What Do We Think About Climate Change

Discussion in 'All Things Boats & Boating' started by Pericles, Feb 19, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. bntii
    Joined: Jun 2006
    Posts: 731
    Likes: 97, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 1324
    Location: MD

    bntii Senior Member

    EPA Finds Greenhouse Gases Pose Threat to Public Health, Welfare / Proposed Finding Comes in Response to 2007 Supreme Court Ruling

    Release date: 04/17/2009

    Contact Information: Cathy Milbourn, 202-564-4355 / 7849 / milbourn.cathy@epa.gov; En español: Lina Younes, 202-564-4355 / younes.lina@epa.gov

    (Washington, D.C. – April 17, 2009) After a thorough scientific review ordered in 2007 by the U.S. Supreme Court, the Environmental Protection Agency issued a proposed finding Friday that greenhouse gases contribute to air pollution that may endanger public health or welfare.

    The proposed finding, which now moves to a public comment period, identified six greenhouse gases that pose a potential threat.

    “This finding confirms that greenhouse gas pollution is a serious problem now and for future generations. Fortunately, it follows President Obama’s call for a low carbon economy and strong leadership in Congress on clean energy and climate legislation,” said Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “This pollution problem has a solution – one that will create millions of green jobs and end our country’s dependence on foreign oil.”

    As the proposed endangerment finding states, “In both magnitude and probability, climate change is an enormous problem. The greenhouse gases that are responsible for it endanger public health and welfare within the meaning of the Clean Air Act.”

    EPA’s proposed endangerment finding is based on rigorous, peer-reviewed scientific analysis of six gases – carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride – that have been the subject of intensive analysis by scientists around the world. The science clearly shows that concentrations of these gases are at unprecedented levels as a result of human emissions, and these high levels are very likely the cause of the increase in average temperatures and other changes in our climate.

    The scientific analysis also confirms that climate change impacts human health in several ways. Findings from a recent EPA study titled “Assessment of the Impacts of Global Change on Regional U.S. Air Quality: A Synthesis of Climate Change Impacts on Ground-Level Ozone,” for example, suggest that climate change may lead to higher concentrations of ground-level ozone, a harmful pollutant. Additional impacts of climate change include, but are not limited to:

    * increased drought;
    * more heavy downpours and flooding;
    * more frequent and intense heat waves and wildfires;
    * greater sea level rise;
    * more intense storms; and
    * harm to water resources, agriculture, wildlife and ecosystems.


    In proposing the finding, Administrator Jackson also took into account the disproportionate impact climate change has on the health of certain segments of the population, such as the poor, the very young, the elderly, those already in poor health, the disabled, those living alone and/or indigenous populations dependent on one or a few resources.

    In addition to threatening human health, the analysis finds that climate change also has serious national security implications. Consistent with this proposed finding, in 2007, 11 retired U.S. generals and admirals signed a report from the Center for a New American Security stating that climate change “presents significant national security challenges for the United States.” Escalating violence in destabilized regions can be incited and fomented by an increasing scarcity of resources – including water. This lack of resources, driven by climate change patterns, then drives massive migration to more stabilized regions of the world.

    The proposed endangerment finding now enters the public comment period, which is the next step in the deliberative process EPA must undertake before issuing final findings. Today’s proposed finding does not include any proposed regulations. Before taking any steps to reduce greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, EPA would conduct an appropriate process and consider stakeholder input. Notwithstanding this required regulatory process, both President Obama and Administrator Jackson have repeatedly indicated their preference for comprehensive legislation to address this issue and create the framework for a clean energy economy.

    http://epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html
     
  2. Jimbo1490
    Joined: Jun 2005
    Posts: 785
    Likes: 41, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 527
    Location: Orlando, FL

    Jimbo1490 Senior Member

    I actually hope this stands because if it becomes part of the CFR, then it will be challenged and then the evidence presented in open court for the first time. Case law long ago settled the issue of regulations that do not reflect current scientific confidence. Pat Michaels summarizes 21 of the climate models used in the latest IPCC report, and a makes comparison thereof with observed temperature data. That summary gave the models a confidence level of less than .025, well below widely accepted standards for confidence in either the models or the AGW via CO2 hypothesis.

    http://fora.tv/2009/03/12/Climate_of_Extremes#chapter_01

    Jump ahead to 14:00 and you'll see what I'm referring to.


    Barack Obama, being the smart fellow that he is, already knows this, and his plan is to implement a 'cap and trade' scheme before the AGW hypothesis can get its day in court, an outcome which would be a welcomed by the climate realists, rather than the alarmists.




    Thomas, remeber how LONG ago in this thread I asserted that clouds and precipitation are the regulators of water vapor, NOT the minor greenhouses gases? Do you remember how long ago I said that the system is dominated by strong NEGATIVE feedback? I mean it seems so obvious, but now the science is in: yes, clouds and precipitation really are the regulators of water vapor, they are the strong negative feedback I said they were, ergo they are the regulators of global temperature.

    Jimbo
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2009
  3. RHP
    Joined: Nov 2005
    Posts: 840
    Likes: 87, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 1183
    Location: Singapore

    RHP Senior Member

    Global warming is over - its all blah blah....

    Antarctic ice cover 'increasing due to hole in ozone layer'

    Antarctic sea ice is growing rather than shrinking as a result of the hole in the ozone layer, scientists have said.

    By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent
    Last Updated: 2:37PM BST 22 Apr 2009

    Scientists believe the growth is down to stronger surface winds over Antarctica Photo: GETTY
    In stark contrast to the loss of sea ice in the Arctic over the last 30 years, the frozen seas surrounding the South Pole have increased at the rate of 100,000 square kilometres a decade over the last 40 years.

    Scientists believe the growth is down to stronger surface winds over Antarctica and more frequent storms in the Southern Ocean – both direct consequences of the ozone hole.

    If ozone levels recover as expected over the next 100 years, thanks to the international ban on damaging CFCs, weather patterns will return to normal and Antarctic sea ice will shrink rapidly, they said.

    Professor John Turner of BAS, lead author of the paper published in the Geophysical Research Letters journal, said the results underlined the complexity of climate change.

    He said: "While there is increasing evidence that the loss of sea ice in the Arctic has occurred due to human activity, in the Antarctic human influence through the ozone hole has had the reverse effect and resulted in more ice.

    "Although the ozone hole is in many ways holding back the effects of greenhouse gas increases on the Antarctic, this will not last, as we expect ozone levels to recover by the end of the 21st Century.

    "By then there is likely to be around one third less Antarctic sea ice."

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...er-increasing-due-to-hole-in-ozone-layer.html
     
  4. Jimbo1490
    Joined: Jun 2005
    Posts: 785
    Likes: 41, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 527
    Location: Orlando, FL

    Jimbo1490 Senior Member

    But there has ALWAYS been a 'hole' in the ozone layer over the antarctic. The existence of the hole was predicted decades before it was actually observed, also decades before the existence of the halon gases.
    :rolleyes:

    Jimbo
     
  5. Guillermo
    Joined: Mar 2005
    Posts: 3,644
    Likes: 189, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2247
    Location: Pontevedra, Spain

    Guillermo Ingeniero Naval

    Correlation between Cosmic Rays and Ozone Depletion

    http://www.science.uwaterloo.ca/~qblu/Lu-2009PRL.pdf

    Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada
    (Received 7 August 2008; published 19 March 2009)
    This Letter reports reliable satellite data in the period of 1980–2007 covering two full 11-yr cosmic ray
    (CR) cycles, clearly showing the correlation between CRs and ozone depletion, especially the polar ozone
    loss (hole) over Antarctica. The results provide strong evidence of the physical mechanism that the CRdriven
    electron-induced reaction of halogenated molecules plays the dominant role in causing the ozone
    hole. Moreover, this mechanism predicts one of the severest ozone losses in 2008–2009 and probably
    another large hole around 2019–2020, according to the 11-yr CR cycle.


    (The Sun, always the Sun)
    Cheers.
     
  6. Jimbo1490
    Joined: Jun 2005
    Posts: 785
    Likes: 41, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 527
    Location: Orlando, FL

    Jimbo1490 Senior Member

    John Stossel, speaking at the 2008 Heartland Conference.


     
  7. Jimbo1490
    Joined: Jun 2005
    Posts: 785
    Likes: 41, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 527
    Location: Orlando, FL

    Jimbo1490 Senior Member

  8. Jimbo1490
    Joined: Jun 2005
    Posts: 785
    Likes: 41, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 527
    Location: Orlando, FL

    Jimbo1490 Senior Member

    Tropical troposphere temps, 1980-2009, predicted vs observed:

    tropical-troposphere.JPG

    The thick, smooth line is the prediction.

    Jimbo
     
  9. plebusmaximus
    Joined: Jan 2009
    Posts: 22
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Australia

    plebusmaximus Junior Member

    Does my bum look big in this?

    http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2009/04/22/2549626.htm?site=science&topic=enviro
     
  10. Jimbo1490
    Joined: Jun 2005
    Posts: 785
    Likes: 41, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 527
    Location: Orlando, FL

    Jimbo1490 Senior Member

    Just another obfuscation, like the "Aerosols caused cooling in the 1970's that masked greenhouse warming". So what was the cause of the warming in the 1930's, a warming which resulted in the virtual disappearance of arctic ice and the opening of the northern passage? Was there a hole in the ozone layer then, and what kind of warming was it since anthropogenic CO2 was not, could not have been a factor?

    Warmers have yet to rise above the null hypothesis of natural variation once again.

    Jimbo
     
  11. CDK
    Joined: Aug 2007
    Posts: 3,324
    Likes: 148, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1819
    Location: Adriatic sea

    CDK retired engineer

    Could that have been caused by the Krakatoa eruptions which started in 1927 and poured immense amounts of gases and dust into the atmosphere?
     
  12. Jimbo1490
    Joined: Jun 2005
    Posts: 785
    Likes: 41, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 527
    Location: Orlando, FL

    Jimbo1490 Senior Member

    That supposedly causes cooling, not warming, and the 1930's really was the hottest decade on record, not the 1990's; GISS (Hansen) has been forced to retract that assertion twice now. Not that this has stopped him from trying again, which he did just about a month ago. Maybe his re-write of history will stick this time:rolleyes:

    Jimbo
     
  13. fasteddy106
    Joined: Apr 2009
    Posts: 72
    Likes: 17, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 171
    Location: connecticut

    fasteddy106 Junior Member

    The CO2 issue is a fraud, and distortion of scientific data. Thats polite for saying the zero growth social engineers of the left are lying to promote their agenda for the human race. CO2 makes up 2.5-3.5 of the total atmosphere depending on the time of year, and the crop productivity around the world. Its rise in the last 150 years would be timed just about right for the end of the last mini-ice age, what we call the dark ages. CO2 follows warming, not the other way around. Thus the lie. Besides, human caused CO2 only makes up about 3% of the total volume of atmospheric CO2. Here we are, spending billions upon billions, to counter a threat that is statisicly insignificant. Plus, the radical left wants to change our very lifestyle to counter a non-existent threat to the environment. Kinda like coming up with an action plan in case all the crabs come out of the ocean at the same time, not gonna happen, so why bother!
     
  14. ancient kayaker
    Joined: Aug 2006
    Posts: 3,497
    Likes: 147, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 2291
    Location: Alliston, Ontario, Canada

    ancient kayaker aka Terry Haines

    Global warming/cooling is a complex issue. The pro side are required to produce predictions based on poorly understood data and primitive models that only represent guesses. Lots of people produce lots of predictions.

    All the Con crowd have to do is find one that is wrong and jeer.

    Lets not worry though; it's not like it's important, just whether our grandkids have a place to stand, food to eat and an atmosphere that will support human life. So why don't everybody just agree to flip a coin, once and for all; if it's heads we DO SOMETHING and if it's tails we will know for sure that we don't have to. If we're proved wrong, the small bunch of desperate survivors can duke it out with the nuclear weapons we will leave them, secure in the knowledge that we, their ancestors behaved responsibly.
     

  15. masalai
    Joined: Oct 2007
    Posts: 6,818
    Likes: 121, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 1882
    Location: cruising, Australia

    masalai masalai

    On the count of three, everybody fart - if the temperature rises/falls? - a direct link? - - - - Jeeees enough already, the climate will change as it has always done and will do, ad-infinitum... Anthropomorphic influences are bound to be causative of some change somewhere - we do not know enough yet to be certain by how much of what and where, as the why & how is not fully understood....
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.