Environmental, Climate and Global Warming Issues

A combination of anthropogenic global warming and a moderate warming of the tropical Pacific Ocean by the phenomenon known as El Niño, makes it very likely that 2010 will be a year worldwide warmer than 2009.

Recently published data confirm that 2009 is expected to be the fifth warmest year in records dating back to 1850.
The latest forecast our climate scientists, shows global temperature is expected to be nearly 0.6 ° C above the 1961-90 average long term. This means it is more likely that 2010 will be the warmest year in instrumental record, beating the previous record year was 1998.
Earlier than that 2010 average global temperature record is not a certainty, especially if the current El Niño unexpectedly low rapidly around the beginning of 2010, or if there was a volcanic eruption. The Met Office forecasts revised during the year 2010 with available observational data.
Looking ahead, the experimental decadal forecasts from the Met Office confirms earlier indications that about half of the years 2010-2019 will be warmer than the warmest year so far observed – 1998.

The year 2009, with a provisional temperature of 14.44 ° C observed, can be compared with identical predicted value of 14.44 ° C.
The Met Office, in collaboration with the University of East Anglia, keeps a record global temperature that is used in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Every December or January, the Met Office, in collaboration with the University of East Anglia, issues a forecast of the global surface temperature for the next year.

Between 5,000 and 8,000 years, methane emissions of both carbon dioxide and began presenting an upward trend.

It is likely that the accumulation of these greenhouse gases in the atmosphere over the last few thousand years has stopped the start of a new glacial cycle, as those who have been in constant intervals every 100,000 years during the last million years.

Each glacial period was marked by regular, predictable changes of Earth’s orbit, known as orbital variations.

Because of these variations in Earth’s orbit, although the solar luminosity is almost constant over millions of years, the average amount of radiation received by each hemisphere fluctuates, what times of extreme cold.

According to scientists, without the action of human beings today we would probably find one of those times.

As a result of many factors, the climate has changed in recent years. These changes have been perceived around the world and has allegedly affected many forms of life around the globe. Global warming is one of the names this phenomenon has received, but there are theories that speak of a global cooling problem, especially in some regions of the planet.

Usually this phenomenon is attributed to high levels of pollution that our modern, industrialized lives expel a mother nature that, despite not being alive, has managed to self-regulate, regulate and even for centuries.

Days, weeks, months and years have passed, but there seems no clear way to resolve the issue. At most, a variety of publications, some more disturbing than others, try to remind ourselves occasionally that the problem is still there and that unless we take action on the matter, we must bear the consequences for generations.

Today I decided to gather some information that is publicly available and an analysis of the topic. The first item on the list was trying to clarify what is global warming. To my surprise, I found that was a perfectly normal natural phenomenon that allows for life on the planet. To summarize, I would say that the sun’s rays bounce off a few times in and out of the planet, warming the atmosphere in the process, until finally managed to get out.

Read more…

The global warming melts the ice in the Arctic. Polar bears have to hunt for ice. If the earth is becoming warmer polar bears will not survive.

Warming up
The earth is getting warmer. The average temperature in 2006 and 2007 was higher than ever in the Netherlands. This is mainly caused by man. But some scholars think that in part comes from nature itself. Around the earth is a shell of oxygen and other gases. This is called the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is one of the gases that hold heat around the Earth. Emissions from cars and planes and by waste from factories and power plants is more and more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Heat can not go out and the earth is getting warmer. This is called also called the greenhouse effect, because it works like a greenhouse.

Impact
Scientists believe that global temperatures in 2050 will be three degrees higher than now. This much is enough ice on the Arctic and Antarctic to melt. This will put more water in the seas. Sea levels are rising and more flooding. Some low areas may disappear. In some places, the more rain and storms. In other places will just always be drier. Some animals will not survive. It is too hot or too cold for them or they will no longer find food. Diseases will spread more easily.

What can we do?
To ensure that the earth can continue should anything happen. Governments try to make other arrangements to address the greenhouse effect. But this is very difficult. Some countries, the industry and the economy more important than milieu.Toch include new ways to gain real power needed by oil and gas because there is much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. With the help of sun, wind and water we can produce energy. You yourself do something for the environment. For example, try not to use too much electricity and use old stuff again.

The destruction of natural ecosystems for bio fuel production exacerbates global warming. It is because more of the greenhouse gas CO2 in the atmosphere by, warn U.S. scientists.

“If the warming of the planet is trying to limit, it is absurd to form soil to produce bio fuels,” said Joe Giorgione, researcher at the Nature Conservancy, one of the leading private environmental organizations and co-author of the study also carried out with scientists from the University of Minnesota. “All the bio fuels we use now, bring a destruction of nature with them, directly or indirectly,” said Giorgione.

The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by converting land to make bio fuels to produce is greater than the amount of CO2 not emitted through the use of those fuels.

Global warming is “very likely” to human-caused problem that will last for centuries and require Concerted international action to reduce its potentially devastating impacts, a United Nations panel of climate experts declared Friday in a landmark report. Now the question is Whether the bleak report will change the politics of global warming in the U.S. and lead to a more united effort to deal with the problem, and for the moment, that appears uncertain.

The Bush administration embrace the report but rejected demands for a mandatory system of capping “greenhouse gas” emissions such as carbon dioxide. Instead, the administration said President Bush would rely on his plans to develop more renewable fuel and require more efficient vehicles.

But with Democrats controlling Congress, pressure is apt to build on the White House to take a tougher approach. More than half a dozen bills, some of them bipartisan-have been presented to Congress calling for mandatory caps on emissions, though the administration said they would hurt the economy and not Effectively deal with the problem.

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said, “President Bush should immediately work with Congress to pass legislation that requires reductions in the emissions of greenhouse gases, and he should call together the leaders of the world To obtain their binding commitment to Reducing pollution around the globe. ”

The report by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change struck a chord of urgency as it warned of rising sea levels, more powerful storms and rapidly shifting weather patterns, including floods and droughts, Resulting from a warming of the planet that it said could last for thousand years.

The scientists from 113 countries said they are now 90 percent confident that global warming is caused by humans, in contrast with a 2001 report In which they said they were 60 percent to 90 percent confident.

Achim Steiner, executive director of the UN Environment Program, said the focus should shift from the cause of global warming “to what on Earth are we going to do about it. The public should not sit back and say, `There’s nothing we can do. ‘”

“Warming of the planet is unequivocal,” the 21-page report concluded, “as is now evident from observations of global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global mean sea level.”

In effect, the panel said governments and people can not prevent the planet from warming but that steps can be taken to stem the projected increases.

The panel forecast global temperature increases of 2 to 11.5 degrees Fahrenheit by the year 2100 but added that its best estimate was for a rise of 3.2 to 7.1 degrees. Warming during the 21st Century would “very likely be larger” than that of the 20th Century, the report said.

Not all scientists agree

Some question such conclusions about global warming.

Patrick Michaels, a scholar at the Cato Institute, a libertarian Washington think tank, said that “it is not news to say that human beings are responsible for much of the warming in the late 20th Century.”

But Michaels said the report was not as alarming as portrayed. He cited a prediction by the panel that sea levels would rise by a modest 7 to 23 inches by the end of the century and noted that this was slightly less than the panel reported in 2001.

“What this report does is place this very small but very widely-quoted group of alarmists who are talking about 20 feet of sea-rise-far, far beyond the fringes [of environmental science],” he said.

But the report, as well as Bush administration officials, said the relatively modest increases in the sea level do not take into account the recent Increased rate of ice melting in Greenland and Antarctica.

“[The sea-rise prediction in the report] is less,” Stephen Johnson, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, told reporters. “But we believe there are other effects that have not been taken into account yet.”

The report said an additional 3.9 to 7.98 inches of sea-level rise are possible if the recent melting of polar ice sheets continues at its recent rate.

Joseph Romm, an assistant secretary of energy in the Clinton administration, said in an interview that if the rate of recent ice loss from Greenland and Antarctica continues, there would be a dramatic rise in sea levels that would devastate coastlines around the world.

Romm, author of a book on global warming, called the report “very solid and alarming.” He said a “hidden bombshell” in the report is a finding that as the Earth grows hotter, the less the soil is able to absorb carbon. That would lead to an acceleration of greenhouse gases, he said, and could be devastating to the ecosystem.

“The key point is that it said humans are the most likely cause,” Romm said. “If we are the main cause, we are the main solution. You can not endorse the report and not endorse strong action on climate change. ”

The Bush administration said it is already taking action. The White House noted that Bush has devoted nearly $ 29 billion to climate-related science, technology, international assistance and incentives since 2001.

Bush has spent nearly $ 9 billion on climate science research, “leading the world with unparalleled financial commitment,” the White House said in a statement.

In his State of the Union speech last month, the president acknowledged that global warming is a problem and that he is taking steps to do something about it. But it has not been his top priority.

He refused to endorse the 1997 Kyoto agreement to create a mandatory system to cap carbon dioxide emissions, saying it would harm the U.S. economy and would not be effective Because fast-developing countries like China and India are not abiding by it.

During his first presidential campaign, I had pledge to regulate carbon dioxide emissions under the Clean Air Act, but I backtrack when I took office.

At the Energy Department on Friday, Secretary Samuel Bodman said the president has set an “aggressive” goal to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 18 percent by 2012, through Increasing the supply of renewable fuels like ethanol and reforming the government’s fuel economy standards for cars.

Global warming is we really blame

Since today is Blog Action Day 2009, the idea of this day is to talk all that blogging can about a subject, and this year is on global warming, then we thought we talk about the alleged global warming, we We created it for the mistreatment of our planet and not worry about tomorrow, because now people just beginning to see that if we recycle and not waste our natural resources are not going to live much more on this planet, because it is showing in the seasons as they change, are most severe winters with heavy snow showers and fed, as are the summers with drought and heat, that really the fault of us?, I think so, because this planet when we was fine and we will deliver it in a deplorable condition unless we begin to change, leaving many trees cut and fill all our rivers, and there are ways to do the same things but with other methods and not wasting natural resources, recycle and be a assist this planet.

I was checking the results of the G8 meeting in L’Aquila – Italy (last July), and noted that the leaders of this select group declared, first, that “any increase in temperature caused by human action should not exceed 2 º C compared to temperatures above pre-industrial average.

It is interesting to find that, amid the continuing economic and financial crisis in which the world is (and despite the leaps of excitement and joy that today have German, French and Japanese to have experienced increases in their GDP not go beyond 0.9% and that makes them assume the exit of the recession … I would be less confident) the G-8 has devoted efforts to address this particular topic. So I found it interesting to make some considerations of why all of this and expose the need for “efforts” are real and not mere statements.

Concern over “global warming” had its origin in an article published in 1957 by Roger Revelle and Hans Suess, both of Scripps Institute of Oceanography in California (USA). In this article, the scientists warned that the agricultural and industrial activities were resulting in a dangerous increase in CO2 levels in the atmosphere, with unpredictable consequences for the Earth’s temperature.

In short, global warming is the result of the gradual accumulation in the atmosphere of gases that prevent heat from escaping the planet. In this process, the sun’s rays enter the Earth through the atmosphere, and when the sun’s rays strike the surface of the planet, these are transformed into heat and infrared energy. Heat rises and causes the molecules of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases entering the atmosphere vibration. Thus, the gas molecules act as reflectors of the heat and return to the surface, producing a heating effect.

Scientists have been able to determine that the increased carbon dioxide is responsible for 70% of global warming, while methane and nitrous oxide share the rest of the global warming effect by 24% and 6% respectively.

Some studies indicate that today’s atmosphere contains 31% more CO2 than that contained in 1,750, while the concentration of methane and nitrous oxide are respectively 151% and 17% higher than levels experienced in the year.

Almost 75% of the increase in CO2 concentrations over the past 20 years is attributable to burning fossil fuels, the increase in the concentration of methane is attributed to emissions from rice paddies, landfills and animal flatulence, whereas, nitrous oxide concentration is the product of extensive use of chemical fertilizers in agricultural soil, the chemical industry, among others.

Undoubtedly, the increase of emissions of harmful gases into the planet’s survival has arisen from the need to generate energy (electricity, gasoline, other fuels, fertilizers, etc..) That allow us to move, use and develop machinery to produce goods and services and thus do things our own life everyday.

This seems to make clear that in a world stuck and desperate to keep the lights on and our launch vehicles, many may seem that there is no other option but to use an increasing amount of fuel, and sacrifice “for now “The interests of our planet for the needs and generating economic gains in the short term.

Some data about the needs of energy consumption are interesting in this debate. For example, forecasts more “conservative” predict that cover the energy requirements of the population of the Earth constantly growing, require double the energy consumption between the years 2000 and 2040, will triple it by 2070 and quadruple by 2100.

This will imply tripling the annual emissions of carbon dioxide from the 6.000 million tons of carbon in 2000 to about 20,000 million tonnes in 2100.

Finally, in a report by scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on UN Climate Change (IPCC) states that the Earth’s average temperature rose from 0.6 + / – 0.2 ° C over the twentieth century , being the largest increase in average global temperature occurred in a century during the past 1,000 years. Furthermore, computer models and statistical IPCC predict that global average temperature increase of the surface between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees Celsius by the year 2100.