Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt...

There are 62366 comments on the Newsday story from Dec 14, 2008, titled Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt.... In it, Newsday reports that:

When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

Hey dude

Corona Del Mar, CA

#49658 Aug 28, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
Our climate has accumulated
2,134,981,361
Hiroshima atomic bombs
of heat since 1998
Which reputable "scientist" came up with that exact number? lol
SpaceBlues

Desoto, TX

#49659 Aug 28, 2014
Hey dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Which reputable "scientist" came up with that exact number? lol
It is increasing .. lol

Our climate has accumulated

2,135,289,115

Hiroshima atomic bombs

of heat since 1998
truth-facts

Chillicothe, OH

#49660 Aug 28, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>
It is increasing .. lol
Our climate has accumulated
2,135,289,115
Hiroshima atomic bombs
of heat since 1998
It is increasing LOL oh yes it sure is,the horsesht that you keep posting there Pinnochio.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#49661 Aug 29, 2014
Every sigh and song is made of CO2. Don't hate.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#49662 Aug 29, 2014
A new study has found that the world’s existing fossil fuel power plants will spew more than 300 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere over their four-decade life span.

That’s more than 20 percent of the earth’s carbon budget of 1,400 billion tons—the highest level of carbon dioxide that scientists believe can be emitted and not raise global temperature beyond the 2 degrees Celsius threshold agreed to at the 2009 United Nations climate talks in Copenhagen.

It may seem strange that nobody thought to count this before, but the study is the first worldwide tally of carbon emissions from power plants by accounting for future emissions, also known as “committed emissions.”

“Our study shows that despite international efforts to reduce CO2 emissions, total remaining commitments in the global power sector have not declined in a single year since 1950 and are in fact growing rapidly—by an average of 4 percent per year from 2000 to 2012,” said Steven Davis, an earth sciences researcher at the University of California, Irvine, and the coauthor of the paper, published this week in the journal Environmental Research Letters.

In contrast, annual carbon emissions from existing power plants grew by 3 percent over the same period. In other words, the world is still building more fossil fuel power plants than it’s mothballing.

Here’s an example of this differential: While the power plants built in 2012 alone are projected to release 19 billion tons of carbon over their 40-year lifetime, the CO2 emissions that year from all the power plants already operating at that time was 14 billion tons.

“We’re taking on more debt than we’re paying, so the balance is growing—and that’s disturbing,” Davis said.

The results improve on current data used by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which has incorporated only estimates about the number of new power plants into their emissions scenario models, according to Davis.

Why hasn’t the analysis been done before?

“It’s a data-intensive process, and only recently has there been more access [to information],” Davis said, who used data from Platt’s, a company that collects information about the energy industry.

His research team also conducted an analysis of where new power plants are coming online. While the United States is retiring more power plants than it’s building, the European Union is bringing them online at the same rate that it’s taking them offline, according to Davis.

“But in China, India, Indonesia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, there’s been a lot of coal-fired power plants—it’s been as high as four times more commitments in any given year versus what they’re emitting right now,” he said.“That’s like charging $400 [on a credit card] in any given month and only paying $100.”

But since 2010, China has slowed construction of coal-fired power plants, while Southeast Asia has been building more to expand its industrial capacity, Davis noted.

He is working on estimating future emissions from the power plants that came online in 2013, noting that such a tally should be done annually to incorporate the latest data available.

In the meantime, his 2012 results have gotten the attention of IPCC scientists in Vienna, with whom he’ll be collaborating to develop a new carbon emissions scenario based on his findings. Davis has also been in contact with the U.S. State Department about the results.

In December, he’ll be presenting at the next U.N. climate talks, which are scheduled to take place in Lima, Peru.

“I’d say these commitments are growing so rapidly that they’re in line with that worst-case emissions scenario presented by the IPCC,” he said, referring to a world where carbon emissions continue to grow past the year 2100.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#49663 Aug 29, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
Every sigh and song is made of CO2. Don't hate.
A new study has found that the world’s existing fossil fuel power plants will spew more than 300 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere over their four-decade life span.

That’s more than 20 percent of the earth’s carbon budget of 1,400 billion tons—the highest level of carbon dioxide that scientists believe can be emitted and not raise global temperature beyond the 2 degrees Celsius threshold agreed to at the 2009 United Nations climate talks in Copenhagen.

It may seem strange that nobody thought to count this before, but the study is the first worldwide tally of carbon emissions from power plants by accounting for future emissions, also known as “committed emissions.”

