Global Warming and CO2 Emissions Blog

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced Monday that he will "do everything I can to protect our coast" and will fight against the offshore oil bill the Senate is poised to vote on this week, as well as any weakening of the 25-year moratorium on coastal drilling. In a teleconference hosted by Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope, the governor echoed the Club's concern that if the Senate bill passes, it would be merged with a House bill sponsored by Representative Richard Pombo (R-Calif.) that could "lead to the weakening of the moratorium that has protected our California coasts for 25 years."

The governor touted alternative fuels, new technologies, hydrogen fueling stations, hybrid and electric cars as better solutions. "For anyone to think that this will bring gas prices down is making a big mistake."

AUDIO: Hear an excerpt from Schwarzenegger's remarks. (MP3)

Republican Schwarzenegger and the Sierra Club have not always seen eye to eye - but they are joining forces to protect our nation's coasts from becoming oil fields.

The Senate bill would open up a huge chunk of Florida's Gulf Coast to oil and drilling, and give away more than a third of the billions of dollars in oil leasing revenues over the next 50 years to four coastal states - Florida, Texas, Alabama, and Louisiana - even though the drilling would take place in federal waters.

Pope said he was delighted Governor Schwarzenegger was joining the Sierra Club and others to oppose this bill and expose it as ruse to open up every inch of the nation's coastline to potential drilling.

The governor had to return to a health summit he was chairing in Los Angeles, but Pope and others fielded reporters' questions. One reporter said that the secretary of the Interior and oil industry executives told him the Senate bill is not a precursor to drill off the coast of California - "You're basically saying they're lying?"

Pope hesitated, then said, "Yes, I am. If they want to write a bill that protects California, they know how."

While states would still have the power to block drilling, Pope said the Pombo bill would give the oil industry an advantage in every state - each state legislature would have to pass two bill every five years, one to stop oil drilling, another to stop gas drilling.

Other speakers in the teleconference included Dan Jacobson, from Environment California, who emphasized that energy efficiency and renewable energy are the cheapest and cleanest ways to generate energy, Mark Ferrulo of Florida PIRG, who expressed concerns about how the bill would be dangerous for Florida, and the Sierra Club's Melinda Pierce, who talked about how Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.), and Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) are leading the opposition.

The first vote on the bill is scheduled for Wednesday.

Reprinted from the Sierra Club Website.

Labels: arnold schwarzenegger, California, carbon dioxide emissions, environmental activism, global warming

Heat waves around the nation's capitol seem to be causing some elected officials to behave in a peculiar manner. It would seem that a handful of politicians are even taking notice of mounting global warming concerns.

The House Government Reform Committee began an inquiry into allegations that White House officials edited reports on global warming to play down the threat it poses.

Retiring Sen. Jim Jeffords (pictured) announced his bill to reverse the U.S. growth in heat-trapping "greenhouse" gases from burning coal and transportation fuels.

The House committee chairman, Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., and the committee's top Democrat, Rep. Henry Waxman of California, said they will request data from the White House and hold hearings into whether the White House Council on Environmental Quality intentionally diluted scientific information on the threat of global warming.

Democrats and Republicans took turns criticizing each other, with President Bush's senior environmental adviser fending off attacks on the administration's wait-and-see approach.

"The Bush administration has very little credibility on this issue," Waxman said. Last month, he proposed phased-in cuts in U.S. greenhouse gases over the next four decades.

James Connaughton, chairman of the White House environmental council, seems adept at maintaing his composure under extreme stress. He said Bush's efforts to slow the growth rate in carbon dioxide and cut methane emissions globally go "far beyond what's been done before. "Step one is to slow the growth," Connaughton said.

Assuming the administration has a plan, let's hope there is time for Step Two.

Scientists told the House committee that humans are causing most of the earth's warming and the planet is 8 degrees to 10 degrees hotter than it was thousands of years ago. Some voiced concern with the pace of U.S. efforts.

"The fact that we don't have a plan is really disturbing," said Judith Curry, head of Georgia Institute of Technology's School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences.

Labels: carbon dioxide emissions, environmental activism, global warming

Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev today urged the US and Australia to sign the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, saying the world's "reservoir of life" was rapidly shrinking.

Australia and the US are the only major industrialised countries that have not signed the Kyoto treaty, which mandates specific cutbacks in emissions of carbon dioxide and five other gases by 2012 in 35 countries.

"Our reservoir of life is shrinking," Gorbachev said from the eastern Australian city of Brisbane, where he is heading an international environmental conference. "Before it is too late I think we need to put our environmental house in order."

Gorbachev said the US had behaved like a "stubborn animal" over the Kyoto agreement, and urged Australia to show leadership by joining the pact.

Australia's conservative Prime Minister John Howard is a staunch supporter of US President George Bush, and has thrown his country's weight behind several US foreign policy decisions.

"That's even more reason for Australia to sign the protocol," the former Soviet leader said. "Then that closeness will play a positive role. If that closeness is used only for aggravating mistakes such as the war in Iraq that's not positive, that's not useful."

The 2006 Earth Dialogues conference runs until Monday, and includes presentations by environmental activists from around the world.

Gorbachev said he believed the forum was important to mobilise public support for dealing with global warming.

"World public opinion is now considered a superpower in its own right, and we have a responsibility to make use of this power to drive positive action for a sustainable future," he said.

Meanwhile, Gorbachev said that the wave of Mideast violence is an example of politics lagging behind the pace of global change.

"More than ever we need to build a strong public consensus in support of peaceful, just and sustainable solutions to the crises which threaten our future," Gorbachev said in a statement. "The current violence in the Middle East is yet another demonstration of politics lagging behind the pace of global change.

"If the leaders of the world's most powerful states lapse back and again see military power as a viable means of resolving disputes, then we should not be surprised if other states also consider it a legitimate course. We must stop the violence, and reinstate effective multilateralism."

Gorbachev's pioneering program of perestroika, or restructuring, caused the first cracks in the Soviet empire, leading to its disintegration in 1991 and the end of the Cold War.

Labels: carbon dioxide emissions, environmental activism, global warming

Calilfornia's Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has proposed a new, centralized authority under his direct control that would be responsible for implementing one of the nation's most far-reaching initiatives to curb global warming.

The Governator's plan to various interests negotiating legislation that would map California's route toward a gradual rollback of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by 2020, a potential 25 percent reduction.

Schwarzenegger did send a strong signal to corporate industry by hand-picking his Climate Action Board and empowering that body with the authority to delay the proposed deadline for reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions if state regulations prove too onerous for businesses.

"It's essential that an emission reduction system have an economic safety valve to ensure the plan protects public health and the environment, is technologically feasible and is not detrimental to the California economy," said Linda Adams, the governor's negotiator in environmental areas.

"The core elements of the bill - mandatory reporting of greenhouse-gas emissions and enforceable limits on greenhouse-gas pollution - have fairly strong support," said Karen Douglas, a negotiator for Environmental Defense, one of the nation's largest environmental advocacy groups.

Researchers say that current global warming trends could deplete water supplies and dry out forests, adding new problems to California's ecosystem and business community.

"California, without question, has a responsibility to address climate change," said Adams, secretary of the state Environmental Protection Agency. "We must do our share to protect our public health, our water supply, our coastline and industry."

California, a global economic power that ranks 12th in the world in terms of carbon dioxide emissions, must lead the way, the governor and legislative leaders agree.

Key elements of the governor's proposed amendments to Assembly Bill 32 include:

• The policy-setting Climate Action Board would be composed almost exclusively of the governor's top agency chiefs.
  
  
• Much of the oversight responsibility would be distributed throughout various departments that would be assigned to monitor specific industries.
  
  
• The new board would establish by June 1, 2008, a set of still-unspecified reduction goals for 2012 and 2016 to ensure progress toward the 2020 target.
  
  
• Industry could secure a reprieve if the 2020 reduction level proves to be harmful to the state's economy.
  
  
• Businesses would be given compliance options, including buying credit for reducing emissions elsewhere in the state, if on-site cuts are not feasible or if the administration's future studies find that the rules cost jobs.

Some industry officials have urged rejection of California-only regulations, insisting that the state's agenda is too aggressive. They say mandatory limits will burden the state's economy with higher costs and more regulation.

"This is a global issue, not a California issue," said Allan Zaremberg, president of the California Chamber of Commerce. "What makes you think that if you drive up the price of energy and fuel you're going to create jobs in California?"

Oil companies claim that they would have to reduce production by 17 percent to meet the proposed standards - the equivalent of shutting down three plants at a time of tighter supplies and spiking prices at the pump.

But Stanford University economist James L. Sweeney maintains that the net effect of new regulation will be small, whether positive or negative. Caps with incentives could reduce emissions "without any significant damage to the economy if you design the rules of the game well," he said.

Labels: arnold schwarzenegger, California, carbon dioxide emissions, environmental activism, global warming

Consumers in California will soon be given te option to pay a little bit more for their utilities to offset their carbon dioxide emissions.

The non-profit California Climate Action Registry was set up by the state six years ago to encourage corporations and government agencies to track and reduce their emissions. The Forest Protocols program will allow consumers to pay to preserve enough trees to offset their personal carbon emissions.

The registry has calculated how much the timber industry loses by allowing trees to grow longer and bigger - past the time they're normally harvested. The industry would then be compensated by other companies that buy carbon credits - or shares of the trees - to offset their carbon emissions.

