If governments are to meet their own stated goal of limiting the warming of the planet to no more than 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, or 2 degrees Celsius, above the preindustrial level, they must restrict emissions from additional fossil-fuel burning to about 1 trillion tons of carbon dioxide, the panel said. At current growth rates, that budget is likely to be exhausted in something like 30 years, possibly less.

Yet energy companies have booked coal and petroleum reserves equal to several times that amount, and they are spending some $600 billion a year to find more. Utilities and oil companies continue to build coal-fired power plants and refineries, and governments are spending another $600 billion or so directly subsidizing the consumption of fossil fuels.

By contrast, the report found, less than $400 billion a year is being spent around the world to reduce emissions or otherwise cope with climate change. That is a small fraction of the revenue spent on fossil fuels — it is less, for example, than the revenue of a single American oil company, ExxonMobil.

The new report comes just a month before international delegates convene in Lima, Peru, to devise a new global agreement to limit emissions, and it makes clear the urgency of their task.

Appearing Sunday morning at a news conference in Copenhagen to unveil the report, the United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, appealed for strong action in Lima.

“Science has spoken. There is no ambiguity in their message,” Mr. Ban said. “Leaders must act. Time is not on our side.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/03/world/europe/global-warming-un-intergovernmental-panel-on-climate-change.html

 

the battle with CONservative denialism...

There is a very powerful network of CONservative (mis- and dis-) information — websites, journals and spruikers — all working hard to promote the denial of global warming, while bashing the science, day in day out...

 

In this framework, science is not for scientists but exposed as doubtful for industrialists, gold-watch makers, oil cartels, car makers, miners of coal and iron ore, and developers — and can I mention many lawyers... All of them jovially compete with each other for your small buck and use you as slaves at the same time — because you are prisoners of comforts, including the clutches of credit... 

 

These CONservative outfits are well equipped. Pure science — such as the science associated with global warming that produces contrary results to the endless capitalistic dream — is thus evil, and promoted as such, as much as possible. 
This promotion, frothed up deep in CONservative circles, is deliberately transferred onto the average uneducated punter by maintaining an apparently "serious" debate that floods the market with doubt of the science. In the end it's quite easy to deny something that we cannot see — or something that is measure in tiny parts per millions or in 0,03 variable increments — measurements that mean zilch to the common man (I use the word "man" here because most of the battles in regard to global warming are fought out by men in suit, apart from the leader of the "abominable" Greens and their carrot cakes. I don't mean this, but this is the thought that underpins CONservative thinking).
The stock market is far more important and more exciting than CO2 fluctuations in the atmosphere... There is no money to be made on the CO2 levels, but mostly there is no possible gamble on the climate to be had between gentlemen at the gentlemen's club. Not even the best computer and super whiz weather forecaster can tell you what the weather will exactly be in three days time... 

The Liberals (CONservatives) use the commercial media (MMMM - mediocre mass media de mierda) — which most of them, the CONservatives, own or control — a media overrun with fat lazy journalists, with scientifically ignorant opinionators, with newly graduated ignoramus journalists barely out of university who believe their work is done when republishing a press release with their own by-line on a front page — and by spruikers who are paid in golden bullions for spreading false information... And doubt... Let's not forget the doubt... On the other side, the reasonable and truly investigative journalists are also obliged (forced by their controlling masters) to be of "balanced" views, thus giving the denialists still another half-voice...

As well, CONservative forces make sure that even the national broadcaster, bound by "ethics", has to be balanced, thus has to present the doubt and the rubbish about climate change in the same amount as the 99 per cent of the scientists who know their boring, yet very accurate warming stuff. One has to know that emotions have always been more creative of beliefs than of understanding... And the emotions on both side of the fence stirred by the denialists promote the battle of beliefs rather than the understanding of reality... This of course is the result the CONservatives want.

