Ummm....

Wasn't the Kyoto protocal really "abandoned" by America prior to 2001? As I recall, the current administration merely chose to continue the abandonment previously begun.

"On November 12, 1998, Vice President Al Gore symbolically signed the protocol. Both Gore and Senator Joseph Lieberman indicated that the protocol would not be acted upon in the Senate until there was participation by the developing nations.[67] The Clinton Administration never submitted the protocol to the Senate for ratification."

I wonder if Arnie drove one of his Hummers to the airport?

"The north polar ice cap is melting; it may be gone in 23 years,"

"And sea level may rise 25 meters this century" And monkeys may fly out of ......

Too bad no one in China could care less about pointless western guilt, and are perfectly happy to absorb the money we are throwing away.
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=7466&edition=2&ttl=20070925153851

China is holding a No Car Day in more than 100 cities as it tries to reduce smog ahead of the 2008 Summer Olympics. But correspondents say that in the capital National No Car Day appears to be making little impact, with high levels of traffic and most streets open as normal.

I agree with George Bush that China has to be part of the solution and that negotiations with the major polluting nations would be more productive.

Also, too bad Schwarzenegger can not run for President. However, Gores statements about a planetary emergency probably plays better in Japan and Tennessee where record high temperature pushed the demand for electricity to keep all that AC running.

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUST3127120070925

http://www.tva.com/river/neighbors/sept07/demand.htm

August was the hottest month ever recorded in Nashville, Knoxville, Chattanooga, Bristol, Huntsville, and Tupelo. Nashville came within one degree of an all-time record high on Aug. 16 when the temperature hit 106 degrees, and Chattanooga did the same on August 23 with a high temperature of 105 degrees. Temperatures in Nashville were 100 degrees or above on 15 days in August ? more than the combined total in the last 15 years.

--European countries called for the world to set a goal of halving global greenhouse-gas pollution by the year 2050.

This should be interesting, seeing how they can't meet their current targets.

Of 15 countries in Europe signed up to Kyoto, only Britain and Sweden were on target to meet their commitments on reducing harmful gas emissions by 2012, said the IPPR, Britain's leading progressive think tank.

In contrast, 10 nations -- including Ireland, Italy and Spain -- would fail to do so unless they took urgent action, it said.

Al Gore called for a new agreement in two years to 2010. "The north polar ice cap is melting; it may be gone in 23 years," he said. "It's a planetary emergency. Let's not wait."

But not to worry, Al. The Antarctic ice cap is getting larger.

Also of interest in Al's statement, why 23 years? Why not 20? Or 25? Or why not get more precise? How about 23.5749 years? They've got the computer power and the models, correct?

Developing countries urged rich economies, which are responsible for some 70% of CO2 in the world to honor pledges of curbing greenhouse-gas pollution and to help poorer countries cope with the impact of climate change.

Perhaps they would prefer that we quit producing the food they live on? Growing and transporting food generates huge amounts of GHG and drives our per-capita emissions way up.

Apparently starving the rest of the world is preferable - as long as we don't have to feel guilty about statistics.

Another planetary emergency! Antarctic sea ice broke the all-time maximum record (again) today. Ice extent has increased five years in a row in the Antarctic! A new ice age is coming! Fear the Manbearpig!
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.area.south.jpg

The long standing dream of globalist utopians, The Flat World described by Thomas L. Friedman, is completely at odds with what would realistically need to be done to reduce GHG emissions world wide below 1990 levels. Also, of note, I cannot think of a better way to restore the long term geopolitical positions of Western countries than to drastically reduce consumption of oil, thereby crashing the economies of Russia and various countries in the Middle East. Same goes for natural gas in Europe. I'm all for it. Let's get below 1990 levels of GHG emission and let the Western countries be the first to drastically reduce, below, say, even 1955 levels.

The fact that a supposedly grown man like Patrick Henry is obsessed with South Park and Simpsons cartoons really gives you insight into the deniers' credibility.

Here are my thoughts about the upcoming Bush summit on Climate Change:

http://local-warming.blogspot.com/2007/09/open-letter-to-top-15-polluters-in.html

The next major summit on climate change will be held in December in Bali.

Bali. In December. I think Fargo, ND in December would be a better choice.

Does anyone else notice that the retoric seems to be getting much more shrill these days?
With Gore preaching disaster is imminent (23 years to be exact) and the leaders of the third world all on the band wagon with their hands out, I sense some panic setting in.
The recent article in the associated press is a prime example.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8RQKV7O0&show_article=1

Could some of the AGW faithful please comment on this article? It would be interesting to see your take on this level of Hyperbole.

Here is a link to several opionions from notable scientests on the accuracy of the peice.
http://antigreen.blogspot.com/

Paul,

"Also of interest in Al's statement, why 23 years? Why not 20? Or 25? Or why not get more precise? How about 23.5749 years? They've got the computer power and the models, correct?"

Didn't you see the movie 23? It came out on the 23rd if I remember correctly. Duh, everyone knows that. Lol, im only bustin your chops.

Paul,

Also of interest in Al's statement, why 23 years? Why not 20? Or 25? Or why not get more precise? How about 23.5749 years? They've got the computer power and the models, correct?

I suspect Gore was referring to models that predict the Arctic will be ice-free during the summer of 2030.

2007 + 23 = 2030

Had he known you required a more specific time frame, I'm sure he would have said 22.837562 years instead.

Somebody must have told Gore that Arctic sea ice will be gone by the summer of 2040.

I am no expert, but if we can try to stay on topic and examine the history of arctic sea ice from the following link, some simple conclusions can be drawn.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.area.jpg

In 1979, the summer sea ice was 5.5 Mkm2
In 1996, the summer sea ice was 5.5 Mkm2
in 2007, the summer sea ice was 3.0 Mkm2.

Now, I realize that the ice was thicker in 1979 and the ice that did not melt this summer is also rather thick. Also, there is an albedo feedback mechanism at work as well as the possibility that the currents flowing thru the Bering strait are warming and or strenghting over time.

So, the future of the Arctic Sea ice may not follow a linear trend. However, if it does, then simply plotting the 1996 and 2007 data points in Excel and trending aheard yields a zero value in 2024.

Personally, my gut impression is that the last 3 years will be more representative of the immediate future than the last 11, so it is possible that zero will be reached before then 2024. 2017 is my guess.

Also, keep in mind that the North Pole will be ice free sooner and once summer sea ice drops below 0.5 MKm2, the arctic ocean will for all pratical climatilogical purposes be ice free.

The first ice free arctic summer will be reached in September. Then, ice free condition will be occur progressively earlier and earlier.

Late August, then mid August, then early August, then late July. This will be accompanied by all types of reports coming from Greenland and the Antactic about accelerated melting and the rising sea levels. Also, expect ocassional dust bowl conditions in portions of the US, while the Sahara Desert moves into Southern Europe, Australia gives up on agriculture and the Russians start talking about how great the weather is in Siberia.

Getting back to Al's statement, "The north polar ice cap is melting. Vincent, a few threads back, pointed to an article on the discovery of active vulcanism along the Gakkel ridge in the Arctic Ocean basin. Given the heat output of spreading centers, Vincent may have hit on something here. I've made several posts about the coincidence of active volcanics and the demise of the Larsen B ice shelf. Could it be that global vulcanism is actually contributing to the melting of the ice?

bt? Mr. Bloom? What say ye?

Andrew,

Here are some record highs for you by continent. All set before the ice age panic and Nixon resignation of 1974. Most set before 1940. Don't remember it getting up to 136 in Tennessee this summer....

World - (Africa) El Azizia, Libya Sept. 13, 1922 : 136
North America - (U.S.) Death Valley, Calif. July 10, 1913 : 134
Asia - Tirat Tsvi, Israel June 21, 1942 : 129
Australia - Cloncurry, Queensland Jan. 16, 1889 128
Europe - Seville, Spain Aug. 4, 1881 122
South America - Rivadavia, Argentina Dec. 11, 1905 : 120
Canada - Midale and Yellow Grass, Saskatchewan, Canada July 5, 1937 113
Oceania - Tuguegarao, Philippines April 29, 1912 : 108
Persian Gulf (sea-surface) - Aug. 5, 1924 : 96
Antarctica - Vanda Station, Scott Coast Jan. 5, 1974 : 59

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001375.html

RE:Antarctica extend record
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.area.south.jpg
Well have to see in CT mentions it in the blog above the charts. If they do, some credibility might be restored (re software glitch)

This study was published just recently. Since it came out this weekend, it did not get alot of press.

This shows the importance of not rushing into solutions like the apologists for poor science would like us to do.

Study: Biofuels May Produce More Greenhouse Gas Than Oil

A renewable energy source designed to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions may be contributing more to global warming than fossil fuels, a study suggests.

Measurements of emissions from the burning of biofuels derived from rapeseed and corn have been found to produce more greenhouse gas emissions than they save.

Other biofuels, especially those likely to see greater use over the next decade, performed better than fossil fuels, but the study raises serious questions about some of the most commonly produced varieties.

Rapeseed and corn biodiesels were calculated to produce up to 70 percent and 50 percent more greenhouse gases, respectively, than fossil fuels.

The concerns were raised over the levels of emissions of nitrous oxide, which is 296 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

Scientists found that the use of biofuels released twice as much as nitrous oxide as previously realized. The research team found that 3 to 5 percent of the nitrogen in fertilizer was converted and emitted.

In contrast, the figure used by the International Panel on Climate Change, which assesses the extent and impact of man-made global warming, was 2 percent.

The findings illustrated the importance, the researchers said, of ensuring that measures designed to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions are assessed thoroughly before being hailed as a solution.

"One wants rational decisions rather than simply jumping on the bandwagon because superficially something appears to reduce emissions," said Keith Smith, a professor at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland and one of the researchers.

Corn for ethanol is the prime crop for biofuel in the U.S., where production for the industry has recently overtaken the use of the plant as a food. In Europe the main crop is rapeseed (one variety of which is canola), which accounts for 80 percent of biofuel production.

"The significance of it is that the supposed benefits of biofuels are even more disputable than had been thought hitherto," Smith told Chemistry World magazine.

It was accepted by the scientists that other factors, such as the use of fossil fuels to produce fertilizer, have yet to be fully analyzed for their impact on overall figures.

But they concluded that the biofuels "can contribute as much or more to global warming by N2O [nitrous oxide] emissions than cooling by fossil-fuel savings."

The research is published in the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, where it has been placed for open review.

The research team consisted of scientists from Britain, the U.S. and Germany, and included Professor Paul Crutzen, who won a Nobel Prize for his work on ozone.

Dr. Franz Conen, of the University of Basel in Switzerland, described the study as an "astounding insight."

"It is to be hoped that those taking decisions on subsidies and regulations will in future take N2O emissions into account and promote some forms of 'biofuel' production while quickly abandoning others," he told the journal's discussion board.

Dr. Dave Reay, also of the University of Edinburgh, used the findings to calculate that with the U.S. Senate aiming to increase corn-ethanol production sevenfold by 2022, greenhouse-gas emissions from transportation will rise by 6 percent.

Andrew:

In 1979, the summer sea ice was 5.5 Mkm2
In 1996, the summer sea ice was 5.5 Mkm2
in 2007, the summer sea ice was 3.0 Mkm2.

CO2 was rising during the 1979 - 1996 period but your link shows no loss of sea ice during that time. That tells me that something other than CO2 may have caused the recent decline.

Vincent, a few threads back, pointed to an article on the discovery of active vulcanism along the Gakkel ridge in the Arctic Ocean basin. Given the heat output of spreading centers, Vincent may have hit on something here.

Paul (and Vincent),

If volcanic activity is indeed producing anomalous (key word--anomalous) amounts of warming along the Gakkel Ridge area, that area would not currently be home to the Arctic's only remaining extensive reserves of multi-year sea ice.

I'm not saying that vulcanism isn't a factor in warming the Arctic, but I would like some proof that volcanic activity in the area is stronger than normal. The Max Planck Society article you reference makes no such claim; it says only that the findings were unexpected. For all they know, this could be a period of weak volcanic activity in the Arctic.

Andrew,

Do you seriously believe what you just wrote? If you do, then no mitagation is possible at this point so why support some idiotic carbon tax or carbon credit system?

Regards,

Steve

Gary,

I think part of the reason for those types of articles is that sea level rise is concrete, tangible and on an accelerating pace.

Also, in a sense, sea level rise is irreversible. Over the short term, once an area of land is flooded by the ocean, it will be severely damaged due to erosion by waves.

Here is a link to the section of the IPCC report on Sea Level rise.

http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch05.pdf

Take a look at Fig FAQ 5.1 on page 409.

According to the figure, sea Level is projected to rise between 0.2 to 0.5 meters. However, take a close look at how the slope of the line has gotten steeper towards present time, so the upper end of the range seems more likely than the lower end. The AP article leads on to believe a 1 meter rise is in the cards. I believe that is true, although it may not happen until 2200.

I sense that most people realize that CO2 emission will not be controlled in the near future. Politicians may say things or promise things, but the reality is that CO2 levels will keep rising along with a developing global economy and population. There is no stopping progress.

We will run out of oil and gas. However, coal is pure carbon and will become the primary fuel for the planet within the next 50 years. Thus Global warming will only accelerate.

So, expect lots of rhetoric and politics, but very little preventive actions.

Mark,

just because someone doesn't watch CNN 24/7 doesn't mean they are not credible. Patrick seems to like some comedy in is his life and appears to me to be a like-able laid back guy. What entertainment someone enjoys has nothing to do with credibility. South park is one show that makes fun of everyday life, relaxes you, and takes pressure off, that's how I see it.

Now if somebody is killing chickens as a gift to the god of weasels then that's a diff