Climate Change

[AZ Jim]

Bob, Think about this. Ever since Al Gore talked about it in his campaign it became the duck to shoot by the right. PERIOD. Don't try to tell me about Gores carbon footprint, stick to what I just stated.

 

[Don M.]

I don't know exactly what President Obama plans to do in his next step, but I support his efforts to do whatever he can for the United States and world pollution. Here's some of his accomplishments. https://www.whitehouse.gov/climate-change#section-the-latest

Here's the essence of what Obama is scheduled to announce tomorrow....

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-unveil-...ssions-limits-monday-041509480--politics.html

Once again, it sounds like something that will be tied up in court for years, before it will be implemented...if ever. Plus, it has a target date of 2030, and a reduction of Only 30%...a very real case of Too Little, Too Late. Given the attitudes in Washington, and the political infighting that will surely occur, there is little to be optimistic about in this action. I suppose it's better than doing nothing, but we are quickly running out of time on this issue.

According to virtually All of the weather services, 2014 was the warmest year on record...and 2015 is on schedule to surpass last year. If this continues, 2030, and beyond, are going to be some really nasty years.

​

 

[BobF]

Jim, who cares about Gore these days. He is a downer for himself, his wife, and that is his problem. I need nothing about him.

In the 1970's we had ice age fears of a mini ice age. Today we have another mini ice age threat. And it will make all of the current governments efforts to be nil. We will be needing more heat then, not less.

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-07/13/mini-ice-age-earth-sunspots

Mini ice age could bring freezing temperatures by 2030

13 July 15 by James Temperton


A mini ice age could hit the Earth in the 2030s, the first such event to occur since the early 1700s. New mathematical models of the Sun's solar cycle developed at Northumbria University suggest solar activity will see a "significant" drop, causing temperatures on Earth to plummet.


The last mini ice age occurred between 1645 and 1715 and caused temperatures in northern Europe to fall dramatically, with London's River Thames freezing over during winter and sea ice extending for miles around the UK. The prolonged cold snap, known as the Maunder Minimum, has been linked to a reduction in the number of sunspots, as observed by scientists at the time.

Such periods were thought to be driven by convecting waves of fluids deep within the Sun, but new research suggests a second force -- or "wave" -- is at play. Two waves, operating at different layers in the Sun's interior, are now believed to drive solar activity. When these waves are desynchronised, temperatures on Earth fall.

(And more with sketches)

 

[AZ Jim]

Did you totally miss the point I was making? Until Gore made the point, no resistance was heard from the right but the minute he made in a plank in his campaign out came the republican deniers.

 

[SeaBreeze]

Am I wrong, SB, in remembering that a while back you didn't take Climate Change all that seriously?

No, you're right Josiah, I didn't take global warming seriously, and I doubted how much humans were responsible for climate change, I still think some of it is out of our control and cyclical. I've had a change of heart, the more I've heard and read, and feel that we should do what we can to protect our planet, plant life and animals, and I'm glad our President is addressing this issue. I was always supportive of solar and wind power, etc.

 

[BobF]

Did you totally miss the point I was making? Until Gore made the point, no resistance was heard from the right but the minute he made in a plank in his campaign out came the republican deniers.

Still don't know what you are talking about and who cares a thing about anything Gore may have said. He has always been a big nothing and is more of a nothing now.

I still think that nature will make any changes she wants to make. So far all the fears of 10 or 15 years ago still have not happened. Now we have a new freeze claim. Something new to worry about. If we stop coal suddenly and no full time replacement we are in big trouble. Time to shut the politicians down and get the scientist on the job of finding out what is really going on. The UN just doesn't know what is happening either. Their group that predicted heat also said it was not going to happen and then decided again that it would heat up. What a bunch of confused folks they were. Now they have a new leader of that group so we will have to wait for things to settle down again. The US never really joined in with that UN group. Neither did Australia for some years, but I think they went with the UN group a couple years back.

 

[Jackie22]

Still don't know what you are talking about and who cares a thing about anything Gore may have said. He has always been a big nothing and is more of a nothing now.

Well, it looks to me like we are seeing more and more evidence everyday that Al Gore was right, maybe the deniers are a big nothing.

Here is President Obama last year.......

White House Official: Obama Will Use Executive Powers To Meet Climate Goals

White House Official: Obama Will Use Executive Powers To Meet Climate Goals

by Emily Atkin
Posted on December 4, 2014 at 11:57 am



The Obama administration is doubling down on its commitment to aggressive climate action despite an incoming Republican Congress that will undoubtedly oppose it, White House senior adviser John Podesta said Wednesday, saying the President can use his executive powers to meet his carbon reduction goals.

The comments, reported by the Financial Times, were reportedly meant to assure other world leaders that the United States can still meet the ambitious climate goals set out under its historic agreement with China, even with a Congress led by a party that largely believes climate change does not exist. Under that agreement, the U.S. pledged to emit 26 to 28 percent less greenhouse gases in 2025 than it did in 2005. China, still a developing country, promised to get 20 percent of its energy from non-fossil-fuel sources by 2030, and to peak its overall carbon dioxide emissions by that same year.

“We’re building our game plan around authorities that exist in current law,” Podesta said, “not in the need to get a major, massive new climate reduction program put in place by the Congress.”

Using Presidential power to address climate change is far from a new theme in the Obama administration. Indeed, when Obama made his landmark climate speech in June of 2013 — months before Podesta was appointed his adviser — he specifically announced his intention to bypass a deadlocked Congress and direct the Environmental Protection Agency to issue strict limits on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.

“I don’t have much patience for anyone who denies that this challenge is real. We don’t have time for a meeting of the flat earth society,” Obama said at the time. “Sticking your head in the sand might make you feel safer, but it’s not going to protect you from the coming storm.”

more...

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/12/04/3599564/podesta-obama-executive-powers-climate/


....to me it is a damn shame that he has no help on this from Congress.....we're talking about our grandchildren's future here.

 

[BobF]

SeaBreeze, I think a lot of folks agree that we need to do something. And today about the only things going are the wind and solar attempts. Both have some real limitations and time will surely help fix some of those limitation.

Solar is really a space taking effort for little real output. Solar is very time limited in much of the country, but better than nothing as in a future time, we likely won't have gas, gasoline, oil, or coal to fall back on. Solar is likely the best of the two right now. Big layouts are need for the capacity they need. Then they need to cover night hours or rainy days with some sort of ready reserve system or methods. We are not their yet but some efforts are being developed for full time from the solar collecting methods and storage.

Wind is also limited. They can only produce for certain wind levels. Not enough wind, no generation. Too much wind, have to be protected from self destruction and that means no production. So again a proper and dependable storage method needs to be developed. Full time back up power plants seem to be desirable in all cases.

Maybe in time we will discover other ways of generation that is dependable day and night. That is a future thought for sure.

 

[tnthomas]

It would be a Great World if people could act for the Common Good. However, most seem incapable of any compromise..."My Way, or the Highway". I'm not very religious...in a "Biblical" sense, but the older I get, and the more attention I give to what people are doing, I often wonder if the predictions of Armageddon aren't in humanities future.

Yep, acting for the common good is what humankind will sorely need to do; it remains to be seen if that will be the case....

Some Armageddon events that are likely, and getting close:

1.Self annihilation(global war)
2.Population growth
3.Climate change
4.Antimicrobial resistance
5.Pandemic(see #4)
6.Starvation(see #1,2&3 above)
7.Gamma-ray bursts
8.Angry god
9.Zombie apocalypse
More Armageddon events

 

[SeaBreeze]

What warming means for four of summer's worst pests. http://www.weather.com/science/envi...eans-four-summers-worst-pests-climate-central


With the rising temperatures brought about by global warming, the risks posed by these pernicious pests could also be increasing. A warmer climate can mean expanded habitats for many pest species, as well as increases in their numbers. Here’s what research suggests will happen with four key summertime pests as the world warms:


Mosquitoes

Is there any pest more synonymous with summer than the mosquito? There are many species of the annoyingly buzzing biters found in different areas around the country.
While some are merely an itchy nuisance, others come with the risk of spreading diseases like malaria, West Nile virus and dengue fever, including the invasive Asian Tiger mosquito, which first appeared in the U.S. in 1985.

Enlarge​

Predicted change in the range of the Asian Tiger mosquito with warming from high levels of greenhouse gas emissions. (Rochlin et al./PLOS ONE)




As temperatures around the country rise, the areas that are conducive to such mosquitoes could expand, and the insects could start to emerge earlier in the year, meaning more opportunities for bites that could spread disease.

After an unseasonably warm late spring, summer, and early winter in 2012, the U.S. experienced a West Nile Virus outbreak linked to the Asian Tiger mosquito, with some 5,600 people becoming infected.

Asian Tiger mosquitoes tend to die off when temperatures venture outside a range from 50°F to 95°F and when relative humidity dips below 42 percent.
A Climate Central analysis examined how warming would affect this range for cities around the country, showing how many more “mosquito suitable” days there were now compared to 1980. See how your city has fared in the dropdown menu below.

One key question in terms of the health impact of expanded mosquito territory is whether the new climates they venture into will be as welcoming to the pathogens they can carry.

Arizona has a lot of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes, another invasive mosquito species, but no dengue, which it can often carry,Mary Hayden, a scientist with the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., said. Why this is isn’t known, but Hayden and her colleagues suspect it is because the harsh desert climate doesn’t allow the mosquitoes to live long enough for dengue to undergo its full development cycle.

But there have been small outbreaks of dengue in Texas near the Mexican border, Hayden said, as well as a disease found in the Caribbean, called chikungunya, in Florida. Health officials are closely watching these areas for larger outbreaks, she said.


Poison Ivy

Time to stock up on the calamine lotion.
Poison ivy is a well-known scourge for those who spend time outdoors in the summer. Already more than 350,000 cases of poison ivy occur annually in the U.S., according to the National Wildlife Federation, and that number could go up as the climate changes.

(Climate Central)




The impacts of climate change on poison ivy have more to do with the cause behind rising temperatures than the warming itself. Plants need carbon dioxide — the key heat-trapping greenhouse gas — to fuel photosynthesis.

Experiments that exposed poison ivy plants to different levels of CO2 have found that “poison ivy grows faster when there’s more CO2” and it produces more leaves that carry the plant’s toxic oil, Doug Inkley, a NWF scientist, said.

Those oils, which put the “poison” in poison ivy, can vary in their chemical structure, and high CO2 levels also cause the plants to produce a more toxic form, “so climate change is not doing us any favors there,” Inkley said.


Deer Ticks

Anyone who’s been out for a walk in the woods on the East Coast is familiar with the phrase “tick check.” The main reason for such concern over these tiny creatures is the ability of certain species, in particular the so-called deer tick, to transmit diseases such as Lyme disease and anaplasmosis.

​

The CDC estimates that about 300,000 people in the U.S. are diagnosed with Lyme disease each year, primarily in the Midwest and Northeast. (While ticks are found throughout the South, they have a more diverse array of species to feed on there, and so are less likely to encounter the deer and mice that can harbor Lyme disease.)

As temperatures rise, there is concern that ticks could spread into newly suitable habitat and bring Lyme disease and other pathogens with them. They have already expanded northward into Canada, where the number of reported cases of Lyme disease doubled between 2009 and 2012, according to Canadian government figures — a trend attributed to more locally acquired cases.

That northward expansion is expected to continue, as shown in the National Climate Assessment, while a much smaller retraction on the southern end of their range is also anticipated. The worry is that people who aren’t used to having to think about Lyme exposure won’t know to take proper precautions to reduce their risks.

Warming could also cause explosions in tick populations, as higher winter temperatures fail to thin out overwintering populations, Inkley said. More ticks means more chances for Lyme to be transmitted. Earlier thaws and later frosts could also mean that ticks are active for a longer period, again increasing the risk of Lyme transmission.

But, just as with mosquitoes, it is unclear whether changes in the climate and conditions of new habitats will be as conducive to the Lyme bacterium and other diseases as they are to ticks.


Red Fire Ants

This last pest is another invasive species. The imported red fire ant, as it is colloquially known, came to the U.S. from its native South America sometime in the 1930s or ‘40s, likely as a stowaway in ship ballast. The species now covers more than 300 million acres, mostly in the Southeast, where it came ashore, according to the NWF.

The ants, which bite and sting as a single mass, thrive in places where winter low temperatures don’t dip too low. “The colder it is, the slower the colonies grow and the more mortality occurs,” Lloyd Morrison, a National Park Service ecologist who has studied them, said in an email. “One very cold period in the winter could kill colonies outright or prevent colonies from reproducing.”

Possible expanded range of the imported red fire ant with climate change. (L.W. Morrison et al.)


With warming, those low temperatures don’t get as cold, meaning colonies could be less inhibited. Morrison did a study in 2005 that modeled the potential expansion of the imported red fire ant with climate change and found that warming temperatures would expand suitable habitats by about 5 percent by mid-century and then by 21 percent towards the end of the century. This would mean imported red fire ants could be found as far north as Nebraska, Kentucky and Maryland.

And while these ants can certainly provide an unpleasant encounter for any unwitting humans who come across them — their en masse bites inject their victims with venom that produces a burning sensation and raises blisters that can become infected — they are actually more of a threat to local wildlife. Swarms of ants can easily overwhelm young birds in ground nests and small animals like mice, Inkley said.

Thinking about all of these summer fun-ruining pests may have you scratching some imaginary itch and eyeing the outdoors warily, but it doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy what nature has to offer, Inkley said.

 

[BobF]

Interesting that nobody commented on my link to a global cooling item. While we are so busy talking of warming, which has not really started yet after at least 10 years, I post about possible cooling. Seems that someone should have noticed this 180 degree difference in what we should be looking for.

Do we need more air conditioning or more blankets. There is a big difference in future needs.

 

[Meanderer]

Interesting that nobody commented on my link to a global cooling item. While we are so busy talking of warming, which has not really started yet after at least 10 years, I post about possible cooling. Seems that someone should have noticed this 180 degree difference in what we should be looking for.

Do we need more air conditioning or more blankets. There is a big difference in future needs.

I remember a NOVA special on Global Dimming, that talked about the three days, after 9/11, when all US continental air traffic was grounded. They recorded record daily lows and highs, during this period, and concluded that the blanket of Jet contrails from the thousands of flights, had been having a cooling effect, effectively offsetting the warming.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/contrail-effect.html

 

[Warrigal]

List of countries by 2013 emissions estimates[edit]

EDGAR (database created by European Commission and Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency) released 2013 estimates. The following table lists the 2013 annual CO[SUB]2[/SUB] emissions estimates (in thousands of CO[SUB]2[/SUB]tonnes) along with a list of emissions per capita (in tonnes of CO[SUB]2[/SUB] per year) from same source.

Country	CO[SUB]2[/SUB] emissions (kt)[SUP][12][/SUP]	Emission per capita (t)[SUP][12][/SUP]
World	35,270,000	-
China	10,330,000	7.4
United States	5,300,000	16.6
European Union	3,740,000	7.3
India	2,070,000	1.7
Russia	1,800,000	12.6
Japan	1,360,000	10.7
International transport	1,070,000	-
Germany	840,000	10.2
South Korea	630,000	12.7
Canada	550,000	15.7
Indonesia	510,000	2.6
Saudi Arabia	490,000	16.6
Brazil	480,000	2.0
United Kingdom	480,000	7.5
Mexico	470,000	3.9
Iran	410,000	5.3
Australia	390,000	16.9
Italy	390,000	6.4
France	370,000	5.7
South Africa	330,000	6.2
Poland	320,000	8.5

Thanks for the stats Jackie. As you can see Australia tops the list on a per capita basis but our government tries to minimise this fact by referring to the absolute figure. We are doing sweet Fanny Addams about emissions now. The emissions trading scheme that was having significant effect has been scrapped, having been falsely labelled as a "big fat new tax" by our current government. It helped win them the election. Their policy is neither fish nor fowl. It's called 'direct action'. Sounds good but all it is is paying some polluters to adopt measures that allow the calculations on emissions to look better. They've tried to scrap the renewable energy target but have managed to reduce it and they refuse to do what Obama is doing, which is to use regulation to address the problem.

Subsidies for domestic solar from the previous government has seen a big uptake and this has been very effective in helping to reduce emissions. Some of the dirtier brown coal plants have been closed down as demand on the grid has reduced.

Bob, you must accept that your country, like mine, is a major emitter of greenhouse gases and is in a position to reduce emissions and where we can, we have a duty and an obligation to do it.

 

[BobF]

Thanks for the stats Jackie. As you can see Australia tops the list on a per capita basis but our government tries to minimise this fact by referring to the absolute figure. We are doing sweet Fanny Addams about emissions now. The emissions trading scheme that was having significant effect has been scrapped, having been falsely labelled as a "big fat new tax" by our current government. It helped win them the election. Their policy is neither fish nor fowl. It's called 'direct action'. Sounds good but all it is is paying some polluters to adopt measures that allow the calculations on emissions to look better. They've tried to scrap the renewable energy target but have managed to reduce it and they refuse to do what Obama is doing, which is to use regulation to address the problem.

Subsidies for domestic solar from the previous government has seen a big uptake and this has been very effective in helping to reduce emissions. Some of the dirtier brown coal plants have been closed down as demand on the grid has reduced.

Bob, you must accept that your country, like mine, is a major emitter of greenhouse gases and is in a position to reduce emissions and where we can, we have a duty and an obligation to do it.

Warrigal, we have a first responsibility to the lives and safety of all people in the US. We are taking steps to shut down emissions but we also need to make sure our homes and hospitals all have full time proper electricity so the people are always safe. Safety comes prior to panic no matter where we live. Glad you used 'where we can'. How about my posting of a possible coming of a cooling system in a few years. Since this warming period has pretty much fizzled and never met its early predictions, not even close, I think this new projection sure needs some close looking.

 

[Don M.]

What warming means for four of summer's worst pests. http://www.weather.com/science/envi...eans-four-summers-worst-pests-climate-central

The habitat of some animals, and insect species is a good indicator of where the climate is headed. Here, in central Missouri, we have had a major influx of Armadillos in recent years. 30 or 40 years ago, the Oklahoma/Arkansas border was about as far north as these rascals could be found, because the Winters were too harsh. Now, they are a common sight, and have moved North about 150 miles from where their boundary used to be. Some humans may not be seeing the reality of warming climates, but the animals seem to be adapting.

Deer ticks are a constant problem around here in the Summer. The worst thing a person can do is to try to pull them off, or crush them. That will almost guarantee that these pest will inject their "juice" into the wound, and expose the person to Lyme disease. I check carefully every time I work outdoors, and if I find one on me the best method is to put a drop of liquid soap on them. They will back out within a few seconds, then I can pick them off and flush them down the toilet.

​

 

[Warrigal]

Nature will adapt to climate change. Manmade systems such as agriculture and commerce will have to do the same. If it happens too quickly it will get ugly.

 

[SeaBreeze]

Pseudoscientific climate claims debunked by real scientists

Read more here.


Most people who deny that human activity is warming the planet just dismiss a massive body of scientific evidence as a big hoax.

But there’s a more sophisticated set of climate “skeptics” who make arguments that, at least to the lay ear, sound like they’re grounded in scientific evidence. And because most of us lack the background to evaluate their claims, they can muddy the waters around an issue that’s been settled in the scientific community.

So, as a public service, we gathered eight of the most common of these pseudoscientific arguments and asked some serious climate scientists — all working climatologists who have been widely published — to help us understand what makes these claims so misleading.

 

[BobF]

It is still an open question and plenty of scientist and weather observations go against the idea of global warming. And I provide connections to some of those contradictions. And with 2015 dates of occurrence. Lots of reading in this link.

http://notrickszone.com/category/cooling/#sthash.hRYgblcq.dpbs

 

[Don M.]

Read more here.


Most people who deny that human activity is warming the planet just dismiss a massive body of scientific evidence as a big hoax.

The points raised in this article are Valid. Perhaps the Most Important is item #7...."The earth has warmed before". Yes...but when these previous warmings have occurred, there weren't Billions of people on the planet. Now, the population and infrastructure has increased to the point that if/when the oceans rise, and major droughts, etc., occur, hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, of people will be forced to relocate. The combination of Climate Change and Overpopulation spells Nothing but Disaster for future generations. Can you imagine the chaos if most of the low lying coastal cities have to be abandoned, and hundreds of millions of people have to give up everything they have, and begin to migrate inland??? This kind of scenario would make WWII seem like a minor disagreement.

 

[BobF]

To selectively listen to only one set of data is to deny yourself some true balances of knowledge and wisdom. The list of items I posted are all dated in this year and are extremes of temperature compared to the mixed up ideas coming from the Global Warming camp that allows only one thought to be printed or talked about. Sure sounds like a warning of pure baloney to me so I do read elsewhere and often wonder just where all this predicted heat has gone over the last 15 years. With the accuracy of the instrumentation over the past couple hundred years compared to the accuracy of the instrumentation of the last 10 year years or so. There is no accurate data base for our new numbers to be compared to.

I think all you deniers of opposing ideas should read the headlines of the list I proposed and see for your self that many animals and people are suffering from this years unusual and extreme cold times in various parts of the world. Our future does not come from some political determination, it will only come from observing what is really happening with out political nonsense involved.

I am sure some of the non warming folks were not real scientist but there are also some real scientist that also say the global warming folks are not all being honest with the people either. Both sides of this discussion must still be heard by all as there are indications that not much is happening in the temp going up side. So we must either be not going to go up much at all or we may be also seeing a down turn coming soon.

Before global warming became the popular item there were concerns about global cooling arriving. Maybe that is still a good contender over global warming which seems to be failing to meet its predicted objectives.

 

[SeaBreeze]

The points raised in this article are Valid. Perhaps the Most Important is item #7...."The earth has warmed before". Yes...but when these previous warmings have occurred, there weren't Billions of people on the planet. Now, the population and infrastructure has increased to the point that if/when the oceans rise, and major droughts, etc., occur, hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, of people will be forced to relocate. The combination of Climate Change and Overpopulation spells Nothing but Disaster for future generations. Can you imagine the chaos if most of the low lying coastal cities have to be abandoned, and hundreds of millions of people have to give up everything they have, and begin to migrate inland??? This kind of scenario would make WWII seem like a minor disagreement. [/FONT][/COLOR][/SIZE]

That would be a nightmare Don.

 

[Debby]

Lots of scary stuff there. But I wonder who might be causing all the problems. I don't think the US is the major culprit here at all. We have some very good energy producing power plants compared to other places.

Our winds and pollution come from China, Japan, Russia. It seems that if we are suffering from pollution that most of it is blown in from the west, just as our weather and ocean junk is from the west of the US.

I agree that we can still improve our pollution problems. But not in a panic method of trying to use unproven methods to fix what are likely not the problem.

It will be interesting to hear of anything Obama proposes. Not sure what he wants now. Will likely hear some soon but more will come later. I hope he keeps an eye on the disruptions and costs of pushing changes too fast for no real reasons. The US is supposed to be among the cleanest and the big problems are in China and parts of Europe and Russia. Where much of our polluted air comes from on the west coast at least.

According to the following: http://www.rt.com/news/316582-china-carbon-emissions-trader/

China is the #1 polluter and the US is #2. But now China and the US have entered into an agreement where 'they' will become the worlds largest carbon emissions market managers. And both countries have decided to require improvements in your power plants emissions. I think it's wonderful and I wish Canada would take that attitude but so far, the protectionism around the oil industry is thriving.

 

[Shalimar]

Debby, I am hoping that America will pressure the Canadian gov't on this issue. Perhaps China also.

 

[BobF]

And that is the problem with the US and Canada. I don't know where those US is as dirty as China numbers come from. And the US should do nothing to mess up Canada's economy either. The economy and what they do is Canada's problem and they need no help from our current government of the US.

This current government nearly killed the US economy and have driven our debt to over 18 trillion from 7.5 billion when they took over in the last two years of Bush. The US is not a good model for Canada or anyone else to follow.

After six years of this government and we don't have all those jobs refilled yet. Remember Chrysler and their auto business? One of the first things Obama did was make sure Chrysler was sold off to get rid of their debt. They are now an Italian company. He also went into GM and we no longer have any Pontiac's and other things. He tried to get Ford to also let his government help with any debts they had but Ford refused and so far have done well without the government meddling in their business world.

Another year and a half till we are free of Obama's style of government and no matter which group goes on, they will surely be a lot less big government over the people and more likely to run from the Congress and less likely from the White House through decrees and special agencies set up to do Presidential wishes.

 

[Debby]

Bob, the 'numbers' on GHG is from your own EPA: http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/global.html 19% = #2 on global emissions.

As for our economy, thanks for thinking of us, but the oil resource we have is part of the problem. Not all of it, but part of the environment equation and our overweighted dependance on it for our economy is part of our current problem. We have not diversified which is what every economist (except that pretend economist known as Stephen Harper) will tell you is critical to financial health, i.e. diversification and therein lies a major problem for our economy.

As far as the environment is concerned, Canada's current PM has shut down science whenever it reared it's 'ugly head' but we need to wake up to the fact that the US government is making decisions that we should also be making. And the time for pointing at somebody else's bad GHG acts as an excuse for doing nothing, is over. We've contributed to the problems, we need to get engaged as well. And while maybe there is merit in the claim that temperature fluctuations are cyclical, I think human activities have probably speeded up the process and with people covering the planet, we've built huge problems into what might have been a 'minor' change considering the size of the planet/universe.

You want to blame Obama for the 18 trillion? Well, this started long before he was on the scene. It started fifty years+ ago when your country decided to be the military King of the world. You've had conflicts going on everywhere, you've been handing out weapons, training and money to terrorists all over the ME plus Ukraine and other places, you've got expensive military bases in 150 countries........you've made your military industrial complex (corporate America) rich and that goes for Democratic and Republican presidents and Houses and..... The blame I think lies on many doorsteps.