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.

“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.

“There is a lot of frozen dead material under the snow pack. There is as much carbon trapped in the soil of northern ecosystems as there is carbon in the atmosphere. It is a big unknown what is going to happen if these environments heat up, “said Treseder.

Her research has been started with the hypothesis that an increase in temperatures would Lead to increased decomposition by fungi and micro organisms and since one by-product of decomposition is carbon dioxide, rising temperatures should result in its greater release from the soil. What she found was that nitrogen levels in the soil increased as temperatures rose, Which Tends Thurs suppress fungal decomposition rates.
“In reality as temperatures increase we tend to see greater nitrogen availability in the soil. Nitrogen suppresses activity and diversity. What we end up seeing is less carbon dioxide production from fungi as temperatures increase in northern ecosystems, “said Treseder.
“As global temperatures rise and glaciers retreat, these microorganisms lose their habitat. They will probably go extinct before we can study them and get a better idea of their contributions, “the study concluded. ]]> http://www.wolfenvironmental.com/environmental/climate-change-may-cause-the-micro-organisms/feed/ 0 http://www.wolfenvironmental.com/global-warming-issues/global-warming-is-not-due-to-any-carbon-dioxide/ http://www.wolfenvironmental.com/global-warming-issues/global-warming-is-not-due-to-any-carbon-dioxide/#comments Sat, 05 Dec 2009 03:23:57 +0000 Lourdez http://www.wolfenvironmental.com/?p=126
Global warming has been attributed to the past in general, bled atmospheric carbon dioxide levels increase. U.S. U.S. National Science Foundation in a recent study that is not the case. The investigation of the amount of carbon dioxide content analysis of the last ice age about 1300 years into the global warming began. The study shows that CO2 increase is the result of  global warming, not because of global warming. researcher Lowell Stout is not the first that brings out this kind of research, but his work is one more detail.
Slotting research differs from other studies dealing with global warming in the fact that he questioned CARBON correlation between global warming and climate. Although CO2 is a component of climate change, its role would have to be re-evaluated. The new research also undermines the belief in the fact that the recent increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would be created by man. Increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is due largely to Totting sea change in circumstances.

According to the study of changes in the atmosphere have increased the Antarctic against the sun’s radiation. Ice floes large withdrawal from the sea has eroded Albedo or reflectance of solar radiation over. Because of this, at least one thousand years have contributed to the phenomenon a result of sunlight is reflected back into space anymore as much as before, the climate is gradually warmed.

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.

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.

An Australian firm and another American, Basel Geopower seek to be the first company to generate this energy. But authorities ordered a halt to the excavations because it was found that tremors that cracked walls of the city on the Rhine in December 2006 were a freak of nature but were caused by excavations

“The geothermal resources are immense,’’said Jefferson Tester, who headed a study released this year by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), which confirms the potential of heat from the earth as an energy source. Generating energy in this way will not be easy.

But first, there is a danger of causing tremors. On the other, will be expensive. The excavation of a well to extract heat from the land would cost between 7 and 8 million U.S. dollars, according to the MIT study.

The average cost of oil wells was $ 1.44 million in 2004 in the U.S., according to the Energy Information Administration.

In addition, the rocks cooled after being operated for several decades and would have to dig more wells.

Bryan Mignone, a specialist in climate change and energy issues at the Brookings Institution in Washington, said that “the new energy technologies must compete with coal, which is much cheaper.”

Currently 24 countries using geothermal energy. But those sources, geysers and hot springs are near the surface.

To use the heat from rocks deep in the earth, we must dig to reach layers of granite with temperatures of 200 degrees Celsius.

Similar equipment is used at oil wells, but you have to dig much deeper and the well must be wider to accommodate the water cycle.

United States was at the forefront of experiments to see if this was a viable alternative source.

Large energy companies like Chevron, Exxon Mobil and American Electric Power are closely following this research but are not investing money in them.

Susan Petty, who worked in the MIT study predicts that 10% of energy consumed worldwide come from geothermal sources within 50 years.

And that in 100 years, half of the energy consumed will have that origin.

Navarre, the Pyrenees north of Huesca and Zaragoza are also on notice by rains that will water up to 15 millimeters in one hour. In the southern half of peninsular expect cloudy intervals with the possibility of a weak shower, except in Andalusia and the South East. In Canary light rains are expected in the northern islands.

AEMET has reported a slight to moderate decrease of the maximum temperatures in Galicia, while the rest will remain little changed. The higher maximum correspond to Murcia and Gerona (28) and the lowest, Lugo (15).

The fog has forced this morning to swerve into Girona airport six planes from Ryanair to Perpignan and two more to Reus (Tarragona) as reported by a spokesman for Spanish Airports and Air Navigation (Aena).

This was due to land planes at the airport of Girona Viloví d’Onyar and who came from Brussels, Frankfurt, Bremen (Germany), Memmingen (Germany) and Shannon (Ireland), plus two in Stockholm and Nottingham (UK) who moved to Reus.

High temperatures are beginning to subside, although the State Meteorological Agency (AEMET) maintains yellow alert still active in the provinces of Valencia, Alicante, Murcia, Albacete, Malaga and the Balearic Islands. They are also at risk of yellow alert Castellón storms, which mainly affect the north of the province, and Huesca, where, moreover, accumulated precipitation is expected of 20 liters per square meter in one hour in the Pyrenees.

Because of the strong coastal winds are also on yellow alert in the provinces of Lugo and La Coruña, and the island of Menorca, which produced Meteotsunami (oscillations of the sea of 0.8 meters).

Temperatures peaked in Murcia, where temperatures will reach 38 degrees in the highlands northwest Valley Guadalentín, Lorca and Aguilas and Vega del Segura. Inside Valencia and Alicante, the mercury will rise to 37 degrees, and one less in Malaga (Sun and Guadalhorce) and Albacete (Hellin and Almansa).