Mark Lynas, one of the environmental activists who helped to organize the opposition to genetically modified organisms, has recanted and now apologizes for his actions, according to a recent Slate article by Tori Bosch. It appears that he now acknowledges that to insist on food purity, and to oppose development of GMO crops and animals that could feed the world, would condemn hundreds of millions to lives of hardship and starvation. Kudos for him to for having the courage to change his mind when he better understood the facts.
You can see his full presentation to the Oxford Farming Conference on January 3, 2013 here.
Saturday, January 26, 2013
Friday, January 18, 2013
The True Cost of Climate Change Hysteria
This is taken from a comment by rgb@duke on a post at Watts Up With That (the comment is on January 17 at 9:29 a.m.). He is a professor at Duke University who occasionally comments on the scientific aspects of climate change. This nonscientific portion of his comment struck a chord with me, and summarizes better than I could the incredible human cost of climate change hysteria.
In the meantime, prudence suggests that we concentrate on the ongoing disaster of global energy poverty first as it is a certain disaster that is happening now and forces 1/3 of the world’s population to live in near prehistoric levels of poverty and misery. Even if CO_2 were precisely as disastrous as the worst-case CAGW scenarios suggest — which few people believe any more, including climate scientists — the impact of a 2.5-3.5 C rise in global temperature by the end of the century will be smaller than the impact of a century more of global energy poverty, even if the ocean does rise a full meter or more, even if storms do actually get discernibly worse eventually, even if there is increased desertification, none of which are currently observible.
Somewhere in the world, as I type this, not one but hundreds of millions of people are cooking a sparse day’s meal on animal dung or a small charcoal fire. Their children are breathing in particulates and smoke and suffering from malnutrition and diseases. Their clothes must be hand washed, if they are washed at all. They have neither fresh, clean water nor anything but the great outdoors as a sewer system. Some two billion people will light their homes — if one can call a tin shanty or mud or grass hut a home — with an oil lamp or nothing at all tonight. The children of those two billion people will not go to school tomorrow, cannot read or do simple arithmetic, and will go to bed hungry (indeed, live always hungry, as they do not take in enough food to support their growth). They will grow up stunted in stature and damaged in their brains, all because they lack access to cheap electricity, running clean water and sewer facilities and clothes washing and refrigeration and schools and houses and adequate supplies of fertilizer-grown food that electricity enables. Many will die young, or live to become “criminals” as they do what they must to stay alive, or will become cannon fodder for anyone who promises to give them a better life if they will fight and die for them.
They, not the threat of a supposed apocalypse that might or might not happen in a century, are the moral imperative of the twenty-first century. There is no need for 1/3 of the world’s population to live in squalid misery — not any more. We have the technology, we have the wealth, to utterly eliminate global poverty within a few decades. What we lack is the will and the vision to do so.
And we will never succeed in doing so at the same time we make energy more expensive and discourage its use. The poverty in question is energy poverty. Fundamentally. With enough, cheap enough, energy, we can make the deserts bloom, create jobs in the heart of Africa or India or South America, bring medicine and electric lights and running water to the world. Cheap, clean energy solves all problems; it is the fundamental scarcity.
Wednesday, January 16, 2013
NRDC Embarrasses Itself With Climate Change Report
The Natural Resources Defense Council, or NRDC, has alleged that West Virginia ranked among the top 10 states for percentage of extreme weather events in 2012. Ken Ward and the Charleston Gazette made it the lead story, with a headline that said "W. Va. among 'extreme weather' states in 2012". The story includes dire predictions of worsening weather due to global warming.
Really? Did anyone actually look at the NRDC's report, or take a moment to consider carefully their claims of record-breaking heat, snow, rain and wildfires?
You could start any number of places in evaluating the NRDC's report, but let's look at the criteria NRDC used. Record breaking snow? That's a sign of global warming? If you look at the data the NRDC provided, you see that all the records came from the cold front that hit the state October 29 and 30, about the time Sandy dropped a ton of rain on us. You can't blame the earth-heating greenhouse gas effect for unusual cold that time of year.
As for precipitation, from Sandy or otherwise, wasn't the prediction just a few years back that we would have more drought as a result of carbon dioxide emissions, because the land was going to sizzle and dry up? So why is rainfall being blamed on global warming? Furthermore, look at the data used by the NRDC. Six of the 17 rainfall records were set at Queen Shoals, which the NRDC could not even locate, and the previous record rainfall was . . . .0, or .01 inch. What does that mean? Here's the NRDC's criteria:
The NRDC report is internally inconsistent in what it offers as evidence of man-made climate change. It cites "the worst drought in 50 years", but doesn't that mean that there was a worse drought in the 60's, before carbon dioxide levels climbed? Actually, there were worse droughts in the 1950s. And have they forgotten the Dust Bowl of the 1930s? But even if the droughts are worse now, how does that jibe with their claims of greater precipitation as a result of global warming?