The Pacific Forest Trust manages the five parcels of timberland owned by the Fred M. van Eck Forest Foundation, and they jointly registered the 2,100-acre property with the state. Negotiations are underway to set the prices for its carbon credits.

For example, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. in January asked the California Public Utilities Commission to let it start a program next year where customers could choose to pay about 3% more on each monthly bill, with the money earmarked to preserve trees in a registered forest.

The utility pumps about 5.3 tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year to supply the electricity and natural gas used by a typical household. If the homeowner opted to pay about $4.31 each month to be invested in forests, the trees would store an equivalent amount of carbon.

"It would cost them about $4.31 a month to become climate neutral," said Wendy Pulling, PG&E's director of environmental policy.

PG&E is the first utility in the nation seeking such a program for its five million electric and 4.2 million natural gas customers, Pulling said. The company serves about 14 million people in northern and central California.

If the utilities commission approves the plan later this year, PG&E projects that about 5% of its customers would participate, generating about $20 million annually. That would support a number of trees equal to taking 350,000 cars off the road, Pulling said.

The money would be invested in forests like the van Eck property in Humboldt County, which is the first to start sending carbon storage information to the state registry.

Go, California! Where are the feds??

Labels: California, carbon dioxide emissions, environmental activism, global warming

French President Jacques Chirac (pictured) issued a stark warning to his G8 partners, saying "humanity is dancing on a volcano" and urging them to live up to commitments to combat global warming. The Group of Eight (aka G8) represents the planets largest industrialized countries.

While his analogy may prove obscure, at best, his proactive stance represents the global conflict that is occurring around CO2 emissions, which pitting pro-corporate governments like Bush administration against "pro-humanity" advocates.

The G8 recently held discussions that involved extensive discussions on "energy security", which seemingly is defined as 'open, transparent, efficient and competitive markets'. This is political speak for making the energy companies more efficient to lower costs, rather than weaning populations off of higher polluting sources of energy.

"We cannot discuss energy security while standing still on climate change," Chirac told the leaders of Britain, Canada, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United States and Russia at their summit in Saint Petersburg.

"I regret that the United States is not taking part. But all the others must stick to their commitments." President Bush rejected the draft Kyoto treaty in 2001 on grounds that its binding commitments on reducing carbon dioxide emissions would be too costly for the US economy.

Chirac's remarks were seen as targeting Canada, where the new conservative government has shown itself to be skeptical toward the Kyoto Protocol.

Kyoto signatories have committed themselves to limiting their earth-warming greenhouse gas emissions by 5.2 percent from 1990 levels by 2012. The leaders issued a statement affirming their willingness "to work to reduce greenhouse gas and deal effectively with the challenge of climate change."

If only willingness were enough. Perhaps, the G8 leaders should be referred to as "G8 Willingnessers". That may be more apros pos.

Labels: carbon dioxide emissions, environmental activism, global warming

In search of industry support, Al Gore presented at a conference Wednesday hosted by Wal-Mart at its Bentonville, Ark., headquarters.

Dubbed the quarterly sustainability network meeting, the conference included Gore's presentation on the dangers of global warming, as well as one from officials of the Rocky Mountain Institute and the Evangelical Environmental Network.

The meeting also included discussions with Wal-Mart's suppliers on how sustainability can impact the supply chain and benefit the customer, according to the statement from the world's largest retailer. Suppliers who were at the meeting included Procter & Gamble, Sara Lee Apparel and Paramount Classics.

"We are all passionate about making real progress regarding the environment," said a statement from Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott. "By working together, we can help each other save money, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and pass the savings on to our customers. Sustainability is good for the environment, and it's also good for business."

In addition to his remarks to the conference, Gore screened his movie, "An Inconvenient Truth," about the threat of global warming.

Earlier this year Wal-Mart announced that it would seek to eliminate 30 percent of the energy used by stores, with the corporate goal of eventually being fueled 100 percent by renewable energy. The retailer also plans to eliminate 25 percent of the solid waste from U.S. stores in the next three years, with the corporate goal of producing zero waste.

Additionally, Wal-Mart is targeting increased efficiency of its truck fleet by 25 percent over the next three years, with efficiency doubled within 10 years except in the North, where Wal-Mart utilizes white reflective roof membranes, resulting in a 10 percent lower cooling load.

Labels: Al Gore, carbon dioxide emissions, environmental activism, global warming

According to the Philipines Department of Environment and Natural Resources (Secretary Angelo T. Reyes pictured), the country has granted country approval for eight projects qualifying for the Kyoto Protocol-Clean Development Mechanism's (CDM) carbon credits as the projects will help cut global warming with 235,442 metric tons (MT) of reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

For more details, you can read the complete article on the Manilla Bulletin.