Thus from the onset we are drowning in this sea of added misinformation and doubt — and serious scientists have little voice outside their sphere of research (now supported strongly by the IPCC which of course is poopooed by the CONservatives. Even there, they are constantly under attack. Scientists always doubt what they do... It is the nature of scientific knowledge to know more precisely and question more, in a world of statistical anomalies and reactive chemistry. 
Even scientists and theorists always try to disprove (or improve upon) the theory of relativity by Einstein — touted by denialists as a brilliant glorious non-peer reviewed theory — while most CONservatives would have no clue about the mathematics nor the meanings of this theory... It's just a historically-held promotionally ingrained belief that bamboozled them since they were kids, possibly because their parents were more intelligent. Yet should Einstein be alive today and promote global warming theory he would be hit by a ton of bricks...

The CONservative themselves have their own intense and purposely driven information network.
The Quadrant for example is a one-sided Liberal (CONservative) pseudo-intellectual magazine representing a think-tank that will pan anything that has a whiff of social conscience if it means human equity — in opposition to financial "equity" — a term which relates to ways to invest money with better return and lower tax rates, than equality for all... The Quadrant has not a skerrick of any acknowledgement of Aboriginal worth nor of Aboriginal independence of thoughts, outside the subservient framework decided by the white shoe brigade — or complete assimilation. It is the place where the Keith Whindshuttles of this world write elegantly in subtle undertones about the glory of white Australia. It is the place where "global warming is crap" is written in elegant literary manner without raising the voice. which would be impolite... There too, "renewable" energy is front-ended with a mining caterpillar truck and is being blamed for an "unecessary" rapidly rising electricity cost to consumer (the poles and wires restructuring which is truly at fault is not mentioned) ... 

One of the CONservative trick is to associate "quality" with CONservatism... This is not a new premise in the exclusivity domain of the rich, where if one can afford it, one will acquire the best car available — some for show, some for speed, but this "CONservative-quality" association illusion is now penetrating the "mass" market... Even people such as David Flint will blame the fall of Fairfax (media) squarely on its "liberalism" — that is to say not having been conservative enough because "CONservatism is where quality resides"... It's a very underhanded and significant but sophistical argument... meaning that it is totally meaningless in a full context.

There is the Australian Conservative — another well-linked Liberal (CONservative) outfit that publishes without any critique, all of Abbott's uttering as if it was golden river (It is really golden shower material). These magazines of course are created for the benefit of "leaders", of capitalists, of money-men and conservative decision makers who own stuff — you included (I mean they own you like kings own slaves)... We are looking at the high end of town — the pharaohs and their courts of our time.
Even on Sundays, when time is dedicated to relaxation while reading the Financial Review (a red-rag to these high-powered men barely reading about what others lesser financial beings think) and to the commiseration about Labor's Carbon Tax — which of course their saviour Tony Abbott will repeal (done with the help of two-timing Palmer) while giving them the tax cuts they so richly deserve on resurrection day after the next elections (won) — the shorts and the T-shirts are unblemished cream designers brands pressed to perfection...
Strangely, more often than not, the sausages and the meat, cooked on the most expensive Webber one can find set in a corner of the marble patio, under the perfectly umbraged veranda — are often the cheapest cuts.

To these rich CONservatives, a Labor government is total anathema... The CONservatives are born to rule, thus democracy is anathema too. But they cleverly know how to manipulate the mood of the proletariat by turning the proletariat against itself... They know they can tickle the fancy of poor struggling individuals by promises of gold — fool's gold as it may be — but the trick works, when the words are falling from CONservative politicians's mouths as well...

Then there is the CO2 Climate Scientific, another conservative outfit dedicated to damage the established science in Australia by claiming to know better— while being mostly ignorant and highly manipulative. Its main targets include the Australian Academy of Sciences. The CO2 Climate Scientific writes columns after columns of pseudo-philosophical need for scientists to be doubtful (which most scientists are anyway — that's what science is about: questioning constantly and reviewing results) and also about government wasting money by giving grants for climate change research, which the writers of CO2 Climate Scientific point out will only produce the slanted desired results...
One has to admire the gall of the title of this outfit: In one line, one has "CO2", the controversial item at the centre of the debate about climate change, the word "Climate" (the controversial issue itself) and the world "Scientific" as to inform its readers that this outfit is a serious scientific unit — where science takes precedence — or in this case has the final say. But the CO2 Climate Scientific does not do any research, and only picks into the basket of denialists' slanted and false information to promote doubt about anthropogenic climate change...  

One of the subtext, here lies in the psychology of how to promote and maintain happiness, by the destruction of "negative" thoughts... Thus the denialists attitude is deemed as a positive force designed to combat the "negative" effect of a problem which has the potential to stop us from burning carbon in a carbon-based rich economy... Burn baby burn.. Be happy...

The Friends of Science is another group reacting in a similar vein... "Friends of Science" What a name!... A very clever name for an outfit that basically promotes some "science" and pseudo-scientific views designed to defeat the global warming alarmists, with many a false argument and wrong data.

I have already mentioned The ACSC, where some of its principals have massive interest in mining and carbon intensive industries. I have also mentioned its association with the ICSC, a US based denialist outfit that does not hesitate to parallel global warming alarmists with murderers on large advertising panels.

Most of these published "magazines" or on the net are of course well presented to appear "at a serious most", while being scientifically illiterate at best and total garbage at worse... But to the capitalistic mind, these restrained graphics represent serenity, sunsets, peace, quality and seriousness of thoughts and the understated intrinsic value of money... I know the tricks, I worked in advertising for more than twenty years... 

Of course, the "business" people have their own "Woman's Day/weekly/Cosmo" magazine called BRW. It's where some of the rich and their lieutenant can shine and show there capitalistic skills such in investments, shares and financial wares — but little production is shown there... It's all all about the whizzes of the market... One has to go to specialist magazines, where engineers and other Liberal (CONservative) professions such as developers can show off.

Any cent that is spend on welfare (public science is similar to welfare in the mind of CONservatives) is resented as it comes out of taxes painfully extracted from their grand fortunes in the making — the leftover after they have managed to stash away the better part of it in "trusts" and "offshore accounts". CONservatives don't mind charity — especially when it's tax deductible and when one can meet like-minded persons at glossy functions with white tablecloths and full silver service...One can outshine other rich bastards there, by glorious bidding on a dinner for twelve with the leader of the opposition Tony Abbott (now turdy PM) or such.  Sure, some of these charities will do-good as long as the poor don't get a cent of it, since most of the dosh raised goes to rich doctors doing research on the diseases of the rich, such as heart-attacks or obesity from rich food and/or the development of new drugs in which later investments in a company that buys the patent cheap will bring in riches.... I am very unfair here as a lot of good is done for kids as well, but rarely at conservative charity events, poor kids of other countries are ever mentioned, unless a feat of medicine can be used as promotional material... 
So the Liberals (CONservatives) don't really read the newspapers — They own them. Nor do they watch much "entertaining" television. They dine with the networks CEOs, mind you... In a sexist spray, I will indulge to tell you their wives do not read House and Gardens either, but they pluck the latest Mercedes or Cartier magazines to see what they could buy next in order to be up-to-date with the latest fashion. No, not the Dior fashion in Women's weekly for the plebes, but that fashion that is exclusively available to those with a black American Express Card and a 160 foot yacht in the Mediterranean.

Thus global warming is like an annoying fly they've been trying to swat for too long. Actually they don't do the swatting themselves. They delegate. That's the privilege of the rich. One can delegate. They delegate the swatting to the Alan Jones, the Janet Albrechtsen, the Andrew Bolt, and others down the food chain to whom they throw crumbs as long as the beneficiary does the job of denigrating the scientists... Or denigrate those annoying do-gooders who want to regulate gambling... Gambling of course is good, since the entire edifice of capitalism is anchored on gambling with peers. The CDSs and the derivative markets are giant gambling pits. Most of the rich of course do not play with their own moneys, but yours and mine and that of many other little retired scrooges and penny pinchers — dollars and cents which when put together amounts to tidy sums. 