“Our study shows that despite international efforts to reduce CO2 emissions, total remaining commitments in the global power sector have not declined in a single year since 1950 and are in fact growing rapidly—by an average of 4 percent per year from 2000 to 2012,” said Steven Davis, an earth sciences researcher at the University of California, Irvine, and the coauthor of the paper, published this week in the journal Environmental Research Letters.

In contrast, annual carbon emissions from existing power plants grew by 3 percent over the same period. In other words, the world is still building more fossil fuel power plants than it’s mothballing.

Here’s an example of this differential: While the power plants built in 2012 alone are projected to release 19 billion tons of carbon over their 40-year lifetime, the CO2 emissions that year from all the power plants already operating at that time was 14 billion tons.

“We’re taking on more debt than we’re paying, so the balance is growing—and that’s disturbing,” Davis said.

The results improve on current data used by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which has incorporated only estimates about the number of new power plants into their emissions scenario models, according to Davis.

Why hasn’t the analysis been done before?

“It’s a data-intensive process, and only recently has there been more access [to information],” Davis said, who used data from Platt’s, a company that collects information about the energy industry.

His research team also conducted an analysis of where new power plants are coming online. While the United States is retiring more power plants than it’s building, the European Union is bringing them online at the same rate that it’s taking them offline, according to Davis.

“But in China, India, Indonesia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, there’s been a lot of coal-fired power plants—it’s been as high as four times more commitments in any given year versus what they’re emitting right now,” he said.“That’s like charging $400 [on a credit card] in any given month and only paying $100.”

But since 2010, China has slowed construction of coal-fired power plants, while Southeast Asia has been building more to expand its industrial capacity, Davis noted.

He is working on estimating future emissions from the power plants that came online in 2013, noting that such a tally should be done annually to incorporate the latest data available.

In the meantime, his 2012 results have gotten the attention of IPCC scientists in Vienna, with whom he’ll be collaborating to develop a new carbon emissions scenario based on his findings. Davis has also been in contact with the U.S. State Department about the results.

In December, he’ll be presenting at the next U.N. climate talks, which are scheduled to take place in Lima, Peru.

“I’d say these commitments are growing so rapidly that they’re in line with that worst-case emissions scenario presented by the IPCC,” he said, referring to a world where carbon emissions continue to grow past the year 2100.
litesong

Everett, WA

#49664 Aug 29, 2014
vox wrote:
Antarctic sea ice extent is going through the roof....
In 2002 Antarctic sea ice was predicted by AGW scientists to increase & re-confirmed in 2005. Ever since, sleepy sleazy slimy steenking toxic topix AGW denier liars have highlighted the accuracy of AGW scientists' predictions, thinking they refute AGW science.

Meanwhile, Greenland & Antarctic land ices continue & ACCELERATE VOLUME melting, now at 150 cubic miles per year. Yes, despite excess Antarctic precipitation (in the form of snow) causing the off-shore sea ice & excess snow on Antarctic land, the land ice is decreasing big-time.

Thank you, sleepy sleazy slimy steenking toxic topix AGW denier liars for proving AGW.
Patriot

Denver, CO

#49665 Aug 29, 2014
Siberia and Canada On Fire!

The Siberian Peninsula is no stranger to wild fires but this is different.

&li st=UUye7OVKZjiI-OJ_4bW_VcYA

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#49666 Aug 29, 2014
vox wrote:
Global Warming FRAUD FACT #2 for dumbass dim-libs:
Antarctic sea ice extent is going through the roof....
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/iphon ...
Antarctic sea ice is thin one-year ice compared to the thick multi-year ice lost in the Arctic, and it is forming in a *warming* Antarctic ocean, so obviously it's not down to cooling but another factor such as wind or salinity.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#49667 Aug 29, 2014
Patriot wrote:
Siberia and Canada On Fire!
The Siberian Peninsula is no stranger to wild fires but this is different.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =9uK66pBjz-sXX&list=UUye7O VKZjiI-OJ_4bW_VcYA
Thanks, I had not seen it yet.

Did you know about this?

The Soviet famine of 1932–33 affected the major grain-producing areas of the Soviet Union, leading to the deaths of millions in those areas and severe food insecurity throughout the USSR. These areas included Ukraine, Northern Caucasus, Volga Region and Kazakhstan,[1] the South Urals, and West Siberia.[2][3] The subset of the famine within the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic is called Holodomor or "hungry mass-death."