Labels: carbon dioxide emissions, environmental activism, global warming

The BBC is sponsoring a global Climate Change Experiment. Similar to well-known SETI project, this project is using the processing power of hundreds of thousands of client computers to help model changes in the planet's temeratures.

To learn more about the experiment visit the Experiment Homepage.

And, if you are ready to put those wasted computer cycles to use go the Download Page.

Here's to the Brits... Cheers!

Labels: carbon dioxide emissions, environmental activism, global warming

Tom Brokaw, the former NBC anchorman, hosted Global Warming: What You Need to Know tonight on the Discovery Channel.

Brokaw, says he was inspired to get involved after seeing the Al Gore documentary An Inconvenient Truth on global warming. Brokaw is no stranger to environmental issues ; his wife, Meredith, is VP of Conservation International.

The program - which was made by Discovery and the BBC - suggests that humankind is contributing to a rapid warming of the Earth's atmopshere with potentially disastrous results, including rising sea levels, hurricanes, and drought.

The show encourages people to take means to slow the rate of global warming, such as conserving energy both on a small scale (unplugging electric appliances when out of use) and large scale (promoting energy-efficient mass transportation).

The documentray will play throughout the month of July. Check Discovery.com for upcoming airings.

Labels: carbon dioxide emissions, environmental activism, global warming

When jobs are on the line, do we subsidize them at the cost of the environment? Or is market demand to blame? What can we (as the individual) do to change this--if at all? What are the solutions for the long-term sustainability of our oceans?

Labels: carbon dioxide emissions, environmental activism, global warming

Hi. My name is Mike Taus and I live in Kailua on the Windward side of Oahu in Hawaii. My wife, two daughters and I moved here almost a year ago from California mostly to escape the toxins and find a peaceful place.

Last night we had a sitter, so my wife and I decided to go see the Al Gore movie, An Inconvenient Truth. Truthfully, I had been eager to see it for some time. Some would say that I am a liberal, others might think me moderate and a few might even consider me conservative. I consider myself political only to the extent the important issues are at stake. I am disenchanted with the politics of the day and certainly do not follow the ongoing battle closely. But, I have been moved from time to take action.

In my opinion, An Inconvenient Truth is not a political movie. True, it is Al Gore's story/mission that is central to this movie. But I tend to agree with Gore's statement that this is a moral issue.

We, the voting population of the United States -- and perhaps only a subset of us with the time and resources to act -- are responsible for affecting change. The sort of change I am referring to is the reversal of a trend that has been growing for more than 100 years. This is not a trend of evil corporations, as some on the left might characterize the issue.

In my estimation, we as consumers are just beginning to awaken from a 100 year binge. A binge of consumption that began, when we as a civilization believed that nature’s boundaries were far too limitless for our actions to have material consequences.

We are all innocent and blameless in this process. Like an alcoholic, who began consuming innocently and over time becomes consumed himself, we must awaken to the realization that we have the potential to do massive and perhaps irreversible harm. Unfortunately, it often takes a catastrophic event to awaken an addict. Similarly, it may take a global catastrophe to awaken the world.

Today, we see the by-product of our industrialization all around us. We consume fish with elevated mercury levels. We dig deep wholes in remote mountains to bury away our nuclear waste. We have left to waste vast swathes of forest that will take centuries to repair, if ever. In many places, we breath air that is thick with smog. We drink water out of bottles to avoid ordinary drinking water.

But, perhaps the scariest of these by-products is the pervasive molecule of carbon-dioxide or CO2. Yes, the same stuff that we exhale with each breath and that is consumed by plants in exchange for oxygen, seems to be directly linked with the rise in global temperatures, the melting of ice caps and the siginificant increase in unusual weather patterns.

If you are not convinced that CO2 is to blame, that is okay. I cannot say with 100% certainty the this is true. Scientists rely upon correlations and this case the data seems to support a stron correlation. The two graphs below do a fair job of illustruting this connection:

For some, this may not be proof of anything. For others it may be convincing. For me it is a start. For those that have seen the movie, you may recall a prediction that ocean levels could rise as much as 20 feet. My home in Kailua is about 8 feet above sea level. For hundreds of years, people have moved close to the ocean for commerce, weather, etc. The consequences of a increasing global temperatures and rising ocean levels are obvious. So, we have a clear moral obligation to investigate this issue fully and act accordingly.

More importantly, we are morally obligated to begin acting in such a way as to reduce CO2 emissions before we can prove with 100% certainty that this link is factual. We cannot wait, because we risk too much.

I ask anyone who is interested to get involved here or elsewhere. All sources, facts and opinions are welcome.

Labels: Al Gore, carbon dioxide emissions, environmental activism, global warming