Clouds From Chinese Coal Cast a Long Shadow

[rrandb]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

So the fact that the polar ice caps have been shown to be melting (which will cause a 6; rise in sea levels!) doesn't alarm you!

While I can niether confirm or deny the 6" thoery. They have taken core samples of the glaciers in Greenland. They found a distict pattern of Thaw, Melt and Freeze going back a long ways. Over and over and over, thaw, melt freeze, thaw,melt, freeze. Its what glaicers do. This was true even during the Ice Age. I know this is true because it was on the TLC and I learned something. Do not panic. The sky is not, I repeat NOT falling. [banghead] [B)] [V]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith

I guess we'll only be sure global warming is real when Florida is under 10 feet of water....

See above

QUOTE: ...., even then, I'm positive there will be some who will blame it on illegal immigrants or Saddam Hussien or someother straw man.

You mean like your boy Clinton the other day blaming "Republican policies" for Hurricane Katrina? And here we thought Algore was the comic foil to Clinton's straight man! Turns out they're both wearing the tin foil hats.[:o)]

QUOTE:
PS did anyone see the PBS Nova science show on how pollutants in the atmosphere have been reflecting some sunlight back into space, dampening the overall increase in global climate warming? Scary stuff....it could be a harbinger of the beginnig of a true greenhouse effect globally. Of course we dont even know if anything today can alter changes that began decades ago, we may just have to be ready for the coming heatwave that no amount of political spin can offset

Well, that's interesting. Atmospheric matter deflecting radiation! Could it be that the greenhouse effect simply moderates global temperature, thus an increase in greenhouse gases would only increase the moderating effect, whereas a decrease in greenhouse gases would dilute the moderating effect?

Now that's a theory that makes some sense! I think you may have stumbled onto the next great scientific theory, V!

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

So the fact that the polar ice caps have been shown to be melting (which will cause a 6; rise in sea levels!) doesn't alarm you!

Do the ice in the bowl of water experiment first, then tell us if you think an alleged melt-off of polar ice will raise sea levels.

[vsmith]

I guess we'll only be sure global warming is real when Florida is under 10 feet of water, even then, I'm positive there will be some who will blame it on illegal immigrants or Saddam Hussien or someother straw man.

PS did anyone see the PBS Nova science show on how pollutants in the atmosphere have been reflecting some sunlight back into space, dampening the overall increase in global climate warming? Scary stuff....it could be a harbinger of the beginnig of a true greenhouse effect globally. Of course we dont even know if anything today can alter changes that began decades ago, we may just have to be ready for the coming heatwave that no amount of political spin can offset

[solzrules]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

So the fact that the polar ice caps have been shown to be melting (which will cause a 6; rise in sea levels!) doesn't alarm you!

Nope.

In fact, the more the merrier.

[Hugh Jampton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

We're all going to die; some of us by more exciting methods than others.

I was hoping to die young,, you leave a better looking corpse that way.

[carnej1]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

global warming
global cooling
ice age coming
arctic ice is melting
asteroids
earthquakes
tsunamis
volcanic eruptions
floods
hurricanes
tornadoes
terrorism
the anti-christ
illegal aliens
space aliens
bird flu
aids
over-eating
over-smoking
drugs
alcohol
crime in the streets
Iraq
Iran
North Korea
unaccounted-for nuclear waste
nuclear war
open-access railroads


Please pick your prefered paranoia, and then proceed to rant and rave about it.

Then hide under your sheets behind closed doors, trembling in fear of whatever the media is trying to scare you with today.

We're all going to die; some of us by more exciting methods than others.

You forgot Bears!!!!( people who watch Steven Colbert's show on Comedy Central will get that one)

[wallyworld]

The postings on this topic are more enlightening in terms of human psychology than really settling any long standing squabble over whether or not global warming is worthy of paranoia. Look at when the cost of oil skyrocketed, how many posts were about the cost of gasoline? Count how many there are now. I dont think that the concept of pollution being detrimental to our enviroment is controversial. It's a no brainer. How bad is bad? It's only when these issues strike us with the immediacy of personally effecting what we do every day, that Chicken Little spreads the news that the skys falling. Otherwise, its business as usual. How many decades have passed since it was discovered that either we are running out of oil or that we are covering ourselves in a blanket of smog? You dont have to be psychic to know what will happen tomorrow if circumstances dont change today. Alot of this reaction is self comforting-we all like buffers between ourselves and the larger world around us. I dont worry about global warming or oil because the cross purposes of economics and democracy insure that nothing is going to change. If the powers that be ever decide that fuel and pollution are inter-related issues and that emissions as they are, is not a good thing-by that time, we will need goggles and a hazmat suit to trim our lawns. And so it goes.

[Tulyar15]

So the fact that the polar ice caps have been shown to be melting (which will cause a 6; rise in sea levels!) doesn't alarm you!

[Anonymous]

Here's a good website which explores the see-saw positions of the MSM regarding climate:

http://www.businessandmedia.org/specialreports/2006/fireandice/fireandice.asp

First, it was global cooling, then global warming, then back to global cooling, and finally back to global warming. My prediction for 2030: Back to new ice age scares.

[jimrice4449]

I posted this on another topic that strayed onto environmental issues but it's worth repeating. If you really want some data, unfiltered through a point of view, try "The Skecptical Environmentalist" by Bjorn Lomborg. He's a Danish professor of statistics
and wanted to cut thropugh all of the conflicting "scientific" claims put out by those simply seeking substantiation of their personal viewpoints. He has sifted through data, mostly derived from governmental and UN sources, and presents the picture as it stands now in reality. The book is published by Cambridge University Press. I got my copy in paperback from Amazon.com for about $15.

[Anonymous]

You may prefer a common sense approach
to enviromental regulation, whatever that means.
I'll have mine based upon the best available
science.

Dave

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal


You see what I mean? Dare to question and parse current environmental dogma, and you are accused of hating clean air/water/et al, by clones like dsktc. I made it perfectly clear that the US environmental laws are overkill, while so-called environmental laws in China are nothing more than window dressing, and that what we all need is a common sense approach to environmental stewardship.

dsktc, you are part of the problem. You cannot see past your own extremism. Or can you even concieve that there is such a thing as environmental extremism?

[zardoz]

global warming
global cooling
ice age coming
arctic ice is melting
asteroids
earthquakes
tsunamis
volcanic eruptions
floods
hurricanes
tornadoes
terrorism
the anti-christ
illegal aliens
space aliens
bird flu
aids
over-eating
over-smoking
drugs
alcohol
crime in the streets
Iraq
Iran
North Korea
unaccounted-for nuclear waste
nuclear war
open-access railroads


Please pick your prefered paranoia, and then proceed to rant and rave about it.

Then hide under your sheets behind closed doors, trembling in fear of whatever the media is trying to scare you with today.

We're all going to die; some of us by more exciting methods than others.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dsktc

So, our enviromental laws are extreme?

Perhaps you would prefer dirty water and
befouled air. Or perhaps you don't understand
the public health implications of a polluted
environment. Or perhaps you don't care,
as long as it affects someone else.

You really should be working for the Bush
Administration.

Dave

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Now, is the pollution coming from China a problem? Of course. Unlike the US, who's environmental laws can best be described as overkill, China's environmental laws are on the other end of the spectrum, e.g. either just lip service to show the world that they might start doing something about it, or simply not following a common sense/stewardship approach.

You see what I mean? Dare to question and parse current environmental dogma, and you are accused of hating clean air/water/et al, by clones like dsktc. I made it perfectly clear that the US environmental laws are overkill, while so-called environmental laws in China are nothing more than window dressing, and that what we all need is a common sense approach to environmental stewardship.

dsktc, you are part of the problem. You cannot see past your own extremism. Or can you even concieve that there is such a thing as environmental extremism?

[Anonymous]

Dear Sirs,

The question of humanity’s impact on our atmosphere and climate are hotly debated issues. There are a plethora of organizations and websites that appear to be authentic in their "take" on this topic. I visited all of the sites from FUTUREMODAL's list, and was quite impressed, in particular, with the fresh insight of the www.clearlight... website.

If I may offer a suggestion, there is a book titled State of Fear by Michael Crichton, copy write 2005? Although it is a work of fiction, Dr. Chrichton has included a well documented and factual bibliograpaghy supporting his thesis regarding global warming and other environmental issues. It's a great read-very exciting- and mind opening as well. Please, as you read it, notice the arguments provided by the professor and his sidekick. They are not the typical platforms of various global warming specialists.

Please give the book a try before you write it off because it doesn't agree with your own stance.

Enjoy,

David

[solzrules]

But wait a minute guys -

I thought the Kyoto treaty was supposed to solve all of this?

The same treaty Bush pulled out of because he was concerned about the ramifications it would have on the U.S. economy.

Could it be that the big bad U.S. is not the SOLE harbinger of evil and corporate greed on the planet? The NYTimes probably figures that our 'comrades' in China will solve the problem with some good' ole communist ingenuity. After all, they fixed that Chernobyl problem right up like it never happened.

I get real bored with people that claim we use a majority of the world's resources while we only have something like 10 percent of the population.

The fact is, as countries like China and India become more developed and industrialized, they will be bringing the 'growing pains' of pollution and waste along with it.

Oh well. Progress, right?

[eastside]

The article is about the pollution caused by the burning of coal in China, and its effects domestically and internationally. China is addicted to cheap coal for power. Although it mentions the production of CO2, the subject of the article is certainly not global warming.

[jeaton]

dsktc-Idaho is exempt from pollution and global warming.

[Anonymous]

So, our enviromental laws are extreme?

Perhaps you would prefer dirty water and
befouled air. Or perhaps you don't understand
the public health implications of a polluted
environment. Or perhaps you don't care,
as long as it affects someone else.

You really should be working for the Bush
Administration.

Dave

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Now, is the pollution coming from China a problem? Of course. Unlike the US, who's environmental laws can best be described as overkill, China's environmental laws are on the other end of the spectrum, e.g. either just lip service to show the world that they might start doing something about it, or simply not following a common sense/stewardship approach.

[Anonymous]

An interesting side note - the measured atmospheric levels of CO2 in the latitude running from China to North America is higher than the CO2 levels in the same latitude coming off the North American Atlantic coast. North America is a net CO2 sink.

Aside from that, this is the typical NYTimes nonsense piece when it comes to extrapolating the credible regional effects of too much pollution into a whole 'nother Global Warming crusade.

Apparently, the NYTimes has concluded that anthropogenic global warming is an established fact.

Apparently, the NYTimes writers and editors have never read these peer reviewed studies that refute the whole notion:

http://www.clearlight.com/~mhieb/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/data/mwp/description.jsp
http://climatesci.atmos.colostate.edu/?cat=3
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/msss/camera/images/CO2_Science_rel/index.html
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/glob-warm.html

Now, is the pollution coming from China a problem? Of course. Unlike the US, who's environmental laws can best be described as overkill, China's environmental laws are on the other end of the spectrum, e.g. either just lip service to show the world that they might start doing something about it, or simply not following a common sense/stewardship approach.

[zardoz]

The article that the link points to is much longer than what dsktc posted. It makes for an interesting read.

I shall eagerly await futuremodal's response. Progress at any price, eh?

[tatans]

I guess you sort of missed the toxic gas cloud the enveloped Toronto, last week, you could not see 2 blocks and a health warning was issued, I have a feeling this crap did not come from China, just wait till summer gets here folks.

[Anonymous]

From the New York Times:

"HANJING, China — One of China's lesser-known exports is a dangerous brew of soot, toxic chemicals and climate-changing gases from the smokestacks of coal-burning power plants.

"In early April, a dense cloud of pollutants over Northern China sailed to nearby Seoul, sweeping along dust and desert sand before wafting across the Pacific. An American satellite spotted the cloud as it crossed the West Coast.

"Researchers in California, Oregon and Washington noticed specks of sulfur compounds, carbon and other byproducts of coal combustion coating the silvery surfaces of their mountaintop detectors. These microscopic particles can work their way deep into the lungs, contributing to respiratory damage, heart disease and cancer.

"Filters near Lake Tahoe in the mountains of eastern California "are the darkest that we've seen" outside smoggy urban areas, said Steven S. Cliff, an atmospheric scientist at the University of California at Davis.

"Unless China finds a way to clean up its coal plants and the thousands of factories that burn coal, pollution will soar both at home and abroad. The increase in global-warming gases from China's coal use will probably exceed that for all industrialized countries combined over the next 25 years, surpassing by five times the reduction in such emissions that the Kyoto Protocol seeks.

"The sulfur dioxide produced in coal combustion poses an immediate threat to the health of China's citizens, contributing to about 400,000 premature deaths a year. It also causes acid rain that poisons lakes, rivers, forests and crops.

"The sulfur pollution is so pervasive as to have an extraordinary side effect that is helping the rest of the world, but only temporarily: It actually slows global warming. The tiny, airborne particles deflect the sun's hot rays back into space.

"But the cooling effect from sulfur is short-lived. By contrast, the carbon dioxide emanating from Chinese coal plants will last for decades, with a cumulative warming effect that will eventually overwhelm the cooling from sulfur and deliver another large kick to global warming, climate scientists say."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/11/business/worldbusiness/11chinacoal.html?pagewanted=print

Dave