I have witnessed (by accident — I was in the wrong place at the wrong time) a mighty Liberal conference, once, where the white-shoe brigade turned up in R M Williams creams and fine stripes, with brown leather belts coming from 2-ton cows. The ten gallon hats would have made Bob Katter blush with envy... I nearly spewed...
Meanwhile as long as the real science and the Aborigines are kept at bay, one can sleep easy... People like Alan Jones are doing a wonderful job at that, but in order to appear righteous, they are also charitable to a fault... Look, the man brought Lord Monckton of Brenchley, a grand-master of scientific fudge... But is it fudge? That is the great swindle here, they don't really care one way or the other as long as the seeds of doubt are sowed to all compass points... and as long that no one tells them where they can't dig. Of course conservatives are born to rule and in that hierarchy, there are sub-networks of allegiances that sometimes can come undone... but this is another topic...

One of the major problem is to properly assess the damage done by "global warming" in proportion to the "normal" amount of natural disasters... For example, in the US this year (2012), that country has experiences in the first six month about three to four times the normal amount of "natural disasters"... Is this due to "climate change"? One could ask this fair question... Of course there is an indication of climate change... But is this climate change linked in some way to human burning of carbon...?

There are scientific experiments that can tell us that CO2 is a moderate "greenhouse gas" by studying its absorption and scattering of some of the infrared spectrum of light. But is it enough to induce global warming? The denialists claim this is negligible. The denialists also claim that CO2 rise in the atmosphere is due to increase temperature and not the other way round. This viewpoint is similar to saying that the sun rotates around the earth...

Methane is a strong "greenhouse gas" but it only exist for a limited time and in small quantity (increasing mind you) in the atmosphere. The denialists will claim that this is also negligible.

Water vapour is deemed a "greenhouse gas", but its behaviour is quite "erratic" due to air density, temperature, atmospheric pressure and quantity thereof. This is the province of meteorologist who predict the weather including long range weather. They have an array of precise instrumentation from thermometers to hygrometers and barometers... In some parts of the world like cities, they also have dust particle counters. Yet the weather gods are often wrong, so how can scientists could right about global warming? That is a question often placed at out feet by the denialists... The answer to this is very complex and one day I will tackle it. Meanwhile the conservative denialists will simply claim that "global warming is bullshit"... End of argument...
This erratic behaviour of water vapour was the reason why Arrhenius took the decision to concentrate on the carbon dioxide conundrum to analyse the ice age inductors, thus what would have been the proportion of CO2 during the ice ages. His very comprehensive analysis let him to calculate that CO2 presence in the atmosphere was around 40 per cent lower during the last Ice Age... Much of these calculations and analysis have been re-performed and re-confirm with small variations, quite a few times, including recently by a very serious scientific outfit. These calculation have also been confirmed by the study of the ice-cores records.

In the end, the science of global warming is correct. It should frighten the pants off us.

It is the effects of global warming that are the subject of controversy and it is a philosophically hot potato.

Global warming trends tell us we are moving towards more extreme weather patterns, more extremes of heat and of cold in some places, more intense in climate oscillations. And rising of sea levels. We need to include the acidification of oceans as well.

For example in the past, it would have take several years for the US weather to experience a complete array of phenomena such as those of the last six months: 
Warm winter, early spring, 240+ tornadoes, wild fires in Colorado being frothed up by record temperatures and winds, and more recently a devastating "storm event" that was not even predicted by the smartest of all weather forecasters. Several days later, about one million people are still "in the dark", the emergency services are down and more high temperatures are on the way with stifling humidity... and there is more "storms and hurricanes to come"

I will end up this article on the way disinformation works:

There is no evidence that mermaids exist, a US government scientific agency has said.

