Saturday, December 12, 2009

Don't Blame Cows for Climate Change

Global warming (GW) is well proven complex of climate changes, which manifests mainly by increase of area of deserts and by glacier melting in latest 50 - 70 years.


Because thermal capacity of oceanic water is at least 5.000x higher, then this one of atmosphere, global mean temperature of atmosphere is much less relevant, then the global mean temperature of ocean.  And this temperature is still raising in accordance to increase of carbon dioxide concentration, despite the weak slow down of warming of atmosphere in recent decade.


Other phenomena, like increase of global temperature of atmosphere aren't so relevant for GW, because they undergo El-Nina / El-Nino cycle and solar cycle due the wobble of center of mass in Sun-Jupiter system (because mean solar cycle is faster then Jupiter period, it's probable, some other planets are affecting it, too). The center of mass controls the direction of global current of plasma beneath surface of Sun, which affects the frequency of sun spots (i.e. magnetic bubbles in plasma, raising to surface) and solar eruptions. The charged particles of solar wind penetrating the atmosphere of Earth are serving like condensation nuclei of fog and snow and they're making Earth surface more reflective.

The effect of ocean heating is not so straightforward. In general, it increases the number of convective cells in our atmosphere and frequency of their switching in similar way, like during heating of water in open vessel. Note that this change increases continental character of the weather, so that above continents the global warming may even lead to temperature records on both sides of temperature scale.
At the moment, when convective circulation switches from horizontal to vertical, an ice age period may occur, because Earth becomes intensively cooled. This is forced by hysteresis, because snow-white surface of Earth becomes more reflective at the same time. Just after cooling of oceans (which takes some time due their thermal capacity) the warm period is restored. Here are some indicia, the start of ice age can be very fast (compare the disaster movie Day after tomorrow) and period of fast paced global warming had preceded this event in younger dryas period, so maybe we are facing ice age soon.

Concerning the hypothesis of man made global warming, it's proven statistically, people are making weather warmer and drier on per week basis (1, 2), so no further evidence is necessary - we can just extrapolate these weekend fluctuations to decades of years.  During last warming periods the rise of carbon dioxide followed warming with delay of many decades with compare to present situation - so we can see this argument of many skeptics rather as another evidence for man-made origin of global warming. In addition, we can consider for example September 11, 2001 climate impact study. Measurements showed that without contrails, the local diurnal temperature range (difference of day and night temperatures) was about 1 degree Celsius higher than immediately before.

In my opinion, human activity started irreversible process, which couldn't be reversed so easily due the hysteresis described above. Nevertheless, we should save money from carbon dioxide taxes for faster research of alternative energy sources to replace fossil fuel as soon, as possible. This would be useful with respect to both prevention of ice age period, both prevention of another rise of carbon dioxide concentration. Carbon dioxide dissolves the shells of coral and plankton, thus destroys the fishing grounds and diversity of biosphere.

But the main risk of fossil fuel depletion is the global nuclear war for the rest of their sources. It's generally ignored, the reason of the recent oil & food price crisis was always lost USA war. These wars are very expensive and at the case of global nuclear conflict the things would get even way, way worse.

Concerning the rise of carbon dioxide, assigned to farming of poor countries, often neglected point is, many animals are able to collect proteins from life environment more efficiently, then the agricultural plants by using of solar radiation, because they can consume even the plants growing in wild, which people cannot. Which is the reason, why people in rain forests, deserts or arctic areas are feeded by meat preferably - the farming of moose is apparently more economical and therefore ecological(!) there, then the growing of plants.

For example, for production of rice it's required 2552 m³ of water/ ton rice, whereas for production of one ton of poultry 3809 m³ of water its required. Therefore the consumption of poultry may sound like ineffective waste of water for someone - but the content of proteins in rice is ten times lower, then in chicken meat! This explains, why people from deserts in Chad or Mongolia are living from pasturage, instead of agriculture. I even suspect, farming is more ecological then the agriculture as a whole, providing it doesn't use agricultural products (which usually does). Methane released by cows on pastures is negligible with compare to amount of methane, released by annual decomposition of plants without cows.

"Those who do not think about the future, do not deserve to have one."

68 comments:

Zephir said...

Russian secret service blamed for hack

According to Walker, a senior member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has voiced suspicions that the hack job was not the handy work of a lone amateur but that of a "highly sophisticated, politically motivated operation. ...It's a carefully made selection of emails and documents that's not random," Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, IPCC vice chairman, told the paper.

For a start, the hacked data apparently surfaced on the server of a Russian internet security company based in the Siberian city of Tomsk, where the FSB has an office. And the FSB, argues Walker, is notorious for grooming hackers and launching cyber attacks.

What's more, by keeping the Arctic Circumpolar Seas ice-free all year round, climate change will unlock Russia's enormous and lucrative reserves of fossil fuel. The suggestion is that Russia will welcome this effect of global warming.

So: Russia not only had the capacity to carry out the hacking job, it also has a motive, as nations rich in fossil fuels will be penalised by any post-Kyoto agreement that seeks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, suggests Walker.

P.S. How global warming skeptics are falsifying data...

(image)

El Cid said...

Lubos doesn't believe that climate change has been caused by CO2 emissions, even, he doesn't believe in climate change. He thinks the climate change is an invention of the environmental organisations and the leftist groups to fight against the capitalism system. By the way is El Niño and La Niña.

El Cid said...

Can you prove using AWT that the climate change is due to the CO2 emissions? No. So, you don't know what is speaking about. As far as I can see, you are being influenced by the leftist propaganda. Don't be silly, Zephir, the climate change is its new religion.

El Cid said...

Due to people like you, we are suffering this economic crisis so big. It's a shame.

El Cid said...

Who do you think you are? Al Gore, maybe? What do you want to do? Saving the World. Zephir, the man that saved the World. HAHAHA!

Zephir said...

We all are facing fossil fuel depletion in near future - and the fear of global warming movement is the only independent force, which can help people in thinking about their future in advance, i.e. without risk of global nuclear war for the rest of fossil fuel supplies.

Al Gore propaganda is just helping civilization to keep oil prices down. Without Him, we would all already pay arabian and russian theorists 200+ USD per gallon for their oil, thus helping them for victory in arms-race. This is why He got (and deserved) His Nobel peace price.

It's not strange at all, short-seeing and schematically thinking people (..theoretical physicists in particular) cannot see these apparent logical connections - because they cannot derive them by their formula.

Zephir said...

/*..Due to people like you, we are suffering this economic crisis so big. It's a shame....*/
The graph above linked illustrates clearly, both recent food & oil price crisis were induced by USA wars (in Vietnam 1975 and Iraq 2007), which depleted USA economy. The antiglobal warming movement is just keeping oil prices low, thus keeping economy stable.

El Cid said...

You are always obsessed with the untrue statement, that there is a fossil fuel depletion. What are you talking about? You are a simple mind that has been influenced by communist propaganda first and by leftist-ecologic propaganda later. There is plenty of fossil fuel for hundred (or thousand) of years. People like you, that are enemies of the freedom, are doing untrue statements about the climate change, the impact of the CO2 emissions and so. But doesn't matter. If I had got a lot of money, I would spend it in a fast, nice and expensive car, and I would like to spend a big amount of gasoline, getting from here to there just for fun.

El Cid said...

No problem with the oil price. The market works very well by its own. So, don't write such nonsense, please.

Zephir said...

/*...that has been influenced by communist propaganda..*/
From where you got it? Commies never cared about life environment in the same way, like you.

/*..market works very well by its own..*/
We are in the worst financial crisis since Depression..

Zephir said...

/*...I would like to spend a big amount of gasoline, getting from here to there just for fun.. */

LOL, enjoy it...:-)

Zephir said...

Concerning the recent data presented by Lindzen, the presentation of temperature differences and anomalies instead of real trends is favorite cheat of GW skeptics... Never look at the derivations at the case of long-term climatic trends.

Motl's trend, real trend

Anyway, GW skeptics are faking data often (1, 2)

Zephir said...

Science denialism works differently. Creationists are unmoved by the wealth of fossil, molecular, and anatomical evidence for evolution. Global-warming denialists are unimpressed by mountains of climate data. Denialists ignore overwhelming evidence, focusing instead on a few hoaxes, such as Piltdown Man, or a few stolen e-mails. For denialists, opinion polls and talk radio are more important than thousands of peer-reviewed journal articles. ... If denialists had evidence disproving global warming or evolution, they could submit it to scientific conferences and journals, inviting analysis by scientists. But, knowing their arguments don't hold water, they spread misinformation in arenas not subject to expert scrutiny: mass-market books, newspapers, talk radio, and blogs.

El Cid said...

You're just another climate activist, who are opposed to the development of the most successful economic system in history. A system based on free market economy, I mean. Don't you know that we are living in the stage of history where the poverty has reached the lowest rates? Climate activists like you prefer that people go hungry. So, climate activism is not more than a new form of organised crime or mafia and their practitioners must be judged. They must pay for their crimes. Incidentally, Al Gore is an envious and resentful man because he didn't win the US presidential election of 2000, and he is trying to revenge against his own country by means of deception and lies, now. Your stupid data show nothing to me. It's not science, it's just bullshit. And I don't have anything more to say about it. I have enough of this.

El Cid said...

The Free Nations have won the war against The Evil Empire once, and The Free Nations will win the war against the ecologist-felonious organisations.

El Cid said...

I agree with Lubos on this issue:

... India Today which has circulation of 500,000 just published an article about the unethical if not criminal behavior of IPCC boss Rajendra Pachauri ...

Zephir said...

/*..unethical if not criminal behavior of IPCC boss Rajendra Pachauri..*/
So what he did, exactly? Owning a company is not crime in most successful economic system in history. A system based on free market economy, I mean.

Zephir said...

Temperature of ocean is still raising - and water in oceans has a 3.000x higher thermal capacity, then the atmosphere.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090725120303.htm

The trick is, warmer ocean doesn't mean warmer atmosphere, just drier atmosphere - especially when global atmospheric circulation switches from horizontal to vertical one.

Zephir said...

Global warming propaganda turning kids into snitches at home
This is logical, because young people are feeling more responsible for future destiny of human civilization - they've whole their life ahead.

Whereas older people are more selfish and they don't prefer to spend money for improving of quality of life, simply because they're finishing it. Such people aren't willing to understand, the greatest risk of fossil fuel depletion is nuclear war for the rest of fossil fuel source - they're conservative and wouldn't change their life preferences, until both geopolitical situation, both life environment become destabilized completely.
We can even met with stance of older people, "I can tell yea, young people need to experience war to learn more responsible life, yea!."
Such opinion is simply ridiculous - it's just the contemporary adult generation, who is behaving short-sightedly and voluntaristic way. It's just a few years, after conservative government of George Bush planned nuclear attack of Iraq. This cartoon (backup) sums up the idiocy of the "climate change is a hoax" "arguments" nicely.

Zephir said...

How Cows (Grass-Fed Only) Could Save the Planet

Zephir said...

Recently another "evidence" suported by "trends of trends"
has
been given
. It seams, the presentation of temperature differences and anomalies instead of real trends is favorite cheat of GW skeptics...
http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/Global_Temp_Anomalies.jpg

Zephir said...

Motl, the politician: "But where I completely disagree is his opinion that the governments should artificially inflate the price of fossil fuels, in order to stimulate progress. Well, the Arabs and the Iranians can do it for you. I think it is a lose-lose situation for the consumers - and those who use energy to produce something new - when the energy sources get expensive."

This is a central problem of Motl's approach to fossil fuel replacement: Is it really better to pay for high oil price to Arabs and the Iranians - or own western government? motl_oil.gif

Of course, for young "conservative expert" makes no problem to pay Arabs "free market" prices for oil - and to subsequently to pay government one trillon USD for keeping it low - rather then to invest into fossil fuel replacement in timely fashion. This is how conservationists are "thinking" in pure "free market" way.

Zephir said...

No Scandal behind these gates

Lately there’s been a rash of stories all ending with the word “gate” and all questioning the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – the IPCC. Here’s our handy guide to the truth behind the gates...

Zephir said...

Sun responsible for Europe's colder winters. When the Sun's magnetic output is low, winters in Europe tend to be cooler than average - whereas higher output corresponds to warmer winters.

physicsworld.com

There is a tangible evidence of correlation of climatic cycles and periods of solar activity, as expressed by frequency of sunspots.

http://tinyurl.com/yhhff54

In my opinion it's generated by Coriolis force, which is switching circulation beneath surface of Sun. The direction of this force is driven by location of center of mass of whole solar system, although the eleven years long period of Jupiter planet is most important there.

Maybe ancient astrologers were quite right, while deriving the changes of climate and human psychics just from conjunctions of planets (wars for sources in particular).

Zephir said...

Deniers often pile up comments on climate change-related articles, most of which may be grouped into the following categories:

Humor (i.e. "What's next, cow farts?" or "Since carbonated beverages release CO2 into the atmosphere, will CalEPA be outlawing beer and sodas in California?")
Political (making fun of Al Gore, partisan name calling)
Bullying, name calling, threats
Despair (i.e. "we're all doomed, humans will go extinct anyway")
Junk science -- quoting disreputed sources that reinforce denier preconceptions, or using simple but wrong aphorisms (confusing weather and climate, or saying the climate is always changing)
Obfuscation - burying your opposition under a mountain of obscure but usually irrelevant statistics
Economic fear -- (i.e. "if we take action on climate, all businesses will leave CA, and we'll lose jobs")

Zephir said...

In general, I welcome the anti-global warming movement, because the replacement of fossil fuels sources to more renewable ones decreases the risk of global nuclear conflict for the rest of oil. We are losing millions years of genetic information evolution due the decline of biodiversity, which could be used for development of cancer cure, nanotechnologies, etc. And the Nature is too beautiful for to be destroyed by covetous people.

But the business with carbon fees, into which Pachauri is involved personally is simply a fringe idea - it just enables to increase the carbon quotes for western companies, while the India and other countries are building another carbon industry by using of these money for their private purposes. IMO Pachauri is one of the main persons, who are responsible for such misinterpretation of carbon taxes and he should be replaced.

The carbon taxes must be used for development of alternative technologies, not for feeding of population explosion in these countries.

My arguments are invariant to some hypothesis of man-made global warming. The risk of global nuclear war for the rest of fossil fuel sources is much more dangerous for human civilization, then the consequences of global warming, whose trends or even origins are much more complex and fuzzy, then the simple fact, the oil sources will be depleted soon. We shouldn't fight against global warming, but against lost of energy sources. Paradoxically, with sufficient energy sources we could thermo-regulate Earth climate to suit our needs, we would have inexhaustible source of drinking watter and so on. We should forget to carbon fuel industry ASAP - we would still need the oil as a raw material for plastic industry.

Zephir said...

Anyone want to list out how many times peak oil has been predicted, passed, and predicted again?

Well, the first problem is, the companies are lying about actual state of oil resources, because the higher their claimed state is, the higher production quotas are enabled by governments. The second problem is, more and more energy is consumed for production of water vapor and additional energy required for mining and oil production. In 1931 the energy of one gallon of oil was sufficient for production of another 131 gallons of crude oil, in 1971 it was only 17 and now (2002) it's five to seven gallons only. I.e. the production of oil may appear stable, but the actual speed of oil resources depletion is increasing.

Monetary economy is not even able to control itself, as it always operates with actual prizes - not to say about oil production and consumption. So I don't think, the price of oil, which is kept low artificially can indicate or even regulate the actual state of oil depletion.

Zephir said...

The biggest problem of emissions trading

is the fact, it virtualizes the main purpose of carbon tax, i.e. the providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants, the collection of money into introduction of green-house gases free technologies in particular.

Instead of it, the rich companies of western word are sponsoring the introduction of older fossil carbon technologies at the less developed countries and nothing forces them to limit their own production of green-house gases.

And I'm not talking about my theory of global warming, in which most of global warming comes from annihilation of dark matter, which the solar system is passing through by now.

Zephir said...

The problem with cold fusion is, it's actually economically less significant business, than the fossil fuel business. Because I you find the very cheap process, which produces energy and it's very easy to imitate, you cannot make too much money about it - it's like the selling of bottled air.

In this way, our civilization could die of energy starvation, albeit we are sitting on the pile of energy, because we have no economical mechanisms, how to motivate people in its utilization.

Zephir said...

The deforestation could really cool the atmosphere, but it will make it more dry too. We should separate two aspects of climatic change - the rising of temperature and the rise of droughts. Actually there is no reason for hawing more dry atmosphere, when the temperature is rising. Whereas I've many evidences of the geothermal origin of global warming, the explanation of droughts is not so straightforward at all and it could be of the anthropocentric origin quite easily. The production of aerosols increases the number or condensation nuclei, so that the droplet of water remain smaller and they cannot coalesce and to fall to Earth. The presence of global warming has nothing to do with this fact, no matter whether it is of anthropogenic origin or not.

The rising of global temperatures is not so big problem for contemporary civilization, the droughts and spreading of deserts is. So we should protect our tropical forests by all means possible. The protection of tropical forest has its another reason in protection of genetic diversity, which is conserving the products of billion years of evolution. The conservatively thinking people, who are supporting free market don't care about price of endangered species, until it cannot be expressed with money. They don't care, if we destroy many precious species, which may contain the cancer cures or which could lead us to various technological solutions, until we cannot exploit them right now. This is because free market economy always operates with current prices, so it doesn't care about future and it's not even able to drive itself - and we are suffering with periodical economical crisis. Briefly speaking, the economical mechanisms, which are working well at the local level cannot be applied at the global level and vice-versa: the socialism and centralized planning isn't applicable for driving of economy at the communal level. The people need to realize these connections urgently.

Zephir said...

This study shows for the first time statistical evidence that when anthropogenic aerosols over the eastern United States during summertime are at their weekly mid-week peak, tornado and hailstorm activity there is also near its weekly maximum.

http://cdn.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/2011/2-newresearchm.jpg

http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016214

Zephir said...

The fight against global warming with aerosols is widespread nonsense, as it deepens the most worrisome impact of global warming, i.e. the droughts. It leads into nucleation of many, but tiny water droplets, which are both source of smog, both cannot condense into rain gravitationally and as such they evaporate before they can contribute to the circulation of watter in the atmosphere. In addition, above certain limit concentration of the nuclei the resulting water droplets are so small, they're absorbing infrared radiation instead of reflecting it.

Zephir said...

Who's behind the 'information attacks' on
climate scientists?

Zephir said...

National Research Council finds that humans are triggering earthquakes because of fracking

Zephir said...

Computer models utterly fail to predict climate changes in regions: Climate models outperformed by random walks

Zephir said...

OSHA and NIOSH issue hazard alert for silica exposure in fracking operations

Zephir said...

These are very dramatic events for the outer continental shelf, at least 2°C warmer than we've seen since 2001... Near-bottom temperatures of 18°C on the outer shelf are extremely high for late autumn
Such a findings could serve as another evidence of my geothermal theory of global warming. The solar system is passing through the dense cloud of dark matter (essentially slow neutrinos), which do accelerate the decay of radioactive atoms (like the potassium) inside the Earth mantle, crust and marine water. The heating of Earth mantle has its impact into elevated level of volcanism, frequency of earth quakes and the shift of magnetic poles too. The evidence for this theory is actually overhelming, but because mainstram science is deterministic, it doesn't take the ten 10% indicia like the 100% evidence, but it has a tendency to ignore them all, because each of these indicia can be explained with another nine ways. The fact, all these indicia overlap mutually bothers anybody here.
Mainstream science deals with evidence only at the moment, when the reliability of some indicia exceeds 50%, which means, it cannot be explained with anything else. The scientists simply wait for construction of some deterministic model, which could be expressed and published in form of math, because only mathematical reasoning is accepted in contemporary science. Such an ignorant approach indeed prolongs the research and safe jobs and salaries of mainstream scientists (they have nowhere to hurry, until their money are going) - but it slows down the understanding of important connections. Because the mainstream scientists have an informational monopoly for their conclusions, they're not threatened with any competition from outside and nothing forces them to consider ideas from outside, despite the internet is full of it. The neutrino based theory was actually a subject of famous "2012" movie, which has been labeled with NASA as the "worst unscientific movie" ever.

Zephir said...

Antarctica: It’s Getting Hot at the Bottom of the Planet

Zephir said...

Wind plants may affect the local climate in [url=http://news.discovery.com/earth/weather-extreme-events/hot-wind-farms-120429.htm]quite observable[/url] way and contribute to global warming and droughts ([url=http://www.ict-aeolus.eu/images/horns_rev.jpg]image[/url])

Zephir said...

The Inuits who live from meat nearly exclusively weren't extraordinarily unhealthy, until the environmental pollution didn't contaminate their food with mercury and chlorinated phenols. This study links the Inuit's game rich diet to "remarkable" protection against heart disease and prostate cancer", for example. So please, think again before you apply all these well intended and "naturally looking" advices of what the environmentally viable and healthy food actually is.

Zephir said...

hockey stick graph

Zephir said...

Two young children in Pennsylvania were banned from talking about fracking for the rest of their lives under a gag order imposed under a settlement reached by their parents with a leading oil and gas company.

Zephir said...

Study finds higher methane, ethane, propane levels in drinking water sources that are closer to fracking wells The radone concentrations weren't traced yet...

Zephir said...

New Study Finds High Levels of Arsenic in Groundwater Near Fracking Sites

Zephir said...

Since records began in 1776, the people of Youngstown, Ohio had never experienced an earthquake. However, from January 2011, 109 tremors were recorded and new research in Geophysical Research-Solid Earth reveals how this may be the result of shale fracking.

Zephir said...

Radioactive Wastewater From Fracking Is Found in a Pennsylvania Stream

Zephir said...

Renewable energy needs copper, steel, aluminium, indium, neodym and concrete. If the contribution from wind turbines and solar energy to global energy production is to rise from the current 400 TWh to 12,000 TWh in 2035 and 25,000 TWh in 2050, as projected by the World Wide Fund for Nature, about 3,200 million tonnes of steel, 310 million tonnes of aluminium and 40 million tonnes of copper will be required to build the latest generations of wind and solar facilities. This corresponds to a 5 to 18% annual increase in the global production of these metals for the next 40 years. Most of indium is consumed with solar cell industry - but we have reserves of indium to the next fifteen years only. This is not how the sustainable evolution is supposed to look like... And 25,000 TWh is still just one sixth of the total world energy consumption. It's evident, the cold fusion is not the alternative, it's actually the only one possible option of the energetic future of human civilization. The faster we will implement it, the better.

Zephir said...

How the western governments actually support the fight against global warming A new report from British think tank the Overseas Development Institute finds that producers of oil, gas and coal received $500 billion in government subsidies in 2011, with the top 11 "rich-country emitters" — the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, Russia, France, Spain, Italy, Australia, Japan and Poland — spending $74 billion on subsidies. This is eight-times more, than on subsidized into renewable energy. Now it's easy to understand, why these governments ignore the cold fusion research for decades.

Zephir said...

Proponents of mainstream science feel unsure: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. Why don’t all newspapers do the same?

Zephir said...

There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age. Indeed, the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated the peer-reviewed literature even then.

Zephir said...

Independent fracking tests from Duke University researchers found combustible levels of methane, Reveal Dangers Driller’s Data Missed

Zephir said...

Babies near gas wells more likely to have birth defects. Researchers analyzed birth defects among nearly 125,000 births in Colorado towns with fewer than 50,000 people between 1996 and 2009, examining how close the mothers lived to natural gas wells.

Zephir said...

Mining Tar Sands Produces Much More Air Pollution Than We Thought Impact assessments considered these PAHs "disposed," Wania says. "But when they get mixed up with hot water, that creates ideal conditions for the PAHs to mobilize and enter the atmosphere."

Zephir said...

According to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, whole towns in Texas are now running out of water, having sold their aquifers for fracking. I doubt that this is a boom that is going to appeal to the rest of the world; many others agree.

Zephir said...

Yellowstone is releasing lots of helium gas. In this place we can recall my theory of geothermal origin of global warming, in which the anomalously high He-3 production wouldn't result from its accumulation inside of Earth mantle, but from neutrino catalyzed cold fusion process inside of Earth crust, which has been assumed with Stephen Jones in 1986 already.

Zephir said...

In general, the production of food requires more energy, than it can be utilized from food. So that the utilization of edible plants is waste of energy in general. In the USA (i.e. economically closed system) nobody would pay for energy from energy crops, because of its high price.

It just works so, because the cost of life and expenses are much lower in development countries. Not only the price of human work is lower there, but you're not required to pay for fertilizers, when you're farming at the freshly deforested areas. But when the soil becomes exhausted, it will bring the speel of death for both economy of hosting country both for global environment (not to say about lost of biodiversity during deforestation).

The conclusion is, so called green technologies are just another form of neocolonialism and devastation of biosphere - but masked for environmental protection this time, which I do perceive particularly ironical.

Zephir said...

Livestock can produce food that is better for the people and the planet

Zephir said...

Dr. Julio Friedmann demonstrating his commitment to the energy status quo: “Our job is not commercialization or the determination of economic viability,” Dr. Julio Friedmann recently told the Energy Commerce Oversight Subcommittee of the United States House of Representatives (the lower house of the US Congress). Dr. Friedmann is the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Energy for Clean Coal. If creation of commercially viable technologies that can ensure economic vitality is not the Department of Energy’s job, one has to wonder what the department’s purpose is. What exactly is this organization spending Americans’ taxpayers money upon. A look at Friedmann and his “job” shows it is not creating new sources of energy. Friedmann is considered a key staff member at the Department of Energy (DOE). It will cost the US government $4.3 billion to build a test plant for one clean coal technology called Carbon Capture and Sequestration or CSS and that technology may not work, critic Daniel Simmons of the Institute for Energy research has alleged. Now just imagine what could be done if that $4.3 billion were spent on LENR and similar cutting edge technologies. Brillouin claims to have a hot tube LENR boiler that could replace coal burning boilers that could be tested for $20 million, yet the company is essentially begging for venture capital from private investors. It needs a few million dollars to build a prototype. One thing is obvious from Dr. Friedmann’s testimony big government cannot be trusted to solve the energy problem. Private industry is going to have to step up and fight this battle. That’s why the news of Cherokee Partners $11 million investment in Andrea Rossi’s e-cat LENR technology is such great news. It’s also why efforts like the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project to disseminate Francessco Celani’s LENR technology are so important. Big science and big government are now so mired down in politics that they are incapable of even trying to solve the situation. If the Department of Energy had been in business in 1900 it would have been financing improved buggy whips instead of investing in automobiles. It looks like the Department of Energy is too enamored of the last century’s technologies to even try to address this century’s problems. The government’s horse and buggy is not going to put an end to our growing energy crisis.

Zephir said...

Is the CO2 effect saturated? After the famous Arrhenius paper in 1896, where he did the first calculations of the CO2 greenhouse effect, his theory was dismissed by Angstrom with a simple experiment. He let an infrared beam pass through a tube filled with CO2 and measured the emerging light intensity. Upon reducing CO2 concentration in the tube, only a tiny difference could be found and he concluded that very few CO2 molecules are enough to completely absorb the IR beam. The conclusion was that a CO2 increase could not matter. This was the birth of the first skeptic of the then called "CO2 theory" and of the more recent "CO2 effect is saturated" skeptic argument.

Zephir said...

Study in the journal Science: "Methane Leaks from American Natural Gas Systems," finds that emissions of the greenhouse gas are 50% higher than EPA estimates.

Zephir said...

Human Activity May Have Triggered Fatal Italian Earthquakes

Zephir said...

List of antialarmist articles 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Zephir said...

Controversial climate change boss uses car AND driver to travel one mile to office... (but he says YOU should use public transport)

Zephir said...

The so-called "renewables" and "green-solution" just [url=http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v6/n11/full/ngeo1993.html]convert[/url] the fossil-fuel crisis into raw source crisis. As [url=http://www.climatenewsnetwork.net/2013/10/renewables-need-huge-mineral-supply]this article[/url] point outs clearly, a shift to renewable energy will just replace one non-renewable resource (fossil fuel) with another (metals and minerals). Right now wind and solar energy meet only about 1 percent of global demand; hydroelectricity meets about 7 percent.  For example, to match the power generated by fossil fuels or nuclear power stations, the construction of solar energy farms and wind turbines will gobble up 15 times more concrete, 90 times more aluminum and 50 times more iron, copper and glass. Also, the wind turbines only work when there’s wind, although not too much, and the solar panels only work during the day and then only when it’s not cloudy.  Other than that, alternative energy is perfect.

Zephir said...

Ethanol fuel not so green after all.  Running vehicles on ethanol rather than gasoline increases ground-level ozone pollution.

Zephir said...

New studies reveal at least 8 chemicals commonly used in fracking fluid are known to be toxic to mammals, at least 60 others have unknown health effects

Zephir said...

New study concludes that there is 99.999% certainty humans are driving global warming

Zephir said...

Wind and wave farms could affect Earth's
energy balance