Last year was a bad year for wildfires? Couldn't prove it by me. I recall many worse years, when the smoke carried all the way from the southern coal fields, and Department of Forestry workers were pressed into manning firelines. Nothing like that in 2012.
The temperature records are a joke as well. Many of the record high temperatures are high minimum temperatures. Hardly something that one worries about when considering the effects of global warming. And even for the high records, you see Wayne County had 3 sites all set records on the same day - the airport, sewage plant, and Dunlow. That obviously increases the number of "records" but it's misleading as evidence of widespread heat records.
What struck me most about the NRDC's report was how few records were broken. Think of all the weather stations in West Virginia. (I tried to find a list, but couldn't) There are dozens, probably hundreds, of reporting stations - cities and towns, the airports, state parks, and sewage treatment plants were among those the NRDC relied upon. With hundreds of stations, and looking at monthly records, there are going to be hundreds of opportunities for breaking records in a given year. Now multiply the number of stations and months by the number of records one could keep, such as: highest temperature maximum, lowest temperature maximum, highest temperature minimum, lowest temperature minimum, windspeed, total precipitation, rainfall, snowfall, consecutive days with rain, consecutive days without rain, highest windchill, lowest windchill, highest humidity, lowest humidity . . . the list is almost endless. The chances of breaking a record for the month in one of those categories once during the year is pretty good for any individual station, and it's a certainty that there will be records somewhere in the state for one or more of those categories.
I could go on. For example, did the NRDC look at record lows that were set in West Virginia last year? Or at the lowest maximum temperatures on record? Of course not, that would have interfered with the misleading tale they wanted to tell. The NRDC is working hard to make hay while the sun shines, while Americans remember a warm summer in 2012. What they cannot avoid is that once again, on a global basis, there has been no rise in temperatures for the last 16 year, and even the big global warming proponents are conceding it will be a few years before they begin to rise again, if ever. The predictions of temperature increases made by the Intergvernmental Panel on Climate Change have been shown to be horribly wrong, and they are trying to repackage their story as one of "extreme weather." They should be ashamed of themselves.
Really? Did anyone actually look at the NRDC's report, or take a moment to consider carefully their claims of record-breaking heat, snow, rain and wildfires?
You could start any number of places in evaluating the NRDC's report, but let's look at the criteria NRDC used. Record breaking snow? That's a sign of global warming? If you look at the data the NRDC provided, you see that all the records came from the cold front that hit the state October 29 and 30, about the time Sandy dropped a ton of rain on us. You can't blame the earth-heating greenhouse gas effect for unusual cold that time of year.
As for precipitation, from Sandy or otherwise, wasn't the prediction just a few years back that we would have more drought as a result of carbon dioxide emissions, because the land was going to sizzle and dry up? So why is rainfall being blamed on global warming? Furthermore, look at the data used by the NRDC. Six of the 17 rainfall records were set at Queen Shoals, which the NRDC could not even locate, and the previous record rainfall was . . . .0, or .01 inch. What does that mean? Here's the NRDC's criteria:
The record-breaking events we used are daily records that are higher than recorded rainfall for any day in that month in the period of record for that station.In other words, in May, July, August, October and December it had never rained at Queen Shoals. Is there any place in West Virginia that has had five months with no precipitation whatsoever? They said they used stations with at least 30 years of data, but that simply cannot be.
The NRDC report is internally inconsistent in what it offers as evidence of man-made climate change. It cites "the worst drought in 50 years", but doesn't that mean that there was a worse drought in the 60's, before carbon dioxide levels climbed? Actually, there were worse droughts in the 1950s. And have they forgotten the Dust Bowl of the 1930s? But even if the droughts are worse now, how does that jibe with their claims of greater precipitation as a result of global warming?
Last year was a bad year for wildfires? Couldn't prove it by me. I recall many worse years, when the smoke carried all the way from the southern coal fields, and Department of Forestry workers were pressed into manning firelines. Nothing like that in 2012.
The temperature records are a joke as well. Many of the record high temperatures are high minimum temperatures. Hardly something that one worries about when considering the effects of global warming. And even for the high records, you see Wayne County had 3 sites all set records on the same day - the airport, sewage plant, and Dunlow. That obviously increases the number of "records" but it's misleading as evidence of widespread heat records.
What struck me most about the NRDC's report was how few records were broken. Think of all the weather stations in West Virginia. (I tried to find a list, but couldn't) There are dozens, probably hundreds, of reporting stations - cities and towns, the airports, state parks, and sewage treatment plants were among those the NRDC relied upon. With hundreds of stations, and looking at monthly records, there are going to be hundreds of opportunities for breaking records in a given year. Now multiply the number of stations and months by the number of records one could keep, such as: highest temperature maximum, lowest temperature maximum, highest temperature minimum, lowest temperature minimum, windspeed, total precipitation, rainfall, snowfall, consecutive days with rain, consecutive days without rain, highest windchill, lowest windchill, highest humidity, lowest humidity . . . the list is almost endless. The chances of breaking a record for the month in one of those categories once during the year is pretty good for any individual station, and it's a certainty that there will be records somewhere in the state for one or more of those categories.
I could go on. For example, did the NRDC look at record lows that were set in West Virginia last year? Or at the lowest maximum temperatures on record? Of course not, that would have interfered with the misleading tale they wanted to tell. The NRDC is working hard to make hay while the sun shines, while Americans remember a warm summer in 2012. What they cannot avoid is that once again, on a global basis, there has been no rise in temperatures for the last 16 year, and even the big global warming proponents are conceding it will be a few years before they begin to rise again, if ever. The predictions of temperature increases made by the Intergvernmental Panel on Climate Change have been shown to be horribly wrong, and they are trying to repackage their story as one of "extreme weather." They should be ashamed of themselves.
Friday, January 11, 2013
No Contamination from Fracking in the Fayetteville Shale
AS EPA proceeds with its evaluation of the environmental effects of hydraulic fracking, it is noteworthy that the USGS found no evidence of groundwater contamination as a result of drilling in the Fayetteville Shale. Pam Kasey reports on it in the State Journal
Radon Test Your House
I've never done radon testing, but maybe I should. Here's a notification from EPA of the importance of getting your house tested.
PHILADELPHIA (January 8, 2013) -
January is national Radon Action Month and the
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency encourages everyone to test their homes for radon. January is an especially good time to test homes and schools because windows and doors are closed tightly and people spend more time indoors.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency encourages everyone to test their homes for radon. January is an especially good time to test homes and schools because windows and doors are closed tightly and people spend more time indoors.
Unsafe levels of radon can lead to
serious illness. The Surgeon General has warned that
radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United States with an estimated 21,000 deaths a year. Only smoking causes more lung cancer deaths. By making simple fixes in a home or building people can lower their health risks from radon.
radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United States with an estimated 21,000 deaths a year. Only smoking causes more lung cancer deaths. By making simple fixes in a home or building people can lower their health risks from radon.
Radon is a colorless, odorless,
tasteless gas; so testing is the only way to know if radon is present in your
home or school. Test kits are available in home improvement centers and
hardware stores and costs approximately $20. The kits are simple to use with
easy testing and mailing instructions.
Make the commitment to protect your
family. Test for radon. Fix the problem if you find elevated radon levels. Save
a life!
For more information about radon
and radon testing see: http://www.epa.gov/radon/
.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Apply for West Virginia Make It Shine Clean Up Campaign
Applications are now available for West Virginians to
sign up for this year’s Make It Shine Statewide Spring Cleanup. Volunteers have until March 1 to register with the state
Department of Environmental Protection. The annual event is jointly sponsored
by the DEP and the state Division of Highways.
During the first two weeks of April, the DEP’s Make It
Shine program will provide resources such as cleanup materials, waste hauling
and landfill fees to citizens volunteering to remove litter from the state’s
landscape. Cleanups must be conducted on public lands. Community
drop off sites, household garbage collection and cleanups on private property
do not qualify.
Last year, more than 4,800 volunteers participated in the
spring cleanup and removed roughly 220 tons of litter and debris from West
Virginia’s public lands and waters.
To obtain a Make It Shine application, contact Travis
Cooper at 1-800-322-5530, or email: Travis.L.Cooper@wv.gov. Applications may also be downloaded via the net at: www.dep.wv.gov. Click
on “REAP” under the Land Section on the DEP homepage.
20 Years of Temperature Stability
The British Meteorological Office quietly announced on December 24 that it has revised its estimates of future warming. It is now predicting that temperature increases will not exceed 1998 levels until about 2017, which would represent 20 years of no temperature increase, despite steady increases in greenhouse gases. You can see a report on it here.
Temperatures rise and fall in cycles, and you can draw whatever conclusion you like from the temperature record, depending on where you decide to start and stop. If you compare the high world average temperatures from 1936 with those from 2011, you'd see 75 years of almost no increase in temperature. If you look at the end of the 1960s until 2011, you'll see a more pronounced increase. If you look at the temperature record from the early 1800's to the present, you'll see an increase in temperatures, in fits and starts, that is clearly not affected in any significant way by the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere after World War II. That post war period has, not coincidentally, provided some of the greatest agricultural production and increased living standards in history.
Temperatures rise and fall in cycles, and you can draw whatever conclusion you like from the temperature record, depending on where you decide to start and stop. If you compare the high world average temperatures from 1936 with those from 2011, you'd see 75 years of almost no increase in temperature. If you look at the end of the 1960s until 2011, you'll see a more pronounced increase. If you look at the temperature record from the early 1800's to the present, you'll see an increase in temperatures, in fits and starts, that is clearly not affected in any significant way by the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere after World War II. That post war period has, not coincidentally, provided some of the greatest agricultural production and increased living standards in history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