Unlike the 1921 famine in the Russian SFSR, information about the famine of 1932–33 was suppressed by the Soviet authorities until perestroika and Glasnost, the political and economic reforms which ended the Soviet Union in the early 1990s.[citation needed]
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#49668 Aug 29, 2014
vox wrote:
Global Warming FRAUD FACT #2 for dumbass dim-libs:
Those with the least to say, speak loudest. You demonstrate this quite well.
vox wrote:
Antarctic sea ice extent is going through the roof....
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/iphon ...
False or at least somewhat dim. Antarctic ice EXTENT has increase very slightly and most of that may be an artifact of multiple data series. http://tinyurl.com/qhm9ckx

Note also that this is only in MAXIMUM extent during the 6 months of darkness (winter) which has very little to do with climate. Peak minimums are the relevant issue that is affected and affects climate the most.
vox wrote:
Global Warming FRAUD FACT #3 for dumbass liberals
Great Lakes spring ice cover obliterated all previous records....
http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/prods/CVCHDCTGL/20 ...
Now this is a matter of local climate NOT of global warming, although it does relate to climate change (more variable climate due to weakening of the jet stream allowing 'loops' of arctic air to penetrate farther south in the mid US. It actually proves AGW better than the global temperature record since it is harder to mistake it.

And note that AGW does not mean that every location will change exactly the same amount in temperature. The main feature of AGW is that it forces a change in LOCAL climates and those may be warmer, wetter, dryer or colder. The AVERAGE will rise.

So far, you have only demonstrated your ignorance.
vox wrote:
Global Warming FRAUD FACT #4 for dumbass democrats
US major hurricane strikes peaked 60 years ago, and are the lowest on record...
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/All_U.S._ ...
Again faulty logic. You are only looking at the US and only at those hurricanes that make landfall. The prediction of climate change from AGW does not say that it will not react to the record ENSO La-Nina, nor does it predict a greater NUMBER of hurricanes. It says that hurricanes that DO form will be stronger due to warmer waters providing more energy.

Note also that science (not dumbasses like you) says that there is a long term cycle of the 'bermuda high' which steers hurricanes either into the gulf of mexico (where they must make landfall) or off the East coast of the US (where they don't mostly). This is due to increasing size of the intertropic convergence zone, a consequence of AGW.
http://tinyurl.com/o947gew
Hey dude

Corona Del Mar, CA

#49669 Aug 29, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>
It is increasing .. lol
Our climate has accumulated
2,135,289,115
Hiroshima atomic bombs
of heat since 1998
Of course, you had no answer. Typical. lol

By the way, lol means I'm chuckling because I know I'm smarter than you.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#49670 Aug 29, 2014
Still no experimental tests of climate change mitigation; it's still a hoax.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#49671 Aug 29, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
Still no experimental tests of climate change mitigation; it's still a hoax.
Still no good arguments from the clueless denier.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#49672 Aug 29, 2014
Hey dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, you had no answer. Typical. lol
By the way, lol means I'm chuckling because I know I'm smarter than you.
I replied your stupid post:
Hey dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Which reputable "scientist" came up with that exact number? lol
You were WRONG when you wrote "exact number" and I showed you it was increasing, DUH.

Now you say you're chuckling when you have been shown to be not "smarter."

Oh, lol means laughing out loud. FAIL, again.

Per litesong .. you deniers don't know how to ask science questions.

Hey computer, tell it again:

Our climate has accumulated

2,135,577,244

Hiroshima atomic bombs

of heat since 1998
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#49673 Aug 29, 2014
replied to
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#49674 Aug 29, 2014
Brian_G wrote:
Still no experimental tests of climate change mitigation; it's still a hoax.
Keep posting an incredibly dumb sentence, denier. You have no idea that it is irrational and downright crazy.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#49675 Aug 29, 2014
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Still no good arguments from the clueless denier.
Agreed.

Have you noticed a frayed or fried brain?

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#49676 Aug 29, 2014
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
Still no good arguments from the clueless denier.
What better argument than the history of experimental tests for climate change mitigation science-fantasy. Man has never been able to control climate or weather; nature doesn't work that way.

“CO2 is Gaseous Love”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#49677 Aug 29, 2014
SpaceBlues wrote:
Agreed. Have you noticed a frayed or fried brain?
^^^I've noticed a pattern of insult and abuse.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 12 min Cheech the Conser... 1,460,465
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr District 1 231,241
Chicagoland bartenders and waitresses NEVER hug... 2 hr Tourism warning 1
News Scientists say they have proved climate change ... (Dec '08) 3 hr Dudley 7,968
last post wins! (Dec '10) 4 hr They cannot kill ... 2,764
last post wins! (Apr '13) 4 hr They cannot kill ... 1,977
Are democrats destroyed? 6 hr enter username 17

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages