global warming – R&R – Reachout and Rebuild

Greta Thunberg: 16-year-old star speaker in Davos

David Posnett — Sat, 26 Jan 2019 19:10:57 +0000

Take a look at a 16 year old lecturing the leaders of the world! Impressive.

Our house is on fire!

On TED!

On ScientistsWarning.Org?

Dangerous Men

David Posnett — Sat, 08 Sep 2018 16:32:12 +0000

Bleached Staghorn Coral

By James Ewing (Watermill, NY)

“The GOP Republican party is the most dangerous organization in human history…dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organized human life on earth.”—Noam Chomsky, scholar, MIT.
What are these most dangerous men doing?
Oceans cover about 70% of earth’s surface and support all the planet’s living systems. They regulate weather, temperature, the food web, absorb atmospheric CO2 while producing half of the world’s oxygen. The ocean’s coral reefs maintain its resilience and viability.
In 2016 and 2017, greenhouse gas induced heating and acidification killed about half the corals on Australia’s Great Barrier Reef as well as many others around the world.
“So, you take out coral reefs and a third to a quarter of all species gets wiped out…that is ecological chaos, ecological collapse”, says John Vernon, world’s foremost expert on coral reefs. “We’ve got a mass extinction event looming,..more than an alarm bell,” says Veron. “It’s an air raid siren.”
And what are dangerous men doing? Driving our precious estate over a cliff and stepping on the gas.
The GOP party, White House and cabinet officials have essentially denied or ignored the existence of global warming. In 2008 the “No Climate Tax” pledge, signed by GOP’s Americans for Prosperity, declares economic growth shall always override environmental sustainability.
Dangerous men withdrew the nation from the Paris Climate accord which bound the globe together in efforts to halt global warming. GOP leadership were united in their praise.
Fossil fuels account for about 80 % of total climate warming emissions. What do dangerous men do?
Trump’s GOP republican party seeks to overhaul the Clean Power Plan which cut greenhouse gas emissions from power plants yielding controls to less restrictive individual states and fast track emissions permitting processes by industry insiders. They repeal the Clean Air and Water Acts; ease restrictions on releasing mercury, arsenic, lead, and carbon monoxide into our air; weaken fuel economy standards; cancel restrictions on super-polluting “glider trucks”; oppose California’s electric car mandate; abandon methane limits on new oil and gas wells; revoke prohibitions on hydrofluorocarbons; expand oil production infrastructure, opening public lands to resource development; weaken the Well Control Rule and allow drilling in 25 of the 26 regions of the entire U.S. Outer Continental Shelf while immunizing extractive industries from compensatory damages; slash funding for renewable energy and efficiency research; remove scientists from advisory positions at the EPA…
“Coral (die-off) is driven by carbon dioxide, unless you stop pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, it’ll go on. There’s no way around it, there’s no alternative… We can’t—as humans—can’t exist independently of the welfare of the planet.”—John Vernon. But is this what dangerous men are thinking? Really? Really?

Miami under Water – for Good!

David Posnett — Sat, 04 Nov 2017 13:24:16 +0000

Just heard from a friend regarding United Nations conference in Geneva (Switzerland).

Pretty devastating UN report. Even action on climate change NOW will not prevent the predicted devastation as the lag time is too great. Here is the link. You can download the entire report if you are interested. It is actually a periodic report put out by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) that checks the gap between commitments and actual implementation! The “Emissions, Gap Report”.

In the meantime, Trump is going his merry way, doing the very opposite of what is recommended, drilling on protected land, giving incentives to fossil fuel companies, devastating the EPA and trying to place the least qualified people in critical technical and scientific posts.

Take a look at the “three-degree world”: the numerous large cities that will be drowned by global warming, including Miami, Alexndria in Egypt, Rio in Brazil, Osaka in Japan and Shanghai in China:
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/ng-interactive/2017/nov/03/three-degree-world-cities-drowned-global-warming?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Miami post “three-degree world” Miami pre “three-degree world”

Bottom graph: predictions of global temperature change by 2100.

Shame on duplicitous Lee Zeldin for not standing up against this!

A Golden Opportunity for Carbon Fees

David Posnett — Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:53:19 +0000

From: John Andrews
Wednesday, October 11, 2017 7:01 PM

Dear Long Island East CCLers (Citizens’ Climate Lobby),

Now that the head of the Environmental Protection Agency has gutted President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, it is a perfect opportunity to ask our representative in Congress, Lee Zeldin, to come out publicly in favor of the best alternative, namely carbon pricing.

I hope you will read the following, taken from an op-ed written by Mark Reynolds, Executive Director of the Citizens’ Climate Lobby, and then write Mr. Zeldin in your own words, asking him to speak out in favor of climate action.

He was an early joiner of the Climate Solutions Caucus in the U.S. House of Representatives, and he voted, along with 65 other Republicans and all the Democrats, against the nefarious Perry amendment that, had it passed, would have prevented the Defense Department from considering climate change in their planning. You might want to thank him for those actions and ask that he take the next important step now.

The easiest way to do this is to go to the Web site www.zeldin.house.gov/contact where you can compose a message and send it to him

Here is the selection from Mark Reynolds’ op-ed:

As Clean Power Plan is gutted, Congress must step in to price carbon

By Mark Reynolds

In its zeal to undo the legacy of our 44th president, the Trump administration is now undoing the future of our children and grandchildren by repealing the Clean Power Plan, a policy designed to reduce the heat-trapping emissions that make our climate more and more inhospitable.

How inhospitable? We’ve gotten a frightening glimpse of an altered climate recently with disasters fueled by warmer temperatures:

Hurricane Harvey turned much of Houston into a lake after dumping 50 inches of rain. Damage estimates have ranged up to $150 billion.
After flattening the Keys, record-setting Hurricane Irma roared up Florida’s west coast, leaving most of the state without power and damage estimated to cost $100 billion.
Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico, leaving most of the island’s residents without power or clean water. Recovery costs could easily reach $95 billion.
Out west, wildfires intensified by hot, dry weather have charred millions of acres, with the most recent fire in Santa Rosa killing at least 15 people.

It’s clear our unstable climate is putting bigger and bigger burdens on our economy. It’s also clear that the current White House is determined to remove regulations on the use of dirty fuels contributing to that unstable climate.

Those who cheer the EPA’s move should remember that President Obama initiated the Clean Power Plan in 2015 in the face of Congress’s inaction on climate change. Without effective legislation to combat climate change, a future president could just as easily go down the path of executive action and regulations again. The best answer here is for Congress to pass legislation putting the market to work on solving climate change.

The policy that finds favor across the political spectrum is a steadily-rising fee on carbon with revenue returned to households. This approach uses the power of the market to hold fossil fuels accountable for the damage they inflict on our society. A straightforward carbon fee will drive investment and consumer behavior toward low-carbon energy and energy efficiency, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions. By returning revenue from the carbon fee equally to all households, we can shield individuals and families from the economic impact of rising energy costs associated with the fee.

A study from the well-respected Regional Economic Models, Inc., looked at a policy with a fee starting at $10 per ton of carbon dioxide that increases $10 per ton each year. In their models, all revenue was distributed evenly to every household. REMI found that after 20 years, CO2 emissions would be reduced 50 percent below 1990 levels. At the same time, 2.8 million jobs would be added because of the economic stimulus of returning revenue to consumers.

In other words, this policy is a win-win for both our environment and our economy.

Oceans in Peril

David Posnett — Tue, 19 Sep 2017 14:06:31 +0000

Title image from Oceans of Acid.

By Judith S. Weis OpEd in the East Hampton Star Sept. 14, 2017

While some politicians claim that climate change is a hoax, and climate scientists try to refine their models and forecasts of exactly how much warming will take place in the next few decades, marine scientists can see clearly the evidence of what has already happened.

Everyone has heard about melting glaciers and dying coral reefs, but climate change is doing something else that is equally dangerous. The oceans absorb about a third of the carbon dioxide emitted from burning fossil fuels. In one way that’s good, because it slows down the warming, but it is making the seawater more acidic. CO2 in the ocean combines with water to form carbonic acid and makes the water more acidic — in fact 30 percent more acidic in recent decades.

This affects marine animals; the most severe effect is impairing shell formation in animals with calcium carbonate shells, such as clams and mussels. This has already occurred: In the Pacific Northwest, oyster larvae in hatcheries are unable to make their shells properly. Tiny planktonic snails are showing eroded shells. Acidified water poses an additional stress to corals already suffering from rising temperatures. Another effect is on behavior. Acidified waters impair the sense of smell of fish, causing them to be unable to find their home reef and to move toward, rather than away from, the odor of a predator.

Another reason global warming has not been too bad yet is because the ocean absorbs most of the earth’s excess heat. But oceans are warming due to greenhouse gas emissions. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, half of the increase in ocean heat content since 1865 has occurred over the past two decades. Warmer water holds less oxygen, but the respiration rate of animals (except for marine mammals) increases with temperature, so they need more oxygen at the same time that less is available. A warmer ocean has less turnover (vertical water movements), which normally brings nutrient-rich water up from deep water to the plankton that photosynthesize near the surface. With fewer nutrients, they photosynthesize less and animals can’t get enough food.

Many species are moving north to find more suitable environments, including species of commercial importance. Lobsters are disappearing from Long Island and southern New England, but increasing in the Gulf of Maine and Canada. Commercial catches are regulated by regional management agencies, but now these animals are fewer where they had been, and are increasing in places where they weren’t important before.

The most dramatic responses to warming oceans are in corals. When stressed, corals eject the single-celled symbiotic algae that live in their tissues, which normally photosynthesize and provide the coral with most of its nutrition. When they are ejected, the coral is “bleached” and appears white. While they can still get some nutrition by catching plankton with their tentacles, most species get less than half of their nutrition this way, so if the stress persists and zooxanthellae do not return, corals die. About 30 percent of the Great Barrier Reef of Australia died in 2016-17. This is devastating not only for the corals, but also for the thousands of other species that depend on the reef, including humans, who depend on it for $6 billion in tourism revenue annually. An excellent documentary about this tragedy, called “Chasing Coral,” is available on Netflix.

Major changes are occurring in the polar regions, where the extent of sea ice is diminishing rapidly. As ice melts, the water gets fresher and normal algal blooms diminish, providing less food at the bottom of the food chain on which the rest of the ecosystem depends. Some species that rely on sea ice, like Adelie penguins in Antarctica and polar bears in the Arctic, are in trouble.

Closer to home, sea level rise is one effect that is apparent in coastal regions. Sea level rise results from water expanding when it warms plus addition of new water from melting glaciers. It is happening faster than was predicted. Increased flooding from storms is common, and many areas (e.g., South Florida) have flooded streets even on sunny days. Since much of the world’s population lives in coastal areas, threats to human lives and well-being are becoming apparent.

In Bristol Bay, Alaska, the ability of local communities to access subsistence resources is impaired. Changes in the timing of ice freeze and melt are affecting safety, making it difficult to travel to neighboring villages and in some cases causing loss of life. Residents of some small low-lying Pacific islands have already moved elsewhere, and such “climate refugees” will increase in the future, which can cause political and social problems. Despite this, the Trump administration has recently undone a regulation that required that development near the coast take sea level rise into consideration, to reduce the risk of future damage.

Natural communities are also at risk. Coastal salt marshes in the intertidal zone are very important ecosystems that reduce storm surge and winds, absorb pollutants, and provide habitat for a variety of crabs, shrimp, fishes, birds, and mammals. In the face of rising seas, marshes must either increase their elevation or move inland. Increase in elevation results from new sediments being deposited and organic matter accumulation from marsh plants. Many marshes in the Northeast do not have adequate input of new sediments to increase their elevation, so moving back is the only option. (The marshes in Accabonac Harbor are increasing with sediments but not organic matter from plants, and have not been keeping up with sea level rise over the past decade.)

In developed regions, there are roads, sidewalks, etc., immediately inland, so there is no place for the marshes to go. Subject to “coastal squeeze,” many marshes that protect us from storm surge and winds will disappear. Recently, the East Hampton Town Board very wisely used the community preservation fund to buy some properties adjacent to marshes to allow for migration.

Another component of forecasted climate change is increased rainfall in the Northeast. This will intensify the nitrogen problem in estuaries, since more rain means more runoff and nitrogen going into the water. Much of our local nitrogen problem is due primarily to leaching from septic systems, but the expansive green lawns in the Hamptons suggest there is a lot of fertilizer runoff also. Warmer water in the future will also accelerate algal blooms.

What can be done? We need rapid decreases in emissions of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide. While governmental actions are vital, and it is important to keep up the pressure on elected officials to do more, collectively individuals can make a difference. Examine your “carbon footprint.” Does your car use a lot of gas? Next time, buy a hybrid or electric. Do you drive short distances that you could walk or bike or take public transportation? How high is your electric bill? Could you keep your house a bit warmer in the summer and a bit cooler in the winter to save energy?

I am surprised and saddened to see so few houses around here with solar panels. Solar technology has improved greatly and the price has gone down. Could you eat less meat and more vegetables? Animal agriculture, especially beef, creates a huge amount of greenhouse gases. Studies indicate that the most important thing you can do — if you are still in a position to do this — is reduce the number of children you have.

All these actions will make the quality of life better for the children and grandchildren you do have.

Judith S. Weis is a professor emerita at Rutgers University. She has a house in Springs.

Climate change: what to expect?

David Posnett — Mon, 09 Jan 2017 17:32:10 +0000

From the Southampton Press Jan 5th 2017

There are many things to worry about regarding the incoming Trump administration. The list is long as both New Deal and Great Society programs could be hobbled beyond recognition. However, the thing that has me existential-threat level worried is the denial of climate science as revealed in statements made by Mr. Trump and some of his key cabinet-level appointments. Mr. Trump saw fit to nominate several climate change skeptics to his cabinet; specifically, his selection to head the Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt, proclaimed, “Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connections to the actions of mankind.”

Well, yes, some scientists do disagree about the degree and extent of global warming, but only a small number of them disagree with the conclusion that mankind is a contributing factor to climate change. There is no debate. Burning fossil fuel increases carbon dioxide output, which contributes to the greenhouse effect, trapping heat in the atmosphere. So, for example, the question is not if sea level will rise due to rising temperatures and melting ice; the question is by how much (degree), and where will the impacts occur first and when (extent). Sea level rise is one of the results of an atmosphere suffused with carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Last year, Carbon Dioxide concentration was measured at 1.6 times the amount from pre-industrial days. That needs to be reduced.

When I first began reading about climate change, the discussions focused on methodologies and models and data points and offsetting phenomena that cool the atmosphere. Those debates still occur, but some recent reports have less to do with the arcane science dealing with models, algorithms, data capture and scientific extrapolation, and more to do with just plain observations through the use of eyeballs and thermometers:

Miami Beach floods even without rain. The local government is spending $400 million to raise road beds and build sea walls.
To avoid rising seas, the Inupiat Eskimo village of Shishmaref, Alaska, has voted to relocate to higher grounds.
The Isle De Jean Charles community in Louisiana was provided $48 by the US Department of Housing and Urban development to relocate due to rising sea waters.
Small Pacific Islands in the Solomon Island chain are disappearing.
Ice shelves are collapsing in Antarctica and Greenland, and glaciers in many parts of the world are shrinking.

Those of us seeking climate change mitigation efforts are lucky to find champions in enlightened governors like NY’s Andrew Cuomo and California’s Jerry Brown, in green energy companies building and installing solar and wind power energy sources, in the climate mitigation works of foreign governments unencumbered by a political party in denial over global warming, and, more at home, by Southampton Township government officials pursuing clean energy and environmental proposals. A lot of good is happening in the sphere of clean energy and reducing our carbon footprint, let us hope it is sufficiently comprehensive.

In the meantime, we can hope that the inconsistent Donald Trump (the businessman believer in climate change who pursued sea barriers at his Scottish golf course) convinces the pre-presidential candidate Donald Trump (the prevaricator who claimed climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese) that climate change is real.

Mike Anthony, Westhampton

One solid reason to fight confirmation of Scott Pruitt for EPA. East End leads by example. Where is Lee Zeldin?

David Posnett, East Hampton