The National Ocean Service made the unusual declaration in response to public inquiries following a TV show on the mythical creatures. It is thought some [many] viewers may have mistaken the programme for a documentary.

"No evidence of aquatic humanoids has ever been found," the service wrote in an online post.

 

Blimey... But then this is a happening in the land where 60 per cent of the folks there still do not subscribe to the theory of evolution because it is contrary to the scriptures...

We're on a loosing streak trying to fight scientific ignorance and conservatism in a world where emotions and denial rule... and where the power of the rich prevails in controlling the commercial emotional debate.

As well, our national media is pushed to be "balanced":

Q&A on ABC TV is an emotional debate and this is why I hate it...

 

The CONservative denialists are cleverly destroying our trust in science... Their tactic is to increase and control the proportion of doubters... In this context, they are succeeding in a 54/45 ration which is about the same as Liberal (CONservative)/LaborGreen ratio... But in Labor there are also many doubters influenced by the CONservative machine and their own religious views... In the end, Summer will tell us a bit more about the future...

(Note: 2013 was the warmest year on record for the Australian continent — 2014 is likely to beat this record...)

 

Gus Leonisky

Your local Global Warming Expert.

 

 

... As he takes a sip and spits it out again, Vauthier says, as if he had suddenly changed his mind: "The storms, well, perhaps they are getting worse." He won't forget the bad weather they had in the June before last, when a hailstorm came up from the southwest and descended upon a 12,000-hectare (30,000-acre) stretch of land. "Twelve-thousand hectares," says Vauthier, "that's never happened before." Within minutes, 5,000 hectares of top-quality Bordeaux grapes were destroyed, "literally hacked to pieces," says Vauthier. "Perhaps, monsieur, this is your climate change."

Extreme weather is becoming more common in all of France's wine-growing regions. Heavy rains and hailstorms frequently come on the heels of summer heat waves and dry periods. Winters and nighttime temperatures are so mild that the plants are never able to rest. Few winegrowers continue to deny these tangible phenomena.

On the other hand, it isn't easy to perceive that the last three decades have been the warmest in the last 1,400 years. It's hard to comprehend that the average annual temperature has increased by 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit), that the Atlantic and the Mediterranean are warming almost imperceptibly, and that days are getting just slightly warmer. Human beings lack the natural sensors to detect such changes, but grapevines have them. The vines are suffering from ongoing stress, say some vintners. Vineyards are in turmoil, not just in France but also in Italy, Spain and all of Southern Europe -- in all the places where it has always been warm and where it is now getting too hot.

'We've Been Fighting Here Since 2008'

Vintners along the Rhône River, 500 kilometers (310 miles) east of Bordeaux, know what this means. The region is home to the large Guigal winery at Château d'Ampuis, a complex of old and new buildings less than half an hour south of Lyon. The château sits directly at the base of the small mountains that produce the Côte-Rôtie, the best location in the northern Rhône Valley. Signs bearing the names of vintners, who proudly mark their parcels, are posted like standards up and down the steep hillsides. This is one of the world's oldest wine-growing regions, where the first vines were reportedly planted 2,400 years ago.

...

The young Guigal tells us that he is about to go on an important business trip to Châteauneuf, necessary because "the problems are getting really serious there." Seventy-five percent of the wine procuded by Châteauneuf-du-Pape is pressed from Grenache but the variety is no longer tolerating the heat. It's become "stubborn" lately, as he puts it. The maturation processes in the grapes are impaired, he explains. The sugar content peaks too early, before the berries are completely ripe. Color, tannins and aromas are so far behind, says Guigal, that proper harvests become difficult. The quality of entire vintages is at risk. "We've been fighting here since 2008," says Guigal. "The years since then have all been extremely dry. Nothing is getting easier."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/climate-change-threatens-french-viticