Original Article from New Scientist.

• Human CO₂ emissions are too tiny to matter

• We can’t do anything about climate change

• The ‘hockey stick’ graph has been proven wrong

• Chaotic systems are not predictable

• We can’t trust computer models of climate

• They predicted global cooling in the 1970s

• It’s been far warmer in the past, what’s the big deal?

• It’s too cold where I live – warming will be great

• Global warming is down to the Sun, not humans

• It’s all down to cosmic rays

• CO₂ isn’t the most important greenhouse gas

• The lower atmosphere is cooling, not warming

• Antarctica is getting cooler, not warmer, disproving global warming

• The oceans are cooling

• The cooling after 1940 shows CO₂ does not cause warming

• It was warmer during the Medieval period, with vineyards in England

• We are simply recovering from the Little Ice Age

• Warming will cause an ice age in Europe

• Ice cores show CO₂ increases lag behind temperature rises, disproving the link to global warming

• Ice cores show CO₂ rising as temperatures fell

• Mars and Pluto are warming too

• Many leading scientists question climate change

• It’s all a conspiracy

• Hurricane Katrina was caused by global warming

• Higher CO₂ levels will boost plant growth and food production

• Polar bear numbers are increasing

What is the easiest way to cut greenhouse gas? Biking instead of driving? Install solar panel? Eat Local Products? The answer is start using Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL). Lighting accounts for about 20% of all electricity use in the country and about 15% of electricity use in our homes. The typical household spends about $110 per year on lighting and most of this is wasted on inefficient incandescent light bulbs, that convert 90% of the electricity to heat and only about 10% to visible light.

CFLs use between one-fifth and one-quarter of the power of an equivalent incandescent lamp, which means it require less energy from coal-burning power plants and thus reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Research states that each CFL will cut carbon dioxide emissions by about 1,300 pounds over its lifetime. If every household in the U.S. replaced a burned-out bulb with an ENERGY STAR qualified compact fluorescent bulb, it would prevent greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to that from nearly 800,000 cars. It would also save enough energy to light 2.5 million homes for a year. Thats why Australia plans to phase out the use of incandescent lamps by 2010 and Canada provinces Ontario and Nova Scotia are also going to ban incandescent lamps in 2012.

Despite all these facts, the current market share of CFLs in the United States is only about 6 percent while compared to 80 percent of CFLs adoption rate in Japan and 50 percent in Germany. So how come CFLs are not widely adapted yet? Energy consumption experts say it does not pass the “Wife Test“.

Lots of people do not like the initial flicker, slow warm-up and weird color of CFLs. Popular Mechanics ran a lab test with seven popular CFLs against a 75 watt incandescent bulb to see which CFLs got the best color temperature and lux. Environmental Defense has a interactive form to help you find an energy-saving light bulb.

Original story from Herald Tribune:

“The global carbon market tripled last year to $30 billion from $11 billion in 2005, the World Bank’s carbon finance unit said Wednesday.”

“Carbon markets put a price on carbon, and so are seen as a possible key weapon against climate change, motivating people and businesses to think harder about their greenhouse gas emissions.”

“Through a linked, project-based market, European companies can meet their EU emissions caps by funding clean-energy projects in developing countries through carbon trade under the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. That project-based market doubled to $5 billion in 2006, and raised an extra $16 billion in finance for development of clean-energy technologies, the World Bank said.”

This makes me think of my friend Amy Balkin‘s project PUBLIC SMOG. The project consists of a gesture in which the artist buys and withholds carbon gas emission credits from international trading markets in order to create a temporary clean-air park. Aiming to highlight the complexities and contradictions of current environmental protocols, Balkin will attempt to submit an application to qualify the entire atmosphere as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

George Monbiot is a columnist for the British newspaper Guardian and author of the bestselling books Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning, Captive State and The Age of Consent.

You can watch the rest of the interview at The Real News.

Global Research Technologies, LLC (GRT), a technology research and development company, and Klaus Lackner from Columbia University have achieved the successful demonstration of a bold new technology to capture carbon from the air. The “air extraction” prototype has successfully demonstrated that indeed carbon dioxide (CO₂) can be captured from the atmosphere. This is GRT’s first step toward a commercially viable air capture device.

A solar-powered reaction turns a greenhouse gas into a valuable raw material. By Kevin Bullis, from Technology Review (original article)

“Chemists have shown that it is possible to use solar energy, paired with the right catalyst, to convert carbon dioxide into a raw material for making a wide range of products, including plastics and gasoline.

Researchers at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), recently demonstrated that light absorbed and converted into electricity by a silicon electrode can help drive a reaction that converts carbon dioxide into carbon monoxide and oxygen. Carbon monoxide is a valuable commodity chemical that is widely used to make plastics and other products, says Clifford Kubiak, professor of chemistry at UCSD. It is also a key ingredient in a process for making synthetic fuels, including syngas (a mixture largely of carbon monoxide and hydrogen), methanol, and gasoline.”

THIS IS THE MOST FUCKING AWESOME IMPORTANT TECHNOLOGY!

The Great Global Warming Swindle is a controversial documentary film by British television producer Martin Durkin, which claims that the consensus on climate change is the product of “a multibillion-dollar worldwide industry: created by fanatically anti-industrial environmentalists; supported by scientists peddling scare stories to chase funding; and propped up by complicit politicians and the media.“

The film also states that Global Warming becomes the convenient tool for the anti-capitalism/ socialists to mobilize the masses to join the anti-globalisation movement and it also prevents developing country from developing. How I see it is the Democrats are definitely using Global Warming as a political weapon to bring the Republicans down.

The film stirs up lots of discussion in the scientists circles including RealClimate, Durando Bill and British Antarctic Society. Carl Wunsch, one of the scientists being interviewed, later called the film “grossly distorted” and “as close to pure propaganda as anything since World War Two.” George Monbiot from UK Guardian calls it a “crank.” On April 24, 38 scientists send an open letter to Durkin.

Here’s the film’s wikipedia page.

2 campaigns, similar idea. A 7 meters high black balloon attached to the cars exhaust pipe, collecting the CO2 a car would have produces per day. The act kick starts WWF China’s 20to20.org

The German Green activists group BUND put a earth balloon on the exhaust pipe and eventually the globe exploded because of CO2 overloaded.

Found at Infosthetics.com

Original article published by NewScientist.com news service on 14:05 11 April 2007

The US Environmental Protection Agency announced new standards for renewable fuels for cars and trucks on Tuesday, but stopped short of committing to regulate greenhouse gases that spur on global warming.

The agency’s Renewable Fuel Standards Program aims to cut dependence on foreign oil and curb global warming pollution by expanding the use of ethanol and other alternative fuels.

“The [planned] increased use of renewable fuels … will prevent the release of greenhouse gas emissions equivalent of up to 13 million metric tons,” says Stephen Johnson, head of the EPA. “That’s equal to the carbon dioxide emissions of nearly 2.3 million automobiles.”

Carbon dioxide, emitted by petroleum-powered vehicles and coal-fired power plants among other sources, is one of the main greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change.

The new standards, originally ordered by Congress in 2005, require that 4.02% or 21.37 billion litres (4.7 billion gallons) of all motor fuel sold in the US in 2007 must come from renewable sources. The standard will gradually increase to 34.1 billion litres (7.5 billion gallons) per year by 2012.
Regulation powers

On 2 April, the US Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has the power to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, although Johnson says that ruling was still being considered (see US Supreme Court forces EPA emissions rethink). “We are evaluating that Supreme Court decision and we’re looking at our options and what actions we may take,” he said at a news conference. “Today is premature to talk about it.”

In 2003, the environment agency refused to regulate greenhouse gases, saying that it lacked the power. California and 13 other states have proposed mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions. But Johnson says, in the California case, this would not be possible until after that state’s petition is evaluated. The evaluation process will begin “shortly”, he adds.

Senator Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat who chairs the Environment and Public Works Committee, called the use of renewable fuels “an important part of the fight against global warming [that] also increases our energy independence.”
Coal-to-liquids

However, Boxer took aim at the Bush administration’s plan to develop such alternative fuels as “coal-to-liquids”. This involves the gasification of coal and the conversion of the resulting hydrogen and carbon monoxide into liquid fuel. But the process generates more global warming pollution than ordinary gasoline.

The Sierra Club – the oldest environmental group in the US – also applauds the renewable fuels standards, but echoes Boxer’s criticism of liquid coal and urges the Bush administration to raise fuel efficiency standards.

The Natural Resources Defense Council, another environmental group, sounds a similar note, also faulting the government for failing to limit emissions. “What is missing today?” says David Doniger of the NRDC. “Any sign that the Bush administration will follow last week’s Supreme Court decision, which ordered EPA to decide – based on the science and only the science – whether the pollution from cars and trucks is contributing to global warming.”

Climate Change – Want to know more about global warming – the science, impacts and political debate? Visit our continually updated special report.

Energy and Fuels – Learn more about the looming energy crisis in our comprehensive special report.
Related Articles

* Hydrogen injection could boost biofuel production
* http://www.newscientisttechnology.com/article/dn11364
* 12 March 2007
* Bush to back bioethanol – but benefits are in the balance
* http://www.newscientisttechnology.com/article/dn11325
* 06 March 2007
* US mobilises for a biofuelled future
* http://www.newscientisttechnology.com/article/mg19325924.300
* 24 February 2007

Weblinks

* Renewable Fuel Standards Program, EPA
* http://www.epa.gov/otaq/renewablefuels/
* Environment and Public Works Committee
* http://epw.senate.gov/public/
* Sierra Club
* http://www.sierraclub.org/
* National Petrochemical and Refiners Association
* http://www.npradc.org/