Category Archives: burning behavior

The Results of the Bali Summit on Climate Change

Posted on by
1

The reporting about the Climate Change Summit in Bali was atrocious. That is why I held off writing anything about it until the dust had started to settle. I hate “horse race” style reporting where there is “almost an agreement”, then a suprise compromise, then a new wrinkle, finally an extended meeting that leads to A BREAK THROUGH! I do not mean to poopoo the accomplishments of either Kyoto (I lobbied for it) or even Bali, but it was clear that all the Bush administration wanted was to push the whole thing off until the next administration. He accomplished that, signed the Energy Bill and then turned around and used the bill to block California’s attempt to crack down on tailpipe toxins. And he did it with that gotcha smile of his. He knows that California will win its suit to do just that, because of the waivers they have gotten in the past and because the SUPREME COURT has always said they can. Again that will be on someone else’s watch…what a prick!

http://unfccc.int/meetings/cop_13/items/4049.php

As you can see, all the fuss was about 5 pages of text.

Advance unedited version

Decision -/CP.13

Bali Action Plan

The Conference of the Parties,

Resolving to urgently enhance implementation of the Convention in order to achieve its

ultimate objective in full accordance with its principles and commitments,

Reaffirming that economic and social development and poverty eradication are global

priorities,

Responding to the findings of the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change that warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and that delay in

reducing emissions significantly constrains opportunities to achieve lower stabilization levels

and increases the risk of more severe climate change impacts,

Recognizing that deep cuts in global emissions will be required to achieve the ultimate objective of the Convention and emphasizing the urgency1 to address climate change as

indicated in the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,

1. Decides to launch a comprehensive process to enable the full, effective and sustained

implementation of the Convention through long-term cooperative action, now, up to and beyond 2012, in

order to reach an agreed outcome and adopt a decision at its fifteenth session, by addressing, inter alia:

(a) A shared vision for long-term cooperative action, including a long-term global goal for

emission reductions, to achieve the ultimate objective of the Convention, in accordance

with the provisions and principles of the Convention, in particular the principle of

common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, and taking into

account social and economic conditions and other relevant factors;

(b) Enhanced national/international action on mitigation of climate change, including,

inter alia, consideration of:

(i) Measurable, reportable and verifiable nationally appropriate mitigation

commitments or actions, including quantified emission limitation and reduction

objectives, by all developed country Parties, while ensuring the comparability of

efforts among them, taking into account differences in their national

circumstances;

(ii) Nationally appropriate mitigation actions by developing country Parties in the

context of sustainable development, supported and enabled by technology,

financing and capacity-building, in a measurable, reportable and verifiable

manner;

(iii) Policy approaches and positive incentives on issues relating to reducing

emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries; and

1 Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change, Technical Summary, pages 39 and 90, and Chapter 13, page 776.

Advance unedited version

2

the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of

forest carbon stocks in developing countries;

(iv) Cooperative sectoral approaches and sector-specific actions, in order to enhance

implementation of Article 4, paragraph 1(c), of the Convention;

(v) Various approaches, including opportunities for using markets, to enhance the

cost-effectiveness of, and to promote, mitigation actions, bearing in mind

different circumstances of developed and developing countries;

(vi) Economic and social consequences of response measures;

(vii) Ways to strengthen the catalytic role of the Convention in encouraging

multilateral bodies, the public and private sectors and civil society, building on

synergies among activities and processes, as a means to support mitigation in a

coherent and integrated manner;

(c) Enhanced action on adaptation, including, inter alia, consideration of:

(i) International cooperation to support urgent implementation of adaptation actions,

including through vulnerability assessments, prioritization of actions, financial

needs assessments, capacity-building and response strategies, integration of

adaptation actions into sectoral and national planning, specific projects and

programmes, means to incentivize the implementation of adaptation actions, and

other ways to enable climate-resilient development and reduce vulnerability of all

Parties, taking into account the urgent and immediate needs of developing

countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change,

especially the least developed countries and small island developing States, and

further taking into account the needs of countries in Africa affected by drought,

desertification and floods;

(ii) Risk management and risk reduction strategies, including risk sharing and

transfer mechanisms such as insurance;

(iii) Disaster reduction strategies and means to address loss and damage associated

with climate change impacts in developing countries that are particularly

vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change;

(iv) Economic diversification to build resilience;

(v) Ways to strengthen the catalytic role of the Convention in encouraging

multilateral bodies, the public and private sectors and civil society, building on

synergies among activities and processes, as a means to support adaptation in a

coherent and integrated manner;

(d) Enhanced action on technology development and transfer to support action on mitigation

and adaptation, including, inter alia, consideration of:

(i) Effective mechanisms and enhanced means for the removal of obstacles to, and

provision of financial and other incentives for, scaling up of the development and

transfer of technology to developing country Parties in order to promote access to

affordable environmentally sound technologies;

(ii) Ways to accelerate deployment, diffusion and transfer of affordable

environmentally sound technologies;

Advance unedited version

3

(iii) Cooperation on research and development of current, new and innovative

technology, including win-win solutions;

(iv) The effectiveness of mechanisms and tools for technology cooperation in specific

sectors;

(e) Enhanced action on the provision of financial resources and investment to support action

on mitigation and adaptation and technology cooperation, including, inter alia,

consideration of:

(i) Improved access to adequate, predictable and sustainable financial resources and

financial and technical support, and the provision of new and additional

resources, including official and concessional funding for developing country

Parties;

(ii) Positive incentives for developing country Parties for the enhanced

implementation of national mitigation strategies and adaptation action;

(iii) Innovative means of funding to assist developing country Parties that are

particularly vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change in meeting the

cost of adaptation;

(iv) Means to incentivize the implementation of adaptation actions on the basis of

sustainable development policies;

(v) Mobilization of public- and private-sector funding and investment, including

facilitation of carbon-friendly investment choices;

(vi) Financial and technical support for capacity-building in the assessment of the

costs of adaptation in developing countries, in particular the most vulnerable

ones, to aid in determining their financial needs;

2. Decides that the process shall be conducted under a subsidiary body under the

Convention, hereby established and known as the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative

Action under the Convention, that shall complete its work in 2009 and present the outcome of its work to

the Conference of the Parties for adoption at its fifteenth session;

3. Agrees that the process shall begin without delay, that the sessions of the group will be

scheduled as often as is feasible and necessary to complete the work of the group, where possible in

conjunction with sessions of other bodies established under the Convention, and that its sessions may be

complemented by workshops and other activities, as required;

4. Decides that the first session of the group shall be held as soon as is feasible and not later

than April 2008;

5. Decides that the Chair and Vice-Chair of the group, with one being from a Party included

in Annex I to the Convention (Annex I Party) and the other being from a Party not included in Annex I to

the Convention (non-Annex I Party), shall alternate annually between an Annex I Party and a non-

Annex I Party;

6. Takes note of the proposed schedule of meetings contained in the annex; 7. Instructs the group to develop its work programme at its first session in a coherent and

integrated manner;

Advance unedited version

4

8. Invites Parties to submit to the secretariat, by 22 February 2008, their views regarding the

work programme, taking into account the elements referred to in paragraph 1 above, to be compiled by

the secretariat for consideration by the group at its first meeting;

9. Requests the group to report to the Conference of the Parties at its fourteenth session on

progress made;

10. Agrees to take stock of the progress made, at its fourteenth session, on the basis of the

report by the group;

11. Agrees that the process shall be informed by, inter alia, the best available scientific

information, experience in implementation of the Convention and its Kyoto Protocol, and processes

thereunder, outputs from other relevant intergovernmental processes and insights from the business and

research communities and civil society;

12. Notes that the organization of work of the group will require a significant amount of

additional resources to provide for the participation of delegates from Parties eligible to be funded and to

provide conference services and substantive support;

13. Strongly urges Parties in a position to do so, in order to facilitate the work of the group,

to provide contributions to the Trust Fund for Participation in the UNFCCC Process and the Trust Fund

for Supplementary Activities for the purposes referred to in paragraph 12 above and to provide other

forms of in kind support such as hosting a session of the group.

Advance unedited version

5

ANNEX

Indicative timetable for meetings of the Ad Hoc Working Group on

Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention in 2008

Session Dates

Session 1 March/April 2008

Session 2 June 2008, in conjunction with the twenty-eighth sessions of the subsidiary

bodies

Session 3 August/September 2008

Session 4 December 2008, in conjunction with the fourteenth session of the

Conference of the Parties

– – – – –

That is it! Yes there are 13 other COP 3 documents, 11 othe CMP documents and 1 AWG 4 documents, but the above is the heart of the agreement. It would have been nice if someone in the press would have published it and not left it up to the U.N.

Peak Oil – Another Perspective

Posted on by
1

While most environmentals and us that have done energy issues for along time have the perspective that the Oil, Natural Gas, and the Coal Companies are the problem. That is they want to keep burning as much as they can and that the only thing that will stop them is the severe results of Global Warming. There is another perspective that says that we are running out of those resources, in particular Oil, and that we are barely adding alternatives fast enough to offset our shortfalls in standard energy sources. Before I talk about the Bali agreements I thought I should give them their due.

http://www.peakoil.com/

 http://www.fcnp.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2255&Itemid=35

Falls ChurchNews – Press ONLINE

The Peak Oil Crisis: Issues    
Written by Tom Whipple   
Thursday, 20 December 2007

As 2007 winds down, it is good time to review some of the major issues that those of us following the peak oil story are watching closely.

Depletion vs. Production is, of course, the heart of the peak oil story. Every year production from the world’s existing oil fields declines by several million barrels a day. Every year new sources of liquid fuel, new oil fields, more natural gas liquids, ethanol etc., must be found to replace the losses and hopefully to satisfy increasing demand. For the last two years, new supplies have been roughly balancing declines so there has been little growth in world production. Some day soon depletion will get ahead of new sources of oil and other liquid fuels for such an extended period that it will be obvious to all that peak oil has arrived.

The prospects for an economic recession or worse increased markedly during the past six months. In recent weeks, oil prices have been moving up and down rather vigorously on economic news — interest rates, subprime losses, government bailouts, etc. — rather than on traditional oil market concerns such as stockpiles and geopolitical threats to production. Many believe that the recent $25 a barrel jump in oil prices was largely the result of the Federal Reserve’s interest rate cuts taken in hopes of forestalling an economic setback.

Should serious economic difficulties arise from the current mortgage/liquidity problem, then a significant drop in worldwide demand for oil is likely. If a reduction in demand for oil were to continue for many months or years, then it is likely that world oil production will never grow much beyond current levels. By the time demand was restored, geologic and economic constraints on production would prevent production from ever again reaching current highs.

So much of the world’s oil production comes from around the Persian Gulf that nearly everything that happens in the region bears watching for possible impact on oil exports. The machinations of Kurds, Iraqis, Iranians, terrorists, mullahs, and numerous small states, tribes, sects and clans all could be important to the uninterrupted flow of oil to the industrialized world.

As the world’s biggest exporter and the only one that may have some spare capacity to increase production, the Saudis are worthy of special attention. Not only are there questions about the ability of the Kingdom’s oil fields to sustain or increase production over the next few years, but concerns also are arising over Riyadh’s domestic consumption of its own oil production which is increasing rapidly. Expectations that the Saudis alone will fulfill the world’s rapidly increasing demand for oil, even at $100+, will never happen.

The rapid rise in oil prices in recent years has resulted in a wave of nationalism on the part of producing countries. Contracts with international oil companies that were written back in the days of $10 or $20 dollar a barrel oil are falling by the wayside as producing nations are demanding an ever increasing share of the profits. In the past year Russia and Venezuela have essentially taken back “their oil” from the foreigners and Nigeria and Kazakhstan are on the verge of doing the same.

From a peak oil perspective, it does not matter if governments or international companies take most of the profit, but as the internationals’ role declines, so does investment and the availability of technical know-how. As oil becomes increasingly difficult to extract from non-conventional sources, partnering with ideological soul mates such as Venezuela and Belarus to help produce oil is unlikely to result in increasing production.  

With a population of 1.3 billion and an annual growth rate in excess of 11 percent, the course of China’s economy plays a key role in the peak oil story. Beijing is now a major importer of oil and products. For several years now, the Chinese have been making a major effort to secure long-term bi-lateral contracts with oil producers and have had numerous successes. It is only a matter of time before China’s demand leads to shortages in the developed world.

Given the close balance of the supply and demand for oil, the world’s importing countries are in constant threat of a sudden interruption to oil supplies. A hurricane, coup, earthquake, terrorist attack, assassination, bird flu or something we have not imagined could easily stop the steady supply of oil to the world’s fuel tanks. Although there are reserves, depending on the nature of the interruption, these could only be sufficient for a few days before serious disruptions occur. There are numerous chokepoints in the Persian Gulf where an interruption of more than a few days would cause serious grief around the world.

Nearly 40 percent or 5.3 million of the 13.6 million barrels of oil and products that the U.S. imports each day comes from Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela. We are going to have a little problem shortly because these sources of oil are going to dry up. Mexico’s biggest field is collapsing so that within ten years they will be out of the oil exporting business. For political reasons, Venezuela is doing its best to sell its oil to anybody but the U.S. and is off to a good start. If Hugo Chavez hangs in there as president for another five years the 1.4 million barrels a day we are currently getting is likely to be a lot less.

To many, Canada is America’s greatest hope to continue happy motoring for a while longer. They look longingly at those billions of barrels of “oil” trapped in the Alberta tar sands and assume that it will soon be flowing south in whatever amounts we desire. This is unlikely to happen for extracting “oil” from Alberta is turning the place into one of the greatest environmental disasters on earth. While production from the Alberta sands will likely continue for centuries, it will never reach the level to replace even a fraction of the 13 million barrels of imports the U.S. requires each day. It will not be long before the Canadian people start thinking about their grandchildren and exports will slow.

Canadians Rip It and Strip It – oil shale or oil sand should be left alone.

Posted on by
Reply

 The Northern Regions of the Earth are under attack. Not only are the normally energy conscious Canadians joining in on the act but every ship’s captain on the planet wants to drive their boats through the Northwest Passage. If the Russians recent land grab is any indication they plan on drilling for oil there as well. The folly of this is plain for everyone to see.

 http://www.energy-daily.com/reports/Canadian_Oil_Sands_Development_An_Economic_Boon_But_Leaves_A_Mess_999.html

blog-headline.jpg 

   

ENERGY TECH

Canadian Oil Sands Development An Economic Boon But Leaves A Mess

 

by Guillaume Lavallee
Fort Mcmurray (AFP) Canada, June 22, 2007
The development of Canada’s oil sands is laying waste to its great northern forest and western plains, say critics who point to skyrocketing greenhouse gas emissions, diverted rivers and razed backwoods. And the devastation can only get worse, they say, as energy companies pump billions of dollars into new projects to triple local oil production to some 3.0 million barrels per day within the next decade.

The Athabasca, Peace River and Cold Lake Oil Sands, at an estimated 173 billion barrels, rank second behind Saudi Arabia in petroleum resources.

But due to high extraction costs, the deposits were long neglected except by local companies.

While conventional crude oil is pumped from the ground, oil sands must be mined and bitumen separated from the sand and water, then upgraded and refined.

Since 2000, skyrocketing crude oil prices (now at about 70 dollars a barrel) and improved extraction methods have made it more economical to exploit the sands, and lured several international oil companies to mine the sands.

 alberta-oil-sands-field-bg.jpg

 

Open pits now dot the northern part of Alberta province where vast tracts of the Boreal Forest once stood, and giant mechanical shovels now devour black oil-encrusted soil day and night.

In an article in the June 2006 issue of Rolling Stone magazine, former US presidential candidate Al Gore offered a scathing sketch of the oil sands industry as wasteful and a blight on Canada.

“For every barrel of oil they extract there, they have to use enough natural gas to heat a family’s home for four days,” Gore told the magazine.

“And they have to tear up four tonnes of landscape, all for one barrel of oil. It is truly nuts,” he said, urging Americans, who are the main buyers of Canadian oil, to break their addiction to oil.

For Canada, which has stepped back from its 1997 Kyoto Protocol commitment to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to 6.0 percent below 1990 levels by 2012, the oil sands boom is a mixed blessing.

It creates wealth and jobs, but the industry is already Canada’s worst polluter and is bound to double its harmful CO2 emissions by 2015, now at 29 megatonnes annually, according to a government environmental audit.

“It’s almost impossible for us to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions if we want to boost production from 2,000 to 250,000 barrels within a decade,” said Michael Borrell, president of Total Canada, a scion of the French oil behemoth Total SA.

The government has proposed a 20 percent reduction in the “intensity” of the sector’s CO2 emissions, but total emissions would still rise as oil production billows.

The boom is also prompting fears of local water shortages and declining water quality as oil companies drain 349 million cubic meters of water from the Athabasca River each year for use in oil production, then dump it into area tailing ponds.

A report by the Sage Centre and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) on global warming said Alberta would have to curtail new oil sands projects, which now use 2.0 to 4.5 barrels of water and large amounts of energy to produce one barrel of oil, if warming persists.

The WWF called for no new water-taking permits for energy companies, noting water flows in the Athabasca River, down 20 percent since 1958, could diminish by another seven to 10 percent if temperatures continue to rise.

“Climate change (is) an issue because the flow in the Athabasca River has constantly been dropping and as the glaciers (that feed the river) disappear in Jasper National Park, it’s gonna get worse,” said Simon Dyer of the Pembina Institute, an environmental group.

“Those people they just don’t care about the environment,” said Terry, a young aboriginal in Fort McKay in the heart of the oil sands. “Some people fish (in the Athabasca River) for fun … but nobody should eat the fish around here.”

Higher than average cancer rates at the nearby Fort Chipewyan Indian Reserve were recently linked to oil industry contamination of the environment, said reports.

Alberta law requires oil companies to restore excavated lands, but out of some 44,000 square kilometers (17,000 square miles) leased to them since 1967, “not a single square meter (foot) of land has been reclaimed,” Dyer lamented.

  

An Inconvenient Truth Wins In Court – New Party Wackos Lose Again

Posted on by
Reply

 Al Gore wins again. The British Court has ruled that the science does support the “broad claims” of An Inconvenient Truth. There goes another one of Rush Limbaugh’s notorious lies. So much for the “11 massive flaws” in Al Gore’s arguements. Still should it be shown in public schools? I have my doubts which I will express tomorrow. But for now I’ll just bask in the glow…

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/11/climatechange?gusrc=rss&feed=8

Gore’s climate film has scientific errors – judge

· Court rules documentary can be shown in schools
· Presentation is ‘broadly accurate’ but lacks balance

Al Gore’s Oscar-winning documentary on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth, was yesterday criticised by a high court judge who highlighted what he said were “nine scientific errors” in the film.

Mr Justice Barton yesterday said that while the film was “broadly accurate” in its presentation of climate change, he identified nine significant errors in the film, some of which, he said, had arisen in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration” to support the former US vice-president’s views on climate change.

The film was broadly welcomed by environmental campaigners and scientists on its release last year, and while they did point out that it contained mistakes, these were relatively small and did not detract from the film’s central message – that global warming was a real problem and humans had the technology to do something about it.

The judge made his remarks when assessing a case brought by Stewart Dimmock, a Kent school governor and a member of a political group, the New party, who is opposed to a government plan to show the film in secondary schools.

The judge ruled that the film can still be shown in schools, as part of a climate change resources pack, but only if it is accompanied by fresh guidance notes to balance Mr Gore’s “one-sided” views. The “apocalyptic vision” presented in the film was not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change, he said.

The judge also said it might be necessary for the Department of Children, Schools and Families to make clear to teachers some of Mr Gore’s views were not supported or promoted by the government, and there was “a view to the contrary”.

He said he had viewed the film and described it as “powerful, dramatically presented and highly professionally produced”, built around the “charismatic presence” of Mr Gore, “whose crusade it now is to persuade the world of the dangers of climate change”.

The mistakes identified mainly deal with the predicted impacts of climate change, and include Mr Gore’s claims that a sea-level rise of up to 20ft would be caused by melting in either west Antarctica or Greenland “in the near future”.

The judge said: “This is distinctly alarmist and part of Mr Gore’s ‘wake-up call’.” He accepted that melting of the ice would release this amount of water – “but only after, and over, millennia.”

Despite his finding of significant errors, Mr Justice Barton said many of the claims made by the film were supported by the weight of scientific evidence and he identified four main hypotheses, each of which is very well supported “by research published in respected, peer-reviewed journals and accords with the latest conclusions of the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change].”

The nine points: fact or fallacy?

· The film claimed that low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls “are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming” – but there was no evidence of any evacuation occurring

· It spoke of global warming “shutting down the ocean conveyor” – the process by which the gulf stream is carried over the north Atlantic to western Europe. The judge said that, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it was “very unlikely” that the conveyor would shut down in the future, though it might slow down

· Mr Gore had also claimed – by ridiculing the opposite view – that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed “an exact fit”. The judge said although scientists agreed there was a connection, “the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts”

· Mr Gore said the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was expressly attributable to human-induced climate change. The judge said the consensus was that that could not be established

· The drying up of Lake Chad was used as an example of global warming. The judge said: “It is apparently considered to be more likely to result from … population increase, over-grazing and regional climate variability”

· Mr Gore ascribed Hurricane Katrina to global warming, but there was “insufficient evidence to show that”

· Mr Gore also referred to a study showing that polar bears were being found that had drowned “swimming long distances to find the ice”. The judge said: “The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm”

· The film said that coral reefs all over the world were bleaching because of global warming and other factors. The judge said separating the impacts of stresses due to climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution, was difficult

· The film said a sea-level rise of up to 20ft would be caused by melting of either west Antarctica or Greenland in the near future; the judge ruled that this was “distinctly alarmist”

· This article was amended on Friday October 12 2007. A panel in the article above listing the significant errors found by a high court judge in Al Gore’s documentary on global warming was labelled The nine points, but contained only eight. The point we omitted was that the film said a sea-level rise of up to 20ft would be caused by melting of either west Antarctica or Greenland in the near future; the judge ruled that this was “distinctly alarmist”. The missing point has been added.

Help, The House Is Burning Down

Posted on by
Reply

We Maybe In More Trouble Than We Thought! 

U.N.: 2006 set record

 for green house gases

By ELIANE ENGELER

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

GENEVA—Two of the most im­portant greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere reached a record high in 2006, and measure­ments show that one — carbon dioxide — is playing an increasing­ly important role in global warm­ing, the U.N. weather agency said Friday.

The global average concentra­tions of carbon dioxide, or CO2, and nitrous oxide, or N2O, in the atmosphere were higher than ever in measurements coordinated by the World Meteorological Organi­zation, said Geir Braathen, a cli­mate specialist at the Geneva-based agency.

Methane, the third of the three important greenhouse gases, remained stable between 2005 and 2006, he said.

Braathen said measurements show that C02 is contributing more to global warming than previ­ously. CO2 contributed 87 percent to the warming effect over the last decade, but in the last five years alone, its contribution was 91 per­cent, Braathen said. “This shows that C02 is gaining importance as a greenhouse gas,” Braathen said.

 The concentration of carbon dioxide in the.atmosphere rose by about, which is a quarter percent higher than in 2005. Braathen said it appears the up­ward trend will continue at least for a few years half a percent last year to reach 381.2 parts per million, ac­cording to the agency. Nitrous oxide totaled 320.1 parts per bil­lion

The World Meteorological Orga­nization’s annual Greenhouse Gas Bulletin provides widely accepted worldwide data on the amount of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Studies have shown that human-produced carbon dioxide emissions heat the Earth’s surface and cause greater water evaporation. That leads to more water vapor in the air, which contributes to higher air temperatures. C02, methane and N20 are the most common green­house gases after water vapor, ac­cording to the meteorological or­ganization.

