) - 100ppm above the pre-industrial average.
The figures are seen as a benchmark for climate scientists around the
globe and have been interpreted as the worst news yet about mankind's
ability to change the climate.
The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has
been analysing samples of air taken from all over the world,
including America's Rocky Mountains.
The chief analyst for NOAA said the latest data confirms a worrying
trend that recent years have, on average, recorded double the rate of
increase from just 30 years ago.
The precise level of in the atmosphere is of global concern because
climate scientists fear certain thresholds may be "tipping points"
that trigger sudden changes.
The latest analysis of air samples shows that 2005 saw a rise of
2.6ppm, one of the largest increases on record.
Tony Juniper, director of Friends of the Earth, said: " levels are
inexorably rising in the Earth's atmosphere. The scientific
projections tell us we should be very alarmed about that fact.
"Once levels cross a certain threshold, climate change may become
unstoppable and lead to catastrophic impacts on the environment and
on the economy."
The danger level of in the environment was believed to be 400ppm,
which would be reached in ten years according to current estimates,
he said.
"It is alarming, and as countries continue to exploit and burn fossil
fuels and continue to destroy forests, the concentration is going to
continue to rise.
"The attempts by government and business to reduce emissions have
lacked ambition and there hasn't been the effort put in that is
needed."
Efforts to tackle emissions needed to be stepped up "as a matter of
some urgency", Mr Juniper said.
Dr Pieter Tans, the chief analyst for NOAA, warned that the latest
data confirmed a worrying trend, with average increases in recent
years standing at double the rate of those only 30 years ago.
"We don't see any sign of a decrease. In fact, we're seeing the
opposite - the rate of increase is accelerating," he said.
Professor Sir David King, the UK government's chief scientific
adviser, said the new data highlighted the importance of taking
urgent action.
"We're over 380ppm," he said. "That's higher than we've been for over
a million years, possibly 30 million years. Mankind is changing the
climate."
Shiona Baird, a Green MSP, said: "These figures are grim indeed and
the Scottish Executive's failure to take serious action verges on
criminal negligence."
Related topic
Climate change
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=52
This article: http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=385972006
http://tinyurl.com/mapxv
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:17:19 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: A Climate Change of Heart
A Climate Change of Heart
Even Bush's business allies have seen the light on global warming.
But he's dug in.
by Eugene Linden
A beleaguered president stubbornly insists on staying the course even
as his staunchest allies abandon him. I'm not talking about Iraq, but
global warming.
Here's a case where virtually everybody is acknowledging a weapon of
mass destruction — the threat of climate chaos — but still President
Bush refuses to take action. When the evangelical community, Bush's
stalwart base, called for climate action last month, the news grabbed
headlines. But the more important Bush defectors on this issue are
some of the world's largest corporations, including British
Petroleum, General Electric, DuPont and Cinergy. So, the question
arises: Why does Bush persist in his increasingly lonely stance?
The answer may lie in the difference between realpolitik and
ideology. Many corporations initially opposed climate action as a
practical matter, because of its perceived costs. The Bush
administration's opposition seems to derive from its ideological
hostility to international treaties and the United Nations on the one
hand and environmentalists on the other.
One story from 2002 illustrates the different approaches. A former
staffer from an anti-climate-action lobbying group, the Global
Climate Coalition, had dinner with oil and chemical company bigwigs
at the Palm Too restaurant in New York not long after the U.S.
negotiating team walked out of the talks on the Kyoto treaty to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
"You'd think that this group would have been jumping for joy," he
told me, "but instead, they were sputtering mad because they felt
that the move could not have been done in a more politically
incompetent way." The last thing these savvy businessmen wanted was a
grand gesture that would galvanize the the world against the U.S.
Instead, business groups had hoped for the U.S. to stay inside the
negotiations, where they could quietly kill action by a thousand
cuts.
That approach had already proved successful. For 17 years, industry-
sponsored lobbying groups forestalled action on climate change even
as scientific alarm mounted. One prong of the attack was to
infiltrate treaty negotiations. The lobbyists not only influenced
policy, in some cases they wrote it. In one incident in the 1990s,
Don Pearlman, an attorney who represented the Climate Council
(another vociferous anti-climate-action group), was escorted from the
floor of a Kyoto negotiating session after he was spotted writing
positions for the Saudi Arabian delegation.
When they were not writing policy for emerging nations, industry
groups were insisting that there was no scientific consensus that
climate change was an urgent threat. It was a brilliant tactic. The
naysayers didn't have to disprove global warming; they just had to
create the impression that it was still subject to debate. This left
the public feeling that there was no need to get excited until the
scientists sorted things out.
Two things happened to change corporate attitudes. The destructive
power of extreme weather events has become impossible to ignore (for
instance, Hurricane Katrina and the 2003 heat wave in Europe that
killed nearly 35,000 people). Even to the casual observer, the
climate system seems to be popping rivets. And multinational
corporations couldn't afford to be too out of step with their
customers and stakeholders, particularly in the many countries where
global warming is viewed as a clear and present danger.
Businesses began defecting from the Global Climate Coalition, which
closed up shop in 2002 (noting that the Bush administration had
adopted its agenda). And some companies changed positions to attempt
green branding or because of the threat of sanctions.
In other cases, however, change came about simply because there was a
new boss. That seems to have been the case with General Electric, the
ninth-largest corporation in the world. Chief Executive Jack Welch
was vocal in his opposition to taking action on climate change, and
according to those close to the situation, in 1997 he forced the head
of Employers Re, a GE insurance subsidiary, to abandon a plan to join
a public/private environmental and climate initiative put together by
the U.N. Environment Program. Now, however, under Jeffrey Immelt, GE
trumpets the very type of initiatives that Welch squashed.
The changed corporate landscape gives hope until we remember that the
climate seems to be changing the landscape that we live on even more
rapidly. With carbon dioxide levels already higher than they've been
since homo sapiens emerged as a species, we are conducting a science
lab experiment on a planetary scale.
