2007 EPA Global Warming Report

Bush-era Global Warming Report Released

by Deb Powers

The environmental world is buzzing this morning with the news that the Obama administration has released a 2007 EPA report on global warming. The report was sequestered by the Bush administration, apparently because its findings were in opposition to the Bush administration's environmental policies regarding global warming and greenhouse gasses. The report is dry as dust to read, filled with legalese and definitions, but when you strip away the awkward language, the findings are unmistakable, as summarized by the following summation:

In sum, the Administrator is proposing to find that elevated levels of GHG (greenhouse gas) concentrations may reasonably be anticipated to endanger the public welfare.

That rather bland statement summarizes the considerably darker contents of the report. This is a list of some of the anticipated (and already starting) effects of increased concentrations of greenhouse gasses - including CO2 - in the atmosphere.

Observed Changes to the Environment from Global Warming

These are changes that have already been observed - change that can be directly attributed to global warming.

• Changes in precipitation patterns - more rain in some places, less rain in others, longer rainy seasons, etc
• Coastal sea levels have risen as much as .75 meters
• More extreme high AND low temperatures throughout the U.S.
• Changing growing seasons and regions for many crops
• Increased instances of insect outbreaks that affect crops
• Higher rates of wildfire outbreaks

Projected Changes to the Environment Due to Global Warming

• Increased coastal flooding from storm surges
• An increase in vector-borne diseases
• Increased interior flooding from run-off and increased precipitation
• An increase in heat-related deaths in dry, hot areas
• A possible decrease in cold-related deaths
• More intense weather events like hurricanes
• More severe and longer heat waves
• An increased strain on water resources in vulnerable areas
• Increased precipitation run-off
• Decrease in air quality, particularly in urban areas, with resulting increase in the severity of respiratory diseases among the population

The report is frightening, but the truly disturbing part is the fact that it was suppressed in an effort to cripple policy decisions. Why would someone want to hide the fact that these changes - whether or not one agrees that they are caused by man - endanger this entire country in ways that mot people don't even consider? The answer is simple of course - it's all about money.

Exceprts from this report are being used to support the push for the Climate Change Bill - aka the Cap and Trade Bill. The opposition to that bill focuses largely on how much money it will cost to mitigate the effects of greenhouse gasses on our environment, and to retool our society to operate in ways that decrease the amount of greenhouse gas that we put into the atmosphere. Withholding the report disguises the fact that this issue is not about money. It is not about who caused global warming and whether we should do something about it. It is not even about saving the planet from some far-off doom at our own hands.

It is, pure and simple, about saving lives and defending our country from the ravages of those who only care about the money. And when it comes to saving lives or saving money, I'll take lives every time.

UN Climate Change Summit

UN Climate Change Summit

by Deb Powers

Yesterday, world leaders met at the UN in New York for a one day climate change summit. There were some promising signs, a lot of high-flown rhetoric and a lovely closing from UN General Secretary Ban Ki-Moon, who praised the nations for coming together to address and discuss changes that must be made in order to meet climate change goals. Overall, though, the Summit did little to further any goals or make any changes. Instead, it was reflective of some of the biggest stumbling blocks and concerns regarding global warming and climate change.

U.S. President Barack Obama gave a stirring and thought-provoking speech on the responsibility of developed nations to lead the fight against global warming, but critics expressed concern that he has the ability to shepherd meaningful legislation through the US Congress before the December COP20. While a U.S. climate change bill - commonly referred to as the cap-and-trade bill - passed the House of Representatives over the summer, the passage of a similar bill in the Senate is not as assured. Nearly all Republicans and some conservative Democrats oppose the bill, which they claim will raise the cost of energy to untenable heights. The member nations of the EU, which have been dealing with high energy prices for decades, are unimpressed by the argument. The EU is urging the US to step up and take the lead on reducing carbon emissions.

Meanwhile, one of the largest pro-business groups in the US is having some troubles of its own over global warming and climate change. As international leaders met in New York to discuss the issues, PG&E, one of the nation's largest utilities, resigned from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce over its extremist position on climate change. Just a few weeks ago, the Chamber called on the US Environmental Protection Agency to hold public hearings on the validity of the science behind climate change and global warming theories. The Chamber envisions a Scopes monkey trial, which they hope will invalidate the science on which many of the global warming statutes will be based.

 Even as the Chamber attempts to cloud the image and stall efforts to reduce carbon emissions by subjecting established science to a circus-like trial, they are joining other global business leaders in demanding a seat at the table at COP20, claiming that their voices should be heard in the debate of what should be done about the phenomenon whose existence they deny. It seems disingenuous at best, self-serving to the point of subordinating the health of the people and the planet at worst.

The oppostion of business and industry leaders to legislation that will force them to change the way they do business is to be expected. The Chamber of Commerce in the US and similar entities in Canada, would prefer to "shape the conversation" in a way that ensures them continued profits while shifting costs in any direction they can find. To that end, they are putting their support behind "intellectual property" laws that will guarantee the developers of technology that they alone can profit from the technology that they develop. The costs of that development, of course, will be highly subsidized by the government and taxpayers - who will pay twice for it: once for the development, and later for the use of it.

The defection of PG&E from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce isn't the first, but it is the most visible to date. It sounds a hopeful note - that there may indeed be those in industry - particularly in the energy industry - who see that changing the way we do business, particularly in energy generation, will be profitable in the long run - and in more ways than one.

Global Warming Reading List

Global Warming Reading List

by Deb Powers

Is global warming real? Is it man-made? Is it natural, but accelerated by man? Why is carbon dioxide so bad? Is there really more carbon in the atmosphere than their used to be? Isn't carbon dioxide part of the natural respiration cycle? So many questions... so few hard and fast answers.

When I was in school, a favorite teacher told me, "There are facts, and then there is truth. It is possible to report facts without ever reaching truth."

I see a lot of that in the debate over climate change and global warming. There are a lot of facts. Facts are indisputable. Truth, however, is harder to come by, because facts can be twisted to support a multitude of opinions - especially if you're willing to leave out the inconvenient ones, or only take a small range of them.

I am a big believer that the more you know, the more likely it is that your opinions approach truth. That's why I make a point of reading the opinions of those who believe that global warming and climate change is a myth, and following any facts they post back to their source documents. I also make a point of knowing the source of research funding to better evaluate the interpretations of the facts presented. More often than not, I end up finding that the facts presented and used as the basis to dispute climate change don't actually support the interpretation given as "truth".

 In the interests of providing information to help you form your own opinions, here is a reading list of items of interest from the recent news. Pick one, pick a few, get informed - because the more you know, the closer you come to the truth.

A diferent take on global warming

 A Maine meteorologist has his own theory and solution to global warming, which he says is a lead-up to a new Ice Age.

Study: Global warming would hit Utah hard

While encouraging "healthy debate" on the issue of climate change, Utah moves to respond to a study that shows how continuing trends will make Utah one of the ten states most affected by global warming in the next decades.

A Primer on Global Warming: Dispelling Myths

A bunch of facts to dispute global warming theory, or at least whether it is manmade. There is no context for any of them, and they are presented by the Heartland Institute, a conservative industry-funded think tank. The editor's note reads : [Each month, Heartland Institute Science Director Jay Lehr, Ph.D. presents evidence that mankind has no significant impact on the Earth’s climate.—Ed.]

Global Security Affected by Global Warming

 Another article that accepts an ongoing debate about the origin of global warming, but acknowledges that no matter the source, there are actions necessary to ensure security in the face of coastal flooding, water insecurity and melting ice caps.

I encourage you to read widely about climate change and the global warming debate. Don't avoid opposing viewpoints - all have a voice that adds something to the debate. Just be sure that you do the due diligence so that you understand how the facts fit into the overall picture.

Picture Credit: lusi@stock.xchng