They are produced by natural sources, such as wetlands, and by human activities such as fertilizer use or fuel combustion. There is 36.1 percent more car­bon dioxide in the atmosphere than there was in the late 18th century, primarily because of combustion of fossil fuels, the World Meteorolog­ical Organization bulletin said.A report presented by a U.N. ex­pert panel said last week that aver­age temperatures have risen 1.3 de­grees Fahrenheit in the last 100 years, and that 11 of the last 12 years have been among the warmest since 1850. Global Warm­ing also led to a sea level increase by an average seven-hundredths of an inch per year since 1961, ac­cording to the U.N. Intergovern­mental Panel on Climate Change.The panel’s report, which said human activity is largely responsi­ble for global warming, noted that the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is far higher than the natural range over the last 650,000 years.  

Page 33

Saturday, November 24, 2007

Tim Landis,

business editor: 788-1536 _ tim.landis@sj-r.com

Springfield, Illinois

And guess what? US Corporations are Investing in German Technology. George Bush has sold this country to the dogs.

Posted on by
2

The Week in Germany: Business, Technology and the Environment

July 20, 2007

Silicon Saxony: Germany at the Cutting-Edge Crossroads of the PV and Semiconductor Industries

Innovative semiconductor technologies and applications are being developed in Germany, where they are now increasingly also tapping into the immense potential offered by photovoltaic (PV) applications, the driving force behind the country’s booming solar power sector.

This was the topic at Invest in Germany’s executive luncheon “Made in Germany – the Growing Success Story for Next-Generation Solar and Semiconductor Companies” on Tuesday (July 17) in San Francisco, which concluded a two-day conference attended by 140 executives from both industries.

At this “Semicon West 2007” event, representatives of leading companies including Qimonda, AMD, Applied Materials, and Signet Solar discussed Germany as a location for high-tech investments and groundbreaking cooperation between the PV and semiconductor industries.

A semiconductor is usually created by silicon for commercial use. Semiconductor devices, electronic components made of semiconductor materials, are essential in modern electrical devices, from computers to cellular phones to digital audio players. A DRAM (dynamic RAM) is the most commonly used semiconductor memory product.

Dynamic technology hot spot

Munich-based Qimonda AG, the top 3 DRAM manufacturer worldwide, operates its largest semiconductor development center in Dresden. “We are located in ‘Silicon Saxony’ – one of the most dynamic technology hot spots in the world,” said Frank Prein, managing director of Qimonda Dresden.

Another leading semiconductor investor in Germany is AMD. The California-based company sees its presence in Germany, notably in Dresden, as essential to its global market success.

“With over $5 billion total investment in Dresden to date, AMD continues to utilize the excellent skill base in the region to develop and optimize next-generation microprocessor solutions,” said William Haerle, vice president for worldwide government relations at AMD.

Solid communication and cooperation structures among equipment makers, materials suppliers and chip makers are distinctive characteristics of the semiconductor industry. Such key relationships across the semiconductor value chain could also benefit PV cell and module makers by enhancing technical standards and production, which would in turn lead to lower prices and boost demand for solar power.

“The synergies between these two industries are increasing, providing promising business opportunities. In this respect, Germany plays a key role as the European leader in both semiconductor and PV technology,” said Claus Habermeier, senior manager at Invest in Germany’s Palo Alto office.

Highest density of PV producers worldwide

According to Winfried Hoffmann, chief technology officer of the Solar Business Group at Applied Materials, rapid growth of the solar energy market in Germany has created an enormous market potential for international semiconductor firms.

“Germany has the largest density of PV producers worldwide. Between 2007 and 2008 another 15 PV companies are planned with investments of about €1 billion in all steps of the value chain,” said Hoffmann.

The success of the PV industry is still strongly linked to existing government support programs. Equipment manufacturers with experience in both the semiconductor and the PV industry could offer PV producers the most effective technology to become competitive under market conditions.

“In the long run integrated manufacturing of thin wafers and subsequent cell and laminate making is probably the most effective route. With this technology cell efficiency gains of up to 24 percent – or even more for Si wafer technology by introducing nanomanufacturing technologies – could become a reality by 2020,” said Hoffmann.

American companies cooperate in Dresden

In Germany, two leading California companies, Applied Materials and Signet Solar, are demonstrating how cooperation between both industries can work: Signet Solar’s first low-cost silicon thin-film PV module plant in Dresden will use Applied Material’s technology.

“Signet Solar combines decades of semiconductor experience from Silicon Valley and Silicon Saxony to accelerate the adoption of PV thin-film silicon technology,” says Gunter Ziegenbalg, managing director of Signet Solar GmbH. “We are aiming for grid parity with solar modules made in Saxony within five years.”

Invest in Germany is the official investment promotion agency of Germany. Its mandate is to assist and advise international companies about investment opportunities in Germany. (Invest in Germany/TWIG)

Links:

Invest in Germany

The German-Indian-Silicon-Valley Solar Solution
(TWIG, Readings, July 20, 2007)

A Huge Success: Federal Environment Minister Presents Progress Report on Renewable Energy Sources Act (TWIG, July 13, 2007)

Cloudy Germany a Powerhouse in Solar Energy (TWIG, May 11, 2007)

 spacer image
 

      

Germans Think of the Future, Americans Think in the Past

Posted on by

I forgot all about transparency and the web on Thursday. I write very few of these blogs myself. I take them from other sources, because there is so much written about energy and the environment, I have very little to add. I have written my own posts like the ones on Asimov, but they are not even 1% of the total posts. So to that end I always try to cite my sources and very openly post the sources web site here. Well Thurday I did a lousy job. I want to do more on German Energy Advancement but before I do I used this service to find that article:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1525/is_n1_v80/ai_16111823/pg_7 

 and the article was from the Sierra Club magazine:

http://www.sierraclub.org/

For this I apologize. Also none of the articles links work…from now on I will try to be a better linker or at least delink what I can not support. This article is from:

IGNITING IDEAS

The High-Tech Strategy for Germany

http://www.hightech-strategie.de/en/201.php#top

 

Environmental Technologies –

Clear Water, Clean

 Air, Fertile Soil

In contrast to the 1970s and 1980s when centre stage was given to aftercare environmental engineering – such as filter systems to keep air and water clean – environmental protection considerations are today increasingly being taken into account during the development phase. With this approach, natural resources are to be used efficiently and harmful effects on the environment are to be minimised throughout a product’s entire lifecycle.

 At the same time, new environmental technologies offer economic benefits. Organic solvents pollute ground water and air, have to be separated and recovered – frequently with considerable energy input – and are also questionable in terms of occupational safety. Such solvents could, for example, be replaced in the future by supercritical fluids which – thanks to their easy-to-modify state of aggregation – are much easier to separate.The German environmental engineering sector – which includes the waste and water management industries and parts of the mechanical engineering and plant manufacturing field – employs some 1.5 million people today. At international level, German firms are particularly successful in the air pollution control, noise abatement and recycling fields.With its national sustainability strategy, the German government aims to reduce the air pollution load by 70 percent by the year 2010, double German industry’s energy efficiency and resource efficiency by the year 2020 and reduce land development from currently 100 hectares a day to 30 hectares a day. The German government has committed itself to reducing the emission levels of the six greenhouse gases cited in the Kyoto Protocol by 21 percent over 1990 levels by the period 2008 through 2012.These national sustainability goals cannot be achieved without cleaner and more efficient technology. German industry should therefore be helped with identifying and developing new R&D findings with environmental protection potential and applying them immediately in the domestic market. The German government aims to tap the global market for the German environmental engineering industry and to adapt technologies and know-how to local conditions in threshold and developing countries.

Progressively develop environmental technology for the domestic market

Economic and ecological targets can often be met simultaneously when a product’s entire life cycle is taken into account during the planning and production processes. The Federal Ministry of Education and Research funds collaborative projects in the manufacturing sector with a view to linking new research approaches with problems in actual practice.

Innovative environmental protection technologies such as self-healing surfaces and waste-free processes are a focus of surface technology and spill over into many sectors – from car manufacturing to the construction sector and furniture industry all the way to the shipbuilding industry. Surface technology has not however had a joint R&D platform because the field has a wealth of user industries and is therefore highly fragmented. The Federal Ministry of Education and Research is therefore planning a comprehensive research initiative for this area.

Bionics use nature as a source of inspiration for technology. In order to make it easier to translate creative ideas into products, the Federal Ministry of Education and Research is planning a new research campaign aimed at supporting work to develop such ideas to the stage where they are functioning demonstration models or production-ready prototypes.

The Ministry’s Research for Sustainability funding programme supports and funds the development of new environmental protection technologies.

Pilot projects create trust in the reliability of new technologies

In contrast to years past, when the focus of funding was on the retrofitting of systems and on downstream purification processes (so-called end-of-pipe technologies), financial assistance today is provided primarily for first use of new integrated environmental protection technologies, with priority being given to SMEs. The Environmental Innovation Programme of the Federal Ministry of Research and Development funds these industrial-scale pilot projects. These activities, which receive flanking technical support from the Federal Environment Agency (UBA), establish the prerequisites necessary for defining technical standards and establishing legally binding emission ceilings.

Use Germany’s strong domestic market as a springboard for tapping the global market

Sustainability in trade and industry is not just a German aim – it is also a European aim. For this reason, Germany has joined up with Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Great Britain, Ireland, Austria, Sweden, Switzerland and Spain in the ERA-NET Sustainable Enterprise (SUSPRISE) project to co-ordinate its national research activities aimed at fostering sustainable enterprises.

Export credit guarantees granted by the federal government (Hermes guaranties) are an important instrument for spurring foreign trade, including in the environmental technology field. The OECD member states agreed in 2005 to extend the maximum permissible terms for export credits for renewable energy and for water and waste-water projects to 15 years. With the new aval guarantee that was launched in 2006, the German government will cover a share of the third-party risk borne by the guarantor. This will substantially improve liquidity, particularly for small and medium-sized exporters. The Federal Environment Agency’s Internet portal at www.cleaner-production.de offers extensive information about the capabilities of German environmental technologies and services.

Protect the global water supply

Many threshold and developing countries suffer from an inadequate supply of drinking water and – particularly in megacities – from waste-water problems that can scarcely be handled. The development and sustainability goals adopted by the United Nations Millennium Summit in 2000 include halving the proportion of the global population that has no access to safe drinking water or adequate sanitation services by the year 2015. This goal is a pressing humanitarian task. The development of the requisite water and waste-water infrastructure however also constitutes an enormous investment market.

The German government is supporting the development of an integrated water resource management (IWRM) system in numerous partner countries, particularly in the Middle East and Africa.

In addition to its development policy projects in this field – Germany is one of the world’s largest donors in the water sector – the Federal Ministry of Education and Research also funds the continued development of IWRM methods and approaches.

German and regional partners from research institutes, government agencies, engineering offices and the water industry participate in these projects.

The International Postgraduate Studies in Water Technologies fellowship programme has been set up to train German and foreign water specialists who, as future decision-makers in their home countries, could help develop the know-how urgently needed there. The networking this will generate between participants could facilitate the German water industry’s access to the growing water markets in threshold and developing countries.

The Federal Ministry of Education and Research and the Federal Ministry for Economic Co-operation and Development will offer funding for ten years for a Water Decade office at the University of the United Nations in Bonn as a step to support collaborative international research activities.

More Topics


  • BMU. BMBF, 2006

    Research Programme Resource Efficiency

    A new research funding programme will be launched to boost resource efficiency.
    more (URL: http://www.bmu.de/pressemitteilungen/pressemitteilungen_ab_22112005/pm/38848.php)


  • BMBF, 2006

    New Research Focus

    The Research for Sustainability programme will foster the development of new environmental technologies. Initiatives for surface technology and bionics are planned to supplement the current Innovation as a Key to Sustainability in Business and Industry funding campaign.
    more (URL: http://www.fona.de/eng/1_research/index.php)


  • BMBF, BMZ, 2006/2007

    Water Technologies

    Collaborative international research activities, a fellowship programme and the possible establishment of a UN Water Decade office in Bonn will facilitate access to growing water markets, particularly in threshold and developing countries, for German hydrotechnology providers.
    more (URL: http://www.bmbf.de/en/3934.php)


  • BMU, BMWI, 2006

    Export of Environmental Technologies

    The Internet portal www.cleaner-production.de and the recently launched aval guarantee will foster the export of environmental protection technologies.
    more (URL: http://www.cleaner-production.de)

What Do G.E. and Chevron have in Common besides being Environmental Pricks?

Posted on by
Reply

When you type “Hot Environmental Topics” into google search, they are the FIRST TWO websites that pop-up. I am not kidding! So I clicked on the first link. The contradictions are amazing:

http://www.chevron.com/globalissues/emergingenergy/

The page you go in at is all gushy about the future but when you click on their global warming page whoa does the corporate speak snap into play?

Q. What is Chevron’s position on The Kyoto Protocol?

A. The Kyoto Protocol assigns mandatory emission limits of greenhouse gasses to signatory nations. We support the intentions of Kyoto in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and respect the individual countries that have made the decisions to sign. However, while we support the global engagement that it envisions, we believe it focuses on signing up many countries rather than truly engaging the 10 – 12 critical emitting countries. Further, we think it asks for emission reductions that are too aggressive too quickly, given the technologies that are currently available. Finally, we don’t think the economic consequences are fully outlined.

Q. Does Chevron support measures such as California’s Global Warming Solutions Act (AB32)?

A. In 2006, California Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act. The legislation seeks to cap California’s greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by 2020.

Again, we support the intentions of the state in reducing GHG emissions. But we believe that effective mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions can only occur at a global level, given that climate change is a global issue. This requires coordinated national frameworks, and fragmented actions by individual states have the potential for undue economic costs without effectively mitigating the climate change risk.

We have experience with state–by–state and region–by–region regulatory approaches, and these have not been favorable to consumers.

Bottomline “YOU CAN’T TELL US WHAT TO DO”

When you click on General Electric’s web site you get very pretty animated stuff. Do these guys have bucks or what?

 http://ge.ecomagination.com/site/index.html?kw=environmental%20issues&c_id=environmental#home

But the first thing they offer up is CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY! Sorry Caz I wish I was a good enough blogger to put up the video but this is the link:

http://ge.ecomagination.com/site/index.html?kw=environmental%20issues&c_id=environmental#tampa

Everyone should ask google how this is possible? Especially after they announce that they are going to spend big bucks on clean energy production??????

Why Ray Lahood is not running for the 18th District?

Posted on by
2

Here is the real reason that Ray Lahood is not running for Congress again. He sent me this letter after I wrote him to support increases in the CAFE Standards. When he finally gets around to it in the letter below…it turns out he supports a much lower CAFE Standard than I was asking for. In fact its the “Floor” or the lowest standard that President Bush Proposed!

The politicians have been told for years by the coal, oil, gas and nuclear industries that:

1. renewables are “years” away from being able to helpay LaHood Member of Congress

2. nuclear will have to be part of the mix

3. that we must drill and mine on environmentally sensitive  areas to be energy self sufficient

4. people who say other wise are out to destroy our economy

They have said it for so long that the politicans came to believe it. Now that the world is changing the energy companies can’t say “oh we were lieing to make more money”. So they are just mum and as the Environmental Storm brews all the dinosaurs are running to get out of the road.

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

select intelligence oversight panel ranking member

subcommittee onagriculture, rural development,

food and drug administration,

and related agencies                CONGRESSMAN RAY LAHOOD

subcommittee onlegislative branch                                                                                               18TH DISTRICT, ILLINOIS


 

November 14, 2007

Mr. Doug Nicodemus

948 E. Adams

Riverton, IL 62561

Dear Doug:

Thank you for contacting me and sharing your concerns about global warming and our nation’s energy supply. It was good to hear from you on these important issues, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.

America must take responsibility for its energy needs, decrease our dependence on foreign oil, promote clean renewable energy sources, and implement a plan to keep our economy growing and our nation safe. It is my understanding that, even though the United States is the world’s third largest crude oil producer, less than 40 percent of the crude oil used by U.S. refineries was produced in the United States. About 50 percent of our petroleum imports are from countries in the Western Hemisphere, with 20 percent from the Persian Gulf, 15 percent from Africa, and 15 percent from other regions. Given these facts, I believe that we need to continue to research and develop alternative fuel choices, reduce our consumption of oil through conservation, and work to increase our domestic petroleum supply.

Any energy policy that addresses our petroleum needs must look at increasing our domestic supply. Several areas in the country offer opportunities worth exploring to increase domestic petroleum production, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), other areas in Alaska, the Rocky Mountain region, and along the continental shelf. The technology exists where we can safely extract oil and natural gas from these areas and not adversely affect the local and regional environment. Increasing efficiencies and technological advancement allow us to capture more resources from a smaller footprint.

Two bills aimed at reforming our energy laws, H.R. 2776, the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2007, and H.R. 3221, the New Direction for Energy Independence, National Security, and Consumer Protection Act, both recently passed the House of Representatives. However, a number of concerns have arisen with both of these pieces of legislation.

The unfortunate reality is that neither of these bills does anything to help develop our own domestic supply of oil, but rather punishes America’s oil and gas workers by raising taxes, imposing new fees, and putting the brakes on energy exploration, making us even more reliant on foreign oil. Other concerns arose from the amendment offered by Representative Tom Udall of New Mexico. His amendment, which was accepted and included within the final legislation, requires electric suppliers to provide 15 percent of their electricity using renewable energy resources by the year 2020. The intentions of this amendment are good; however, it unfortunately implements a standardized requirement for the entire country without taking into account the specific needs of individual states. While this new mandate may be easily fulfilled by certain areas of the country that have readily available access to renewable energy sources, such as wind, water, and solar, it becomes more difficult and costly to implement these requirements for other parts of the country where such amenities are not easily found. At the same time, I am also concerned that this legislation

respond to:

1424 longworth house office building                     fj  100 NE monroe                           O 3050 montvale drive                      D  209 west state
washington, DC 20515                                                              peoria, IL 61602                                     springfield, IL 62704       jacksonville, IL 62650

(202)225-6201                                                                   (309)671-7027                                   (217)793-0808                                       PHONE/TTY (217) 245-1431

FAX (202) 225-9249                                                           FAX (309) 671-7309                            FAX (217) 793-9724                               FAX (217) 243-6852

INTERNET: WWW.HOUSE.GOV/LAHOOD/

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER


 

Mr. Doug NicodemusNovember 14, 2007

Page # 2

excludes nuclear energy from being defined as renewable. This would make it increasingly difficult for states such as Illinois to meet these new energy restrictions where nuclear is the dominant form of energy used.

This legislation also failed to address an important issue which I have consistently been concerned with, the promotion of fuel efficient vehicles. Of the 20 million barrels of oil the U.S. consumes in a day, 67 percent is used to power our cars. If Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards were increased by only three miles per gallon, not only would it save you money, but it would steeply reduce the amount of oil consumed each day by our country. We already have the technology to increase CAFE standards, and it is the single most important thing we could do to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

Consistent with this goal, in the new 11 Oth Congress, I have signed onto legislation, as I have done in the past, which would increase our automobile fuel efficiency standards in the United States, H.R. 656. This legislation, introduced by my colleague from Washington, Representative David Reichert, would prescribe CAFE standards for automobiles manufactured after 2016 of at least 33 miles per gallon. This legislation has been referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee. While I am not a member of this committee, I will closely monitor the progress of this legislation, hopeful that it will reach the House Floor for a vote so that I may continue to show my support for it.

As a result of my dedication to decrease America’s dependence on oil, while researching alternative forms of energy, I was happy to vote to support and pass H.R. 6, the CLEAN Energy Act of 2007, by a vote of 264-163, earlier this Congress. This bill will repeal a number of tax credits given to major oil corporations in the hope that this would generate investment and research in new and renewable energy alternatives. It will also amend certain deepwater oil and gas leases, issued during 1998 and 1999, to incorporate specified price thresholds applicable to royalty suspension provisions. The funds generated from this legislation would then be put into a ‘Strategic Energy Efficiency and Renewable Reserve Fund’. The money in this fund would go to researching and developing new and renewable alternatives to petroleum energy in order to wane America’s dependence on foreign oil.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. I will continue my dedication to promoting alternative and renewable fuel choices to help lessen our dependence on foreign oil as we continue to work through the 110th Congress. Please feel free to contact me again should you have any further thoughts or concerns.

Sincerely,Ray LaHood Member of Congress


 


 


 

RHL/mjr

Unity in Springfield – Environmental Harmony

Posted on by
Reply

While I was doing national posts, I over looked some local things. I have been very bad and apologize. On November 4rth there was a very important meeting of all the environmentalists in Springfield and led to the next blog.

GREEN LIVING

Meeting yields ways to locally battle climate change

By AMANDA REAVY

 

STAFF WRITER

on Natemeyer attended a town hall meet­ing devoted to climate issues Sunday af­ternoon, ready to learn ways he and other citizens can make an immediate impact.

But as some participants asked for more direc­tion, Natemeyer decided to pitch his own idea of planting Illinois native species along blighted al­leyways.

It started when Natemeyer began cleaning the alley behind his house. Soon, he saw one of his neighbors was planting native species behind his garage.

Natemeyer liked the idea and thought it could lead to a sponsorship program in which seed heads are collected and then planted in alleys that have been cleared of litter and other debris.

“It’d be simple, easy, and doesn’t cost anything except time,” Natemeyer told the crowd.

A representative of the Illinois Native Plant So­ciety expressed interest in the project.

“I will talk to them next and see if they want to help. Maybe we can pick one alley or something and experiment,” Natemeyer said after the meet­ing.

Such networking is what “Cool Town Meeting: Facing Global Climate Change Locally,” was all about, said Diane Lopez Hughes, the event’s chief organizer.

“We want to hear from people and get great ideas from people who live in the community,” Hughes said.

About 150 people attended the gathering in Fel­lowship Hall at First Presbyterian Church, 321 S. Seventh St.

The meeting featured a discussion as well as presentations by University of Illinois at Spring­field professor Jim Bonacum, an evolutionary ge­neticist, and State Journal-Register Outdoors Edi­tor Chris Young.

Representatives from 10 community environ­mental organizations were also on hand to ex- plain their initiatives. Those repre­sented were: Community Energy Systems, Cool Cities Springfield, Illi­nois Stewardship Alliance, Jubilee Farm, Sangamon Valley Group of the Sierra Club, the St. Joseph Parish Environmental Justice Committee, Sustainable Springfield Inc., UIS Stu­dents Allied for a Greener Earth, Jus­tice and Peace Office of the Francis­can Sisters and Pax Christi.

Ideas presented during the discus­sion included adjusting tax rates to discourage city residents from using too much electricity and water, pro­viding course credits for homeless people and troubled youths who par­ticipate in clean-up projects and cre­ating a database or Web site where the environmentally conscious can find information on resources in Springfield.

Lindsay Record, local food coor­dinator for the Illinois Stewardship Alliance, said she was particularly inspired by Natemeyer’s sugges­tion.

“It’s a simple idea, but I liked it so much when someone stood up and said, ‘Why don’t we do something here…. I’m willing to do something, here’s an idea, who wants to do it?'” Record said. “I think it’s all these lit­tle things that add up to making our community the way we want it to be.”

Amanda Reavy can be ro—’-

7CO im^