India, China and other big greenhouse gas emitters will not do their
part unless the United States, the biggest emitter, joins the effort.
And that won't happen without presidential leadership. So, President
Bush, if the scientific, evangelical and business communities can't
sway you, what will it take to persuade you to help halt our lunatic
meddling with Earth's atmosphere?
Eugene Linden is the author of "The Winds of Change: Climate, Weather
and the Destruction of Civilizations."
© 2006 Los Angeles Times
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0314-22.htm
http://tinyurl.com/p8dzo
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:27:33 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: A Proposal for Hydrogen, Synthetic Fuels and the Halving of US
Emissions
A Proposal for Hydrogen, Synthetic Fuels and the Halving of US CO2
Emissions
14 March 2006
A flow-sheet for 100,000 gallons per day of CO2-free synfuel. Click
to enlarge.
A team from General Atomics is proposing the use of hydrogen provided
from non-fossil sources (solar, wind or nuclear) and CO2 captured
from coal-fired power plants or from the air to produce enough
Fischer-Tropsch synthetics to meet the fuel needs of the
transportation sector.
With such an approach, propsed in a poster session at the NHA
hydrogen conference, the total net US release of CO2 could be halved,
even factoring in the release of CO2 from the ongoing combustion of
hydrocarbon—although not fossil—fuels, according to the researchers'
analysis.
The production rate of CO2 from coal power plants in the US is 1,875
million metric tons/year. If this CO2 were captured using proven
absorption processes and used with hydrogen produced by solar, wind
or nuclear energy to make synfuel, it would provide all the
hydrocarbon fuel needed for our transportation economy.
Since that transportation economy produces 1,850 million metric tons
of CO2 per year, this synfuel process would cut our CO2 production in
half. We could shift from a petroleum-based transportation economy to
a synfuel transportation economy.
This would reduce our petroleum use by 75%, and reduce our CO2
production by 50% with no increase in coal use. It would require
significant quantities of hydrogen (255 million metric tons/year, or
25 times our current production) that would be produced from water
using solar, wind or nuclear energy.
This hydrogen synfuel concept would allow us to significantly reduce
our use of petroleum, and cut our CO2 emissions in half, while still
using our existing hydrocarbon-based transportation infrastructure.
It could provide a bridge to a pure hydrogen economy.
The Fischer-Tropsch process takes a synthesis gas (syngas) rich in
hydrogen and carbon monoxide and converts it catalytically to liquid
fuels and chemicals. The synthesis gas is produced by the
gasification of carbon-bearing feedstocks (coal, biomass) or by the
reforming of natural gas.
The gasification and reforming processes are energy, emissions and
cost-intensive. The basic gasification reaction (for coal, for
example) is:
2C + ½O2 + H2O ? 2CO + H2
The Water-gas Shift reaction is then used to produce additional
hydrogen:
CO + H2O ? H2 + CO2
The reaction for producing Fischer-Tropsch products (generically [CH2]
n) from synthesis gas (CO and H2) is:
CO + 2H2 ? [CH2]n + H2O
The simultaneous Fischer-Tropsch and Water-Gas Shift reactions in the
reactor leads directly to the complete reaction:
2C + H2O + ½O2 ? [CH2]n + CO2
In summary, the process uses two carbons and half an O2 for every CH2
produced. Substituting such synfuels for petroleum-based fuels in
transportations would triple US coal use and double current CO2
emissions.
Adding hydrogen from an external source into the process, however,
cuts the carbon need in half compared to synfuel from standard coal
gasification, and eliminated the production of CO2 from the process
reactions.
Adding Water-split H2 into the F-T Process
Gasification C + ¼O2 + ½H2O ? CO + ½H2
Water-splitting 3/2H2O + Energy ?3/2H2 + ¾O2
F-T Reaction CO + 2H2 ? CH2 + H2O
Net Reaction C + H2O + Energy ? CH2 + ½O2
The US currently produces 11 million tons of hydrogen annually
primarily through steam reformation of CH4 (methane). The process is
fossil-dependent and produces 100 million tons/yr of CO2.
Using low-temperature electrolysis, high-temperature electrolysis or
thermochemical conversion of water (assuming the electricity is
provided by wind, solar or nuclear and the heat is provided by solar
or nuclear), eliminates the generation of CO2 from hydrogen
production.
If CO2 is used as the source for carbon in the FT process, the
gasification step is replaced by a reverse water-gas shift reaction
and the outcome becomes even more attractive.
Synfuel by CO2 Capture + H2 from Water-splitting
Reverse water shift CO2 + H2 ? CO + H2O
F-T reaction CO + 2H2 ? CH2 + H2O
Water-splitting 3H2O + Energy ? CH2 + 3/2O2
Net Reaction CO2 + H2O + energy ? CH2 + 3/2O2
No coal or methane is needed, and one CO2 is consumed for each CH2
produced. When the CH2 is burned, the process is net carbon-neutral.
If used to replace oil, the use of these synfuels in transportation
would cut US carbon dioxide emissions in half.
Carbon dioxide is readily available, the General Atomics team points
out, from flue gas from fossil power plants. A 1,000MW coal-fired
power plant produces 5.5 million tons of CO2/yr. (14,500 tons/day).
Coal-fired plants, which account for 53% (0.38TWh) of US electricity
generation, generate 2 billion tons of CO2/yr—meeting the total
annual CO2 requirement to make synfuel for US transportation needs.
Carbon dioxide could also be captured from the atmosphere. Membrane
separation of CO2 from air followed by its absorption by either amine
or inorganic solvents is an emerging technology, but has been
demonstrated on a laboratory scale.
Large airflow would be required due to low concentration of CO2 in
air, and the resulting CO2 would be costly: about $0.10/kg (about
$1.0/gallon cost added to the synfuel).
All the component pieces have been demonstrated, the General Atomics
team points out. What is required is an integrated demonstration.
To actually implement the proposal would require enormous amounts of
both feedstocks.
The US consumes 260 million gallons of transportation fuel per day.
(13 million barrels of crude)
2.5 million tonnes of CO2 (2.5 billion kg) and 0.35 million tonnes of
H2 (350 million kg) per day would be required to make synfuel to
replace crude.
General Atomics naturally points to the potential for using nuclear
reactors for high volume high-temperature electrolysis or
thermochemical conversion of water to hydrogen.
But assuming sufficient hydrogen from renewable or zero-carbon
processes, and factoring in a modest carbon credit, the production of
synthetics in this manner could make economic sense as well as
environmental sense, according to the team.
Resources:
H2 + Synfuel Poster
Hydrogen and Synthetic Hydrocarbon Fuels—a Natural Synergy
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/03/a_proposal_for_.html#more
http://tinyurl.com/pzezd
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:38:37 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: Chernobyl: A poisonous legacy
Chernobyl: A poisonous legacy
Twenty years after a blast in the nuclear plant at Chernobyl spread
radioactive debris across Europe, it has been revealed that 375 farms
in Britain, with 200,000 sheep, are still contaminated by fallout
By Andy McSmith
Published: 14 March 2006
After two decades, the legacy of the Chernobyl disaster is still
casting its poisonous shadow over Britain's countryside. The
Department of Health has admitted that more than 200,000 sheep are
grazing on land contaminated by fallout from the explosion at the
Ukrainian nuclear plant 1,500 miles away. Emergency orders still
apply to 355 Welsh farms, 11 in Scotland and nine in England as a
result of the catastrophe in April 1986.
The revelation - in a Commons written answer to the Labour MP Gordon
Prentice - comes as Mr Blair prepares to make the case for nuclear
power in a forthcoming government Energy Review. The Prime Minister
argues that nuclear energy would allow the UK to achieve twin
objectives of cutting C02 emissions and reducing dependency on
imported natural gas supplies.
But, just last week a damning report from the Government's own
advisory board on sustainable development identified five major
disadvantages to any planned renewal of Britain's nuclear power
programme, including the threat of terrorist attack and the danger of
radiation exposure. The longevity of the "Chernobyl effect" in a
region generation of nuclear power stations, and going through a
consultation exercise to try to convince the public that this is a
safe form of electricity generation, we shouldn't overlook the
terrible consequences if something does go wrong,
"No one would now build a reactor as unsafe as those at Chernobyl,
which were jerry built. Even so, I think a lot of people will be
shocked to know that, as we approach the 20th anniversary of
Chernobyl, hundreds of farming families are still living with the
fallout."
Jean McSorley, Greenpeace's senior adviser on nuclear energy
said: "Chernobyl was the worst nuclear accident the world has ever
seen but it is by no means the worst that could happen. In Cumbria,
where I come from, people who are old enough to remember still talk
about it. It's quite moving to hear the stress that farming families
were put through. I think the British public that all this distance
from Chernobyl, 20 years later, so many families are still living
with its impact day to day."
The Chernobyl disaster turned public opinion in Britain against civil
nuclear power overnight. The land still poisoned by Chernobyl's
radioactivity lies all along the Welsh hills between Bangor and Bala,
much of it in the Snowdonia National park. There is also a large
triangle of contaminated land in Cumbria, south of Buttermere -
though the number of farms affected is smaller than in Wales.
Some of the Scottish hills are also still affected. No sheep can be
moved out of any of these areas without a special licence, under
Emergency Orders imposed in 1986. Sheep that have higher than the
permitted level of radiation have to be marked with a special dye
that does not wash off in the rain, and have to spend months grazing
on uncontaminated grass before they are passed as fit to go into the
food chain.
A National Farmers' Union spokesman said: "The paramount concern has
to be the safety of the consumer, and consumer confidence in the meat
supply, so exceptional care has to be taken to make sure no
contaminated meat goes into the food chain."
Most of Britain's nuclear power stations have either ceased to
produce electricity, or are nearing the end of their active life. The
last is due for closure in 2035. The Government is now conducting an
energy review, to be published in June, which is expected to announce
a new nuclear programme.
Tony Blair signalled his support for the industry in a speech to
Labour's conference last autumn, when he warned Britain is too
reliant on "unstable" regimes for its energy supplies, and singled
out nuclear power as an alternative.
But resistance to the idea has been growing, particularly with the
publication last week of the report by the government's Sustainable
Development Commission. The Commons Environmental Audit Committee
will also report later this month. According to a committee member,
their findings are expected to be "measured" but "certainly won't put
a strong case for nuclear power".
On 23 March, leading specialists will hold a conference in London on
the long term impact of Chernobyl. At the end of the month, the
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority will issue a revised figure for the
cost of cleaning up the sites of disused publicly owned nuclear
plants.
Their figure is expected to be substantially higher than their
original estimate which was published last year, of £56bn.
David Ellwood, 49, farmer: 'Nobody can tell us when the radiation
will pass'
By Geneviéve Roberts
David Ellwood has 700 sheep on his farm in Ulpha, near Broughton-in-
Furness. His wife, Heather, 50, helps out on Baskell Farm, and they
have four children.
"I remember the Chernobyl disaster 20 years ago. We were lambing in
April and it was raining like hell. We got a letter from the ministry
suggesting it would last about three weeks, but they were only
guessing - it could go on for another 20 years.
"Every time we take sheep to auction, we must phone Defra, who check
they are clear from contamination [from radioactive caesium]. They
give us £1.30 for every sheep they monitor. We take them off the fell
and put them in the fields for a couple of weeks before selling them,
so readings are usually low. But the odd one gets a high reading if
it comes straight in off the fell, and has to be slaughtered.
"Defra are here four or five times a year which is a hassle. At
shearing time in July they monitor everything. If we are taking
Cheviots to auction, we have to get them into a pen to take readings,
which makes them mucky and bad for selling. Now we try to get them
monitored three or four days before," said Mr Ellwood, 49. "We have
been on this farm for 16 years, and owned the ground surrounding it
before that, so have always been affected by Chernobyl. There is a
lot of contaminated peat on our fell, so when the grass comes up in
the summer that gets contaminated too. If our fell were rocky, I
don't think it would be such a problem.
"I could get angry, but it is pointless, there is not a damn thing we
can do and nobody seems to know when it will pass. I would be worried
if more power stations were built. We were 1,500 miles from Chernobyl
and still feel the effects."
Edwin Noble, 45, sheep farmer: 'I had no idea it could affect us so
far away'
Edwin Noble and his family, who run a 2,500- acre farm close to Mount
Snowden, live under emergency restrictions that they were told would
apply for 30 days, but which are likely to continue for years.
Mr Noble, 45, was in his early twenties when he took charge of the
family farm. On the night of 2 May 1986, he was disturbed by
torrential rain and feared the river would burst its banks. What he
did not know was that the radiation cloud from Chernobyl was passing
invisibly overhead. The rain left huge deposits of radioceasium in
the peaty soil, which is no direct threat to humans but works itself
into the grass, contaminating his sheep.
"I had heard about Chernobyl on the news, but had no idea at all that
[it] could affect us so far away," he said. "It's something we have
had to live with ever since.
"Every time we move a sheep or lamb off our land it has got to be
scanned. If it fails the monitoring, it ... cannot be sold. If you
can get the sheep or lamb off the contaminated land, then the
radiation comes out of them fairly quickly, but the whole of our farm
is affected, so we rent grazing land 20 miles away. It means you
constantly have to think ahead. If the lamb is fattened and ready to
go to market, you can't have it sitting in a pen waiting to be
monitored because it loses weight, so you've got to get the
monitoring done ahead of time. When the market is volatile, it has
cost us a sale.
"The experience has made me very opposed to nuclear power. It's not
so much the inconvenience for farmers like us - but what if the
explosion had been at the plant near here, at Trawfynydd? It doesn't
seem worth the risk," he said.
After two decades, the legacy of the Chernobyl disaster is still
casting its poisonous shadow over Britain's countryside. The
Department of Health has admitted that more than 200,000 sheep are
grazing on land contaminated by fallout from the explosion at the
Ukrainian nuclear plant 1,500 miles away. Emergency orders still
apply to 355 Welsh farms, 11 in Scotland and nine in England as a
result of the catastrophe in April 1986.
The revelation - in a Commons written answer to the Labour MP Gordon
Prentice - comes as Mr Blair prepares to make the case for nuclear
power in a forthcoming government Energy Review. The Prime Minister
argues that nuclear energy would allow the UK to achieve twin
objectives of cutting C02 emissions and reducing dependency on
imported natural gas supplies.
But, just last week a damning report from the Government's own
advisory board on sustainable development identified five major
disadvantages to any planned renewal of Britain's nuclear power
programme, including the threat of terrorist attack and the danger of
radiation exposure. The longevity of the "Chernobyl effect" in a
region generation of nuclear power stations, and going through a
consultation exercise to try to convince the public that this is a
safe form of electricity generation, we shouldn't overlook the
terrible consequences if something does go wrong,
"No one would now build a reactor as unsafe as those at Chernobyl,
which were jerry built. Even so, I think a lot of people will be
shocked to know that, as we approach the 20th anniversary of
Chernobyl, hundreds of farming families are still living with the
fallout."
Jean McSorley, Greenpeace's senior adviser on nuclear energy
said: "Chernobyl was the worst nuclear accident the world has ever
seen but it is by no means the worst that could happen. In Cumbria,
where I come from, people who are old enough to remember still talk
about it. It's quite moving to hear the stress that farming families
were put through. I think the British public that all this distance
from Chernobyl, 20 years later, so many families are still living
with its impact day to day."
The Chernobyl disaster turned public opinion in Britain against civil
nuclear power overnight. The land still poisoned by Chernobyl's
radioactivity lies all along the Welsh hills between Bangor and Bala,
much of it in the Snowdonia National park. There is also a large
triangle of contaminated land in Cumbria, south of Buttermere -
though the number of farms affected is smaller than in Wales.
Some of the Scottish hills are also still affected. No sheep can be
moved out of any of these areas without a special licence, under
Emergency Orders imposed in 1986. Sheep that have higher than the
permitted level of radiation have to be marked with a special dye
that does not wash off in the rain, and have to spend months grazing
on uncontaminated grass before they are passed as fit to go into the
food chain.
A National Farmers' Union spokesman said: "The paramount concern has
to be the safety of the consumer, and consumer confidence in the meat
supply, so exceptional care has to be taken to make sure no
contaminated meat goes into the food chain."
Most of Britain's nuclear power stations have either ceased to
produce electricity, or are nearing the end of their active life. The
last is due for closure in 2035. The Government is now conducting an
energy review, to be published in June, which is expected to announce
a new nuclear programme.
Tony Blair signalled his support for the industry in a speech to
Labour's conference last autumn, when he warned Britain is too
reliant on "unstable" regimes for its energy supplies, and singled
out nuclear power as an alternative.
But resistance to the idea has been growing, particularly with the
publication last week of the report by the government's Sustainable
Development Commission. The Commons Environmental Audit Committee
will also report later this month. According to a committee member,
their findings are expected to be "measured" but "certainly won't put
a strong case for nuclear power".
On 23 March, leading specialists will hold a conference in London on
the long term impact of Chernobyl. At the end of the month, the
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority will issue a revised figure for the
cost of cleaning up the sites of disused publicly owned nuclear
plants.
Their figure is expected to be substantially higher than their
original estimate which was published last year, of £56bn.
David Ellwood, 49, farmer: 'Nobody can tell us when the radiation
will pass'
By Geneviéve Roberts
David Ellwood has 700 sheep on his farm in Ulpha, near Broughton-in-
Furness. His wife, Heather, 50, helps out on Baskell Farm, and they
have four children.
"I remember the Chernobyl disaster 20 years ago. We were lambing in
April and it was raining like hell. We got a letter from the ministry
suggesting it would last about three weeks, but they were only
guessing - it could go on for another 20 years.
"Every time we take sheep to auction, we must phone Defra, who check
they are clear from contamination [from radioactive caesium]. They
give us £1.30 for every sheep they monitor. We take them off the fell
and put them in the fields for a couple of weeks before selling them,
so readings are usually low. But the odd one gets a high reading if
it comes straight in off the fell, and has to be slaughtered.
"Defra are here four or five times a year which is a hassle. At
shearing time in July they monitor everything. If we are taking
Cheviots to auction, we have to get them into a pen to take readings,
which makes them mucky and bad for selling. Now we try to get them
monitored three or four days before," said Mr Ellwood, 49. "We have
been on this farm for 16 years, and owned the ground surrounding it
before that, so have always been affected by Chernobyl. There is a
lot of contaminated peat on our fell, so when the grass comes up in
the summer that gets contaminated too. If our fell were rocky, I
don't think it would be such a problem.
"I could get angry, but it is pointless, there is not a damn thing we
can do and nobody seems to know when it will pass. I would be worried
if more power stations were built. We were 1,500 miles from Chernobyl
and still feel the effects."
Edwin Noble, 45, sheep farmer: 'I had no idea it could affect us so
far away'
Edwin Noble and his family, who run a 2,500- acre farm close to Mount
Snowden, live under emergency restrictions that they were told would
apply for 30 days, but which are likely to continue for years.
Mr Noble, 45, was in his early twenties when he took charge of the
family farm. On the night of 2 May 1986, he was disturbed by
torrential rain and feared the river would burst its banks. What he
did not know was that the radiation cloud from Chernobyl was passing
invisibly overhead. The rain left huge deposits of radioceasium in
the peaty soil, which is no direct threat to humans but works itself
into the grass, contaminating his sheep.
"I had heard about Chernobyl on the news, but had no idea at all that
[it] could affect us so far away," he said. "It's something we have
had to live with ever since.
"Every time we move a sheep or lamb off our land it has got to be
scanned. If it fails the monitoring, it ... cannot be sold. If you
can get the sheep or lamb off the contaminated land, then the
radiation comes out of them fairly quickly, but the whole of our farm
is affected, so we rent grazing land 20 miles away. It means you
constantly have to think ahead. If the lamb is fattened and ready to
go to market, you can't have it sitting in a pen waiting to be
monitored because it loses weight, so you've got to get the
monitoring done ahead of time. When the market is volatile, it has
cost us a sale.
"The experience has made me very opposed to nuclear power. It's not
so much the inconvenience for farmers like us - but what if the
explosion had been at the plant near here, at Trawfynydd? It doesn't
seem worth the risk," he said.
http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article351153.ece
http://tinyurl.com/nzby3
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:40:42 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: OT: Latin America and Asia are at last breaking free of Washington's grip
Latin America and Asia are at last breaking free of Washington's grip
The US-dominated world order is being challenged by a new spirit of
independence in the global south
Noam Chomsky
Wednesday March 15, 2006
Guardian
The prospect that Europe and Asia might move towards greater
independence has troubled US planners since the second world war. The
concerns have only risen as the "tripolar order" - Europe, North
America and Asia - has continued to evolve.
Every day Latin America, too, is becoming more independent. Now Asia
and the Americas are strengthening their ties while the reigning
superpower, the odd man out, consumes itself in misadventures in the
Middle East.
Regional integration in Asia and Latin America is a crucial and
increasingly important issue that, from Washington's perspective,
betokens a defiant world gone out of control. Energy, of course,
remains a defining factor - the object of contention - everywhere.
China, unlike Europe, refuses to be intimidated by Washington, a
primary reason for the fear of China by US planners, which presents a
dilemma: steps toward confrontation are inhibited by US corporate
reliance on China as an export platform and growing market, as well
as by China's financial reserves - reported to be approaching Japan's
in scale.
In January, Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah visited Beijing, which is
expected to lead to a Sino-Saudi memorandum of understanding calling
for "increased cooperation and investment between the two countries
in oil, natural gas and investment", the Wall Street Journal reports.
Already much of Iran's oil goes to China, and China is providing Iran
with weapons that both states presumably regard as deterrent to US
designs. India also has options. India may choose to be a US client,
or it may prefer to join the more independent Asian bloc that is
taking shape, with ever more ties to Middle East oil producers.
Siddharth Varadarjan, the deputy editor of the Hindu, observes
that "if the 21st century is to be an 'Asian century,' Asia's
passivity in the energy sector has to end".
The key is India-China cooperation. In January, an agreement signed
in Beijing "cleared the way for India and China to collaborate not
only in technology but also in hydrocarbon exploration and
production, a partnership that could eventually alter fundamental
equations in the world's oil and natural gas sector", Varadarjan
points out.
An additional step, already being contemplated, is an Asian oil
market trading in euros. The impact on the international financial
system and the balance of global power could be significant. It
should be no surprise that President Bush paid a recent visit to try
to keep India in the fold, offering nuclear cooperation and other
inducements as a lure.
Meanwhile, in Latin America left-centre governments prevail from
Venezuela to Argentina. The indigenous populations have become much
more active and influential, particularly in Bolivia and Ecuador,
where they either want oil and gas to be domestically controlled or,
in some cases, oppose production altogether.
Many indigenous people apparently do not see any reason why their
lives, societies and cultures should be disrupted or destroyed so
that New Yorkers can sit in their SUVs in traffic gridlock.
Venezuela, the leading oil exporter in the hemisphere, has forged
probably the closest relations with China of any Latin American
country, and is planning to sell increasing amounts of oil to China
as part of its effort to reduce dependence on the openly hostile US
government.
Venezuela has joined Mercosur, the South American customs union - a
move described by Nestor Kirchner, the Argentinian president, as "a
milestone" in the development of this trading bloc, and welcomed as
a "new chapter in our integration" by Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, the
Brazilian president.
Venezuela, apart from supplying Argentina with fuel oil, bought
almost a third of Argentinian debt issued in 2005, one element of a
region-wide effort to free the countries from the controls of the IMF
after two decades of disastrous conformity to the rules imposed by
the US-dominated international financial institutions.
Steps toward Southern Cone [the southern states of South America]
integration advanced further in December with the election in Bolivia
of Evo Morales, the country's first indigenous president. Morales
moved quickly to reach a series of energy accords with Venezuela. The
Financial Times reported that these "are expected to underpin
forthcoming radical reforms to Bolivia's economy and energy sector"
with its huge gas reserves, second only to Venezuela's in South
America.
Cuba-Venezuela relations are becoming ever closer, each relying on
its comparative advantage. Venezuela is providing low-cost oil, while
in return Cuba organises literacy and health programmes, sending
thousands of highly skilled professionals, teachers and doctors, who
work in the poorest and most neglected areas, as they do elsewhere in
the third world.
Cuban medical assistance is also being welcomed elsewhere. One of the
most horrendous tragedies of recent years was the earthquake in
Pakistan last October. Besides the huge death toll, unknown numbers
of survivors have to face brutal winter weather with little shelter,
food or medical assistance.
"Cuba has provided the largest contingent of doctors and paramedics
to Pakistan," paying all the costs (perhaps with Venezuelan funding),
writes John Cherian in India's Frontline magazine, citing Dawn, a
leading Pakistan daily.
President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan expressed his "deep gratitude"
to Fidel Castro for the "spirit and compassion" of the Cuban medical
teams - reported to comprise more than 1,000 trained personnel, 44%
of them women, who remained to work in remote mountain
villages, "living in tents in freezing weather and in an alien
culture", after western aid teams had been withdrawn.
Growing popular movements, primarily in the south but with increasing
participation in the rich industrial countries, are serving as the
bases for many of these developments towards more independence and
concern for the needs of the great majority of the population.
© Noam Chomsky
· Noam Chomsky, the author, most recently, of Imperial Ambitions:
Conversations on the Post-9/11 World, is a professor of linguistics
at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329434467-103677,00.html
http://tinyurl.com/fwgcd
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:43:49 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: Ice Retreats in Arctic for 2nd Year; Some Fear Most of It Will Vanish
Ice Retreats in Arctic for 2nd Year; Some Fear Most of It Will Vanish
By ANDREW C. REVKIN
For the second year in a row, the cloak of sea ice on the Arctic
Ocean failed to grow to its normal winter expanse, scientists said
yesterday. The finding led some climate experts to predict a record
expansion of open water this summer.
"We keep looking for the ice to recover, but it isn't," said Mark C.
Serreze, a senior scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center
in Boulder, Colo., which monitors the region using
satellites. "Unless conditions turn unusually cold this spring and
summer, we may be looking at sea ice losses in 2006 that will rival
what we saw in 2005."
The ice retreat recorded last September was the biggest since
satellites began routine monitoring in 1979 and was probably the
biggest in 100 years, according to Dr. Serreze's research group and
an independent University of Illinois team.
The new findings on winter ice were first reported yesterday in the
British newspaper The Independent.
Next week, when the Arctic begins six months of daylight, the warming
trend is likely to be amplified by the shift from ice to water, since
water absorbs sunlight that ice would otherwise reflect.
Scientists studying the region are divided over how much of the
Arctic shift is from the region's large natural variations and how
much is being driven by the global buildup of carbon dioxide and
other heat-trapping greenhouse gases emitted mainly by smokestacks
and tailpipes.
Some experts on the region, including Jamie Morison of the University
of Washington, say they remain convinced that the biggest force
determining the extent of Arctic sea ice is wind patterns, which
cause part of the ice cap to revolve like a giant turntable,
propelling a steady river of floes out past Greenland into the North
Atlantic.
When ice is purged that way, the resulting open water can absorb more
heat from the air, then expel that heat through the winter, limiting
the thickness and area of new ice.
"I have a feeling the temperature rise over the Arctic Ocean is more
due to the loss of ice from wind-driven export, rather than the loss
of ice being due to temperature rise," Dr. Morison said.
But Dr. Serreze and others disagree, saying it is hard to explain the
changes in ice area without including the broader warming of the
atmosphere and oceans that has been linked by almost all climate
experts to the intensifying greenhouse effect.
Many experts agree that despite the short-term complexities, if
emissions of greenhouse gases are not curbed the human influence will
dominate and the region could well be nearly bereft of ice later in
the century.
Yesterday, a NASA team reported that one of the greenhouse gases,
ozone, which is also a component of smog, appeared to be having an
outsize warming effect in the Arctic.
Carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas from human activities, can
last a century and tends to diffuse uniformly around the world,
exerting its warming influence evenly.
Ozone generated in polluted cities and by industrial sources in the
Northern Hemisphere tends to accumulate in the lower layers of the
atmosphere over the Arctic in winter, when a lack of sunlight
prevents natural chemical reactions from breaking it down.
As a result, it appears to be contributing to winter warming there,
said Drew Shindell, the leader of the NASA research, which was
conducted at the agency's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in
Manhattan.
Dr. Shindell said the findings showed there was a double benefit to
curbing this particular pollutant.
"Reducing ozone pollution can not only improve air quality but also
have the added benefit of easing climate warming, especially in the
Arctic," he said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/15/science/earth/15ice.html?
pagewanted=print
http://tinyurl.com/khy4e
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:47:21 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: CHILLING
CHILLING
Issue of 2006-03-20
Posted 2006-03-13
I n March, 2002, NASA and the Deutsches Zentrum für Luftund
Raumfahrt, the German aerospace agency, launched a pair of satellites
from the Plesetsk Cosmodrome, a former intercontinental-ballistic-
missile site in northern Russia, to map changes in the earth's
surface. The satellites, nicknamed Tom and Jerry, have been chasing
each other around the globe ever since. Separated by a gap of
approximately a hundred and thirty-seven miles, they sometimes pull
apart, only to draw closer again. By monitoring their relative
positions to the fantastic exactitude of one micron—less than one-
fiftieth the width of a human hair—scientists can detect tiny
variations in the earth's gravitational field.
Now, almost four years to the day after they were launched, Tom and
Jerry have yielded a scarily significant result: Antarctica is losing
ice. The rate of loss, according to researchers at the University of
Colorado, in Boulder, who analyzed changes in the continent's
gravitational pull, is around thirty-six cubic miles per year. (For
comparison's sake, the city of Los Angeles uses about one-fifth of a
cubic mile of water annually.) The finding, which was reported two
weeks ago in the online version of Science, is particularly ominous,
because climatologists had expected that even as the ice sheet lost
mass at its edges, its over-all mass would increase, since rising
temperatures would lead to more snowfall over the continent's
midsection. If the loss continues, it will mean that predictions for
the rise in the sea level for the coming century are seriously
understated.
The news from Antarctica follows a string of similarly grim
discoveries. In September, satellite measurements showed that the
extent of the Arctic ice cap had shrunk to the smallest area ever
recorded, prompting a prediction that the Arctic Ocean could be ice-
free in summer "well before the end of this century." Around the same
time, a group of British scientists reported that soils in England
and Wales have been losing carbon at the rate of four million metric
tons a year, a loss that is at once a symptom of warming and—as much
of that carbon is released into the atmosphere—a likely cause of
more. In January, researchers at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space
Studies concluded that 2005 had been the hottest year on record, and,
in February, a team of scientists from NASA and the University of
Kansas announced that the flow of ice from glaciers in Greenland had
more than doubled over the past decade. Earlier this month, the
Washington Post reported that the mountain pine beetle, a pest once
kept in check by winter cold, has decimated huge swaths of forest in
western Canada. Officials with the Canadian Forest Service say that
the beetle has crossed the Rockies and they fear that it will soon
start eating its way east. "People say climate change is something
for our kids to worry about," one official told the Post. "No. It's
now."
In the face of such news, how does a country, i.e. the United States,
justify further inaction? Certainly, there isn't much tread left in
the argument that global warming is, to use Senator James Inhofe's
famous formulation, a "hoax." In January, six former heads of the
Environmental Protection Agency, five of whom had served under
Republican Administrations, met with the current administrator,
Stephen Johnson, for a panel discussion in Washington. Panelists were
asked to hold up their hands if they believed global warming to be a
real problem, for which human activity was responsible. Every one of
them, Johnson included, raised a hand.
But where there's a will there is, indeed, always a way. The new
argument making the rounds of conservative think tanks, like the
National Center for Policy Analysis, and circulating through assorted
sympathetic publications goes something like this: Yes, the planet
may be warming up, but no one can be sure of why, and, in any case,
it doesn't matter—let's stop quibbling about the causes of climate
change and concentrate on dealing with the consequences. A recent
column in the Wall Street Journal laid out the logic as follows: "The
problems associated with climate change (whether man-made or natural)
are the same old problems of poverty, disease, and natural hazards
like floods, storms, and droughts." Therefore "money spent directly
on these problems is a much surer bet than money spent trying to
control a climate change process that we don't understand." Sounding
an eerily similar note, a column published a few days later in the
National Review Online stated, "We can do more to help the poor by
combating these problems now than we would by reducing carbon dioxide
emissions."
The beauty of this argument is its apparent high-mindedness, and
this, of course, is also its danger. Carbon dioxide is a persistent
gas—it lasts for about a century—and once released into the
atmosphere it is, for all practical purposes, irrecoverable. Since
every extra increment of CO2 leads to extra warming, addressing the
effects of climate change without dealing with the cause is a bit
like trying to treat diabetes with doughnuts. The climate isn't going
to change just once, and then settle down; unless CO2 concentrations
are stabilized, it will keep on changing, producing, in addition to
the "same old problems," an ever-growing array of new ones. The head
of the Goddard Institute, James Hansen, who first warned about the
dangers of global warming back in the nineteen-seventies and recently
made headlines by accusing the Bush Administration of censorship, has
said that following the path of business-as-usual for the remainder
of this century will lead to an earth so warm as to be "practically a
different planet." In a world thus transformed, the only sure bet is
that there will be no sure bets.
A project like Tom and Jerry demonstrates all the strengths of
American science: technological sophistication, restless curiosity,
and monumental budgets. But, at the same time, it points to the
fundamental disconnect in our culture. Why spend tens of millions of
dollars to produce such an elegant set of measurements only to ignore
them? With knowledge comes responsibility, and so it is that we turn
from the knowledge we have gone to such lengths to acquire.
— Elizabeth Kolbert
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/articles/060320ta_talk_kolbert
http://tinyurl.com/jnjha
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:52:55 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: GE: Bund will Wasserstoffautos mit 500 Millionen Euro fördern
Bund will Wasserstoffautos mit 500 Millionen Euro fördern
Mit einem Innovationsprogramm will die Bundesregierung die
Wasserstofftechnologie für Autos vorantreiben. In den nächsten zehn
Jahren will Bundesverkehrsminister Tiefensee jährlich 50 Millionen
Euro bereitstellen.
Berlin - "Wir werden unser Engagement verstärken und zusätzliche
Fördermittel von 500 Millionen Euro für die kommenden zehn Jahre
bereitstellen", sagte Bundesverkehrsminister Wolfgang Tiefensee (SPD)
am Dienstag bei der Eröffnung einer zweiten Wasserstoff-Tankstelle in
Berlin.
Die Hauptstadt soll zugleich mit Hilfe ihrer Verkehrsbetriebe (BVG)
zur europäischen Metropole für diese Antriebstechnologie werden. Bis
2007 werden 14 Wasserstoff-Linienbusse angeschafft, teilte die BVG
mit. Das Projekt ist Teil der vom Bund geförderten "Clean Energy
Partnership" (CEP/Partnerschaft für saubere Energie), an der neben
deutschen Autobauern auch Ölfirmen, der Stromriese Vattenfall und der
Technologiekonzern Linde beteiligt sind.
"Als Kraftstoff im Verkehr hat die Wasserstoff-Technologie den
längsten Weg noch vor sich", erklärte Tiefensee. "Wasserstoff muss
verlässlich, verbraucherfreundlich und kosteneffizient sein."
Massenproduktion und breiter Einsatz seien nicht über Nacht
möglich. "Heute wird ein weiteres wichtiges Fundament gelegt: die
Einführung des (CO2-) emissionsfreien Personennahverkehrs mit
Wasserstoff."
Nach Angaben des Ministeriums soll die Wasserstoff-Technologie mit
Hilfe der angekündigten Bundesmittel von im Schnitt jährlich 50
Millionen Euro über Berlin hinaus auch auf andere Regionen ausgedehnt
werden. So zeigten sich Aktivitäten in Hamburg, Süddeutschland und
Teilen von Nordrhein-Westfalen.
Die Fachleute von BMW gehen davon aus, dass die vom schädlichen
Kohlendioxid freie Wasserstoff-Technologie 2015 "marktreif" sein
könnte. Das verlange deutliche Kostensenkungen durch
Weiterentwicklung, damit die Fahrzeuge mit einem "normalen Aufschlag"
auf den Preis mit Benzin und Diesel betriebener Autos überhaupt
verkauft werden könnten, erläuterte der BMW-Vorstandsbeauftragte für
Verkehr und Umwelt, Klaus Scheuerer. Dieser Preisaufschlag dürfte bei
der Markteinführung etwa 2000 bis 3000 Euro betragen.
abl/dpa
http://www.spiegel.de/auto/aktuell/0,1518,druck-405976,00.html
http://tinyurl.com/fq3ok
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 09:55:28 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: BMW to start serial output of hydrogen-powered car
BMW to start serial output of hydrogen-powered car
March 14, 2006
MUNICH, Germany (Reuters) - BMWintends to start serial
production of a hydrogen-burning 7-Series executive car within two
years, the world's largest premium automaker said on Tuesday.
"We will present such a vehicle to the public in less than two
years," a spokesman said, confirming media reports. BMW had said last
year its hydrogen-fuelled cars, which emit only water vapour, would
make their debut in 2010.
BMW intends to build a few hundred such cars at first. They will be
able to switch between burning standard gasoline and hydrogen so that
drivers will not be left stranded while the infrastructure to deliver
hydrogen is built up.
The space that two fuel tanks take up means only the 7-Series will
offer the hydrogen package at first. BMW's long-term goal is to offer
hydrogen motors in all its cars.
BMW unveiled the world's fastest hydrogen-powered car at the 2004
Paris auto show. Dubbed the H2R, it can exceed 300 kilometres (185
miles) per hour and reaches 100 km per hour from a standing start in
around six seconds.
While BMW is developing fuel-cell driven cars as well, it says it is
concentrating on the combustion engine because the sum total of its
features and characteristics offers the largest number of advantages
and benefits all in one.
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2006/03/14/bmw_to_s
tart_serial_output_of_hydrogen_powered_car?mode=PF
http://tinyurl.com/gpuwh
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:01:22 -0000
From: "janson2997"
Subject: NASA scientists get the OK to talk
NASA scientists get the OK to talk
Now the Bush administration should free all civil servants to be
frank with the public, their boss.
A NASA scientist who would not be muzzled is convinced the agency
administrator's pledge of "scientific openness" is genuine, and that
NASA workers will be able to speak freely to the public without first
running their remarks through a political rinse cycle.
That will be a change in procedures that had evolved since political
appointees at NASA headquarters began trying to cleanse all public
communications of any scientific findings contrary to Bush
administration policy.
But, warns James E. Hansen, the man whose protests of government
censorship drew congressional scrutiny, don't mistake a change at
NASA, which is crafting a new public information policy, for
widespread reform. Other scientific agencies have been constrained by
political appointees who see President Bush, rather than the American
people, as their boss.
There's no sign that NASA administrator Michael Griffin's
intervention on behalf of scientists and the public is being widely
emulated.
Griffin ordered a review of the agency's communications policies last
month, after Hansen complained to The New York Times that NASA
officials had told public affairs officers to review his future
lectures, Web postings and scientific papers. Hansen is one of NASA's
top climate scientists -- one who, not incidentally, thinks that
global warming caused by human activity is an urgent threat.
Hansen insists that motor vehicle emissions can be cut enough to
significantly reduce the greenhouse gases that are heating up the
planet. His message is inconvenient for an administration that
insists that voluntary industry measures to merely slow the increase
in emissions, rather than reduce them, is quite enough.
Hansen joined more than 140 NASA scientists and other civil servants
from the agency's nationwide network of research centers in stating
publicly Monday that the new communications policy will limit the
potential for political mischief -- if, that is, it gets final
approval.
That would leave the public to worry only about what scientific
propaganda the administration might be forcing all of the other
federal agencies to churn out.
http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/wb/wb/xp-56739
http://tinyurl.com/mxyfz
j2997
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fuelcell-energy/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A personal quest to promote the use of wind energy and hydrogen technology in the Great Lakes area of the United States. The Great Lakes area is in a unique position to become an energy exporting region through these and other renewable energy technologies. *Update 2014: Just do it everywhere - Dan*
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
[fuelcell-energy] Digest Number 1403
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment