Climate Change

Two hundred years ago the world heard of extinct beasts buried in Polar regions. In Siberia hairy mammoths were found quick-frozen as they had stood—one still had buttercups in its mouth! Giant oxen, woolly rhinoceros and saber-toothed tigers were dug out in Arctic Europe and Asia; bison, wolves and mountain lions from similar latitudes in America.

Nineteenth century geologists, botanists, zoologists, astronomers, mathematicians and enthusiastic amateurs jumped in to solve the mystery. How, and when, could a region of permanent ice support huge animals.

At the same time, scientists recognized our largest trees in fossils brought back by Arctic explorers. On the forest floor from millions of years ago lay fossilized parts of Sequoia (redwoods), oak, pine, birch, poplar, walnut, ginkgo and ferns! Similar species seemed to have grown from Alaska to Greenland, Spitzbergen to Siberia.

The richness of Polar species… Botanists identified one hundred sub-species of fossil ginkgo: too many to name each separately! Mixed in with the plant fossils were layers of sea shells. Explorers also found fresh shells and whale bones piled up on terraces many meters higher than the sea level of their day. Scientists guessed the sea had risen and flooded the land. Several times. Fossil records and more recent marine debris pointed that way. And 20th century data backs them up.

Petroleum geologists noticed wedge-shaped patterns to sediment at the edge of the continents. They guessed rising and falling sea-levels were the cause. Seismic data from oilwells also pointed to MASSIVE changes in sea level. And gave an estimate of geological time and length for these cycles of relative change.

In the Cretaceous (144 – 65 million years ago), seas were as high as 300 METERS above ours. In Tertiary times (65 – 1.8 million years ago), sea levels fell 100 – 200 meters over almost one million years. Besides these large cycles, the earth goes through short ones too.

Scientists say Greenland’s climate was once like ours. An ice sheet keeps record of it over hundreds of thousands of years. So American and European teams are studying its ice cores. Frozen gas bubbles, pollen and dust grains, sea salt and other chemicals reveal conditions from when the ice formed.

One surprise: climate changed in Greenland but not globally. Another is that within a long, warming cycle there were sudden flips to a cold climate. In 8200 BCE (before current era), 3800 BCE, and lately 2600 BCE. But researchers can’t say yet what triggered these quick changes in less than ten thousand years. The good news is that humans and animals and plants survived their environment going topsy-turvy. Over and over again.

It’s past time for us to learn how meltwater, water vapour, dust and sunlight affect climate. And quickly pinpoint ocean currents and forces that keep seas circulating. Native people fish and hunt around Arctic seas. They are the best look-outs to alert us when freshwater dilutes seawater in the Beaufort, Chukchi and Bering Seas. The level of salt in the water and temperature already affect the fish, seals, walruses and whales they live off. So why don’t we teach the many theories of climate change.

Wall Street’s money-lenders and brokers control the climate change message. They profit from risks—death, disability, fire, flood—and climate makes the perfect risk. Their 2007 booklet described climate change insurance:

“Such catastrophic risks, and society’s wish to avoid them, explains why society may be willing to pay a bit ‘over-the-odds’ to reduce further the risk of irreversible climate-change-related event, i.e. people may be willing to pay more than the cost-benefit-calculated ‘social’ cost of carbon.”

Wall Street consults scientists who say we must ban coal and petroleum. If we do this, can we stop Arctic ice from melting and the seas from rising? NO. Because climate has been changing since the earliest Cambrian records (500 million years ago). We’re still learning why it switches from warm to cool and back. We can’t stop it. But our ancestors managed to survive. And so will we.

Reference

1. John Llewellyn and Camille Chaix, “The Business Of Climate Change II”, 2007.

2. Kim Murphy, “Engineers say Alaskan village could be lost as sea encroaches”, 2001.

3. Jonathan Adams et al., “Sudden climate transitions during the Quarternary”, 1999.

4. Peter R. Vail and Jan Hardenbol, “Sea Level Changes During The Tertiary”, 1979.

5. Ivan T. Sanderson, “The Riddle Of The Quick Frozen Mammoths”, 1960.

The times they are a-changin’. Californian Henry Waxman is now Chair of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. He’ll watch over energy, environment and healthcare as we try to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020; and lower them another 80% by 2050. This is going to be unpopular because the costs will be high.

Almost half of our electricity comes from coal-fired powerplants. At the last government count, 52 more of these were being developed. To generate an additional 27000 megawatts of electricity. So, while alternate generation revs up, some will suffer. But we can trust a Californian to get emissions changes passed. And the world’s biggest company seems to know it.

Earlier this month, the Chief Executive (CEO) of Exxon Mobil said he preferred a “more direct, a more transparent and a more effective approach” than what’s being talked about. That’d be the cap-and-trade of carbon allowance permits.

Several States in the US and Canada are testing ways to cap CO2 emissions by industries and individual companies. Those that stay below their cap can trade the credit to companies that go above their limits. But trading gives our financial wizards, who bankrupt whatever they touch, control. CEO Tillerson is CORRECT to not want a “Wall Street of emissions brokers.” European carbon traders also report problems.

The European Union (EU) plans to auction 20% of carbon allowance in 2013 and 100% in 2020. But the German Association of Industrial Energy Users and Generators (VIK) has an alternate plan because:

• auctions don’t help climate change;
• auctions raise costs for all electricity users;
• auctions can’t help make up lost profits for powerplants.

International consultancy ECOFYS agrees that the EU’s auctioning is very expensive and inefficient. They recommend allocating free carbon allowance based on actual production data. VIK’s alternative makes electricity FOURTEEN TIMES cheaper for consumers! And reduces as much carbon as auctioning.

Are Waxman & co. listening?

Reference

1. The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont.

2. The Western Climate Initiative: Arizona, California, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Washington, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec.

3. The Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord: Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin.

4. Russell Gold and Ian Talley, “Exxon CEO Advocates Emissions Tax”, 2009.

5. National Energy Technology Laboratory, Tracking New Coal-Fired Power Plants, 2008.

6. VIK Verband der Industriellen Energie- und Kraftwirtschaft e.V., “VIK Proposal for the EU Emissions Trading System: Correcting Shortcomings of the Current Proposal”, 2008.

Protect high-paying jobs

Like the US, Australia is moving towards emissions trading. Paul Howes, national secretary of the Australian Workers’ Union (AWU) was in the US earlier this year. His Union says carbon trading will push high-emissions industries to developing countries. Where few emissions controls let factories emit more greenhouse gases. Aluminum, for example, is made in China with TWICE as high emissions as in Australia. So the environment is worse off! Howes wants US help for global emissions standards. To keep coal, steel, cement and aluminum jobs within the developed countries.

Reduce carbon consumption

Australian Geoff Carmody also thinks that greenhouse gas controls on imports—rather than exports—can stop manufacturers moving to developing countries. Let those that consume carbon-based products pay for controlling emissions. Instead of those that mine or manufacture them.

This sounds like a way to make us change our low-cost, high-carbon lifestyle. And it might make global standards acceptable to developing countries. On the other hand, the world trade talks prove that finding agreement takes YEARS. And smokey, high-emissions industries have their own agenda.

Cover of “The Colliery Engineer”, 1913.

Take years to set up

On October 1st, Shell Oil’s Jeroen van der Veer said the 2009 UN climate change conference should set WORLDWIDE energy efficiency standards. He’s concerned that “all sorts of fragmented standards” slow progress and waste capital. In 2006 Shell’s John Hofmeister said they couldn’t deal with “fifty different policies” and wanted a national approach in the US. Why this push for ONE set of standards? It’s the best way to delay emissions standards! Big Oil used similar tactics when we reduced lead in gasoline.

New York’s Lead Experience

In the 1960s New York and California planned to cut lead in gasoline. But industry appealed to Congress. When they passed the Clean Air Act in 1970—States lost the right to cut lead in gasoline!

Children playing on city streets had blood lead levels DOUBLE what was “lead poisoning”. But for FIFTEEN MORE YEARS our law makers played footsie with Big Oil and the automakers. And all that time thousands of New York children had poisoned blood. In 1985 Washington banned lead in gasoline.

Both John McCain and Barack Obama have low-carbon plans. We, little people, MUST participate and shape a carbon policy that works for us.

Reference
1. Christian Kerr, “Global approach would go well with Shell boss”, 2008.

2. Paul Kelly, “Rudd’s carbon scheme chokes”, 2008.

3. The Australian Workers’ Union , “the national emissions trading scheme”, 2008.

4. David Schoenbrod, “Saving Our City From D.C.”, 2006.

The Minerals Management Service has been put in charge over commercial fish farms at unused oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. The same waters where we’ve destroyed marine ecosystems already.

In Florida hundreds of gentle manatees wash up dead, bleeding from the nose. Gassed to death by toxic algae.

For now, tourists and local residents are luckier. They drive inland to escape the red tides of choking gas and dead fish that linger for months each year. Scientists say fertilizer runoff is the trigger.

Industrial farms for fruit, vegetables and grains, cattle ranchers and urban gardeners use about 20 MILLION tons of fertilizer a year. This washes down creeks and waterways to empty into the sea. And there it grows forests of algae so deadly that 2000-pound mammals die from their fumes.

Nature created large schools of little fish and oysters, to eat algae and filter the water.

But we ate all the oysters and ground up the fishies. For industrial fertilizer and chicken feed. So the algae grow and die unchecked, sucking up the oxygen. And large fish suffer without enough of it breathe.

There’s a crisis in the insect world too. Honey bees have disappeared from their hives. Ice-cream producers worry how they’ll make almond and pistachio flavors without bees to pollinate flowers. Scientists dissect dead bees, and test empty hives, to find the killer. Bee keepers in China’s Sichuan Province could tell us, if asked.

In the 1980s, Sichuan pear farmers were encouraged to use strong insecticides. In Hanyuan County they sprayed as told, and noticed that the bees disappeared. Since the 1990s, they have to arrange for each pear blossom to be pollinated by hand! It’s stressful work but nearby bee keepers won’t let their bees anywhere near those trees. Reason: industrial-strength poisons KILL bees.

This summer, the Fish and Wildlife Service is warning cavers to avoid contamination from dead and dying bats in caves. People in New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts and Vermont are alarmed by dead bats with a white fungus around the nose. Found in yards, in attics, on the side of houses. Tens of thousands of dead bats. Since a single bat can eat 3000 pest insects in one night, our crops are in danger.

Scientists can’t keep up with everything that’s going wrong. But the good news is each State has officers like Ruth Wallace in Missouri. She helps farmers, ranchers and urban developers find cost-effective solutions. And is happy to share what’s worked.

#1 : Design for the watershed.
Instead of starting urban development by laying out straight roads, begin by identifying how water naturally drains. And place green buffers between proposed buildings and the water drainage route. So what if this makes the roads less straight. We can live with curvy roads if that cleans our water.

#2 : Build with less concrete.
The more land we leave natural, the better sand and gravel and plants can filter out toxic stuff from runoff. And the cleaner is the water that reaches the sea. Do we need roads as wide as we’re designing? Make them narrow and reduce oily runoff. Keep planted ditches alongside to absorb water. Remove the curbs and stormwater gutters.

#3 : Check water for phosphorus.
As little as 0.025 mg/liter of phosphorus in lakes and reservoirs makes algae grow abnormally fast. Wastewater treatment plants along rivers can help by reducing this chemical in the water they release.

#4 : Landscape with native plants.

Orchardgrass, bromegrass, tall fescue, lespedeza and clover provide rich grazing. And let ranchers fatten cattle while cutting fertilizer bills! They make hay land profitable too. Plus, native plants are naturally drought and pest resistant habitats on wildlife land. They rebuild soil quality with their deep root systems.

Urban gardeners save water and pesticides with native species. Gently-sloping depressions catch stormwater, and provide a backyard wetland for insects and birds.

#5 : Green buffers and roofs.
Edge feathering of land with trees, shrubs and grass makes for a buffer strip along water channels. It protects stream banks from erosion—how most phosphorus, that sticks to soil particles, gets into water. And plants break down animal waste and fertilizer.

Green roofs that grow plants on 3-5 inches of soil, soak up stormwater and grow vegetables and reduce energy bills! New York City will give tax credits for 25% of the cost—if at least 50% of roof space is converted to a roof garden.

#6 : Fenced cattle = cleaner water.
Phosphorus is present in manure. Keep cattle away from creeks and ditches, and there’s less work for water treatment plants.

Ruth also recommends we read Bruce Babbitt’s “Cities In The Wilderness”.

There aren’t enough monitors for agribusiness so we have to protect ourselves. As consumers we can buy locally grown produce and fruit at farmers’ markets. Plant, and exchange, heirloom seeds. Buy a share in family farms—we agree to pay the farmer in advance for harvest that’s delivered later. Community Supported Agriculture, it’s called. The benefits: small, family farms can find cash when they need it; we get organic produce and fruit; and stop our money going to corporations like Cargill, Archer-Daniels Midland, Monsanto and Hormel. As shareholders, demand that chemical giants be accountable for their environmental violations. And petition our Senators to put some teeth in environmental fines.

All life’s related. The poison that kills off one species needs just a few steps to get to us.

Reference
1. Ruth Wallace, Water Pollution Control Branch, Missouri Department of Natural Resources.

2. New York State Law A11226 Diaz RS7553 Lanza, August 2008.

3. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “Unidentified Ailment Threatens Bat Population”, 2008.

4. Michael Risinit, “Dying Bats Befuddle Scientists, 2008.

5. Food & Water Watch, “Cargill: A Corporate Threat to Food and Farming”, 2008.

6. Kenneth R Weiss, “Altered Oceans”, 2006.

7. Tang Ya, Xie Jia-sui, Chen Keming, “Hand pollination of pears and its implications for biodiversity conservation and environmental protection”, 2005.

Thirty years of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) prove that we, ordinary Americans, must enlighten our politicians. For some reason, they can’t tell when scientific gibberish hides nonsense. So, corporations take advantage and sell them agendas that destroy all life forms.

Breeding, as we traditionally know it, mates individuals of different varieties within a species. Or crosses related species. To create an offspring with genes of both parents. The child’s genes are different versions of the parents’ but coded for the same functions.

GMO are made by tampering with natural DNA. Genetic material from UNRELATED species are artificially combined with a host organism. To form a new species, coded for a previously unknown function. But scientists can’t create genetic diversity. Modified breeds start in a single cell so each generation is weaker and less stable. The genetic synthesis rearranges itself or becomes inactive. Worse, the modified DNA recombines with bacteria and viruses in soil, air, or inside the mouth and gut and lungs of animals and humans. And destabilizes every life form: bacteria, fungi, algae, plants, animals and humans!

Corporations fund inserting of DNA from herbicides, viruses, bacteria and humans into our food crops. And the World Bank twists arms to make poor nations buy this genetic rubbish. One example is farmers who scratch out a living in India. Since 1998 they have to buy GM seeds from Cargill, Syngenta, and Monsanto. Every year. The crop yields are so low they need MORE fertilizer and pesticide. Every year. Farmers lose money on failed crops, mortgage their patch of land and lose that. Then, what’s left?

In August 2002, Zambia, Mozambique and Zimbabwe questioned the safety of American GM food aid. The World Bank asked its chief scientist, Dr. Robert Watson, to study the risks and opportunities of GM food. So FOUR HUNDRED scientists compared GM and conventional crops.

Their report was published in April, 2008:

“…Between 1950 and 1980, prior to the development of GMOs, modern varieties of wheat increased yields up to 33% even in the absence of fertilizer…data based on some years and some GM crops indicate highly variable 10-33% yield gains in some places and yield declines in others.”

The US was “unable to provide unqualified endorsement” of it!

At last month’s world free-trade talks, the Indian representative wouldn’t budge on India’s right to protect its agriculture. And China’s representative sided with him, for his nation’s food security. Only our US rep opposed them. She was for nothing but free trade. So the corporate agenda trumps complaints from all the world.

How can we, the poor and ill and homeless and hungry, change our nation’s agenda. By becoming a concerned community that petitions. We must tell our elected representatives that we want safe, GMO-free, locally grown produce and fruit, like the rest of the world. Keep asking what they’re doing for OUR food security. And when they tell us, push them to do more.

Reference
1. International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), Executive Summary of the Synthesis Report, 2008.

2. William Engdahl, “Seeds of Destruction: The Geopolitics of GM Food”, 2004.

3. Mae-Wan Ho and Joe Cummins, “Genetically Modified Organisms 25 Years On”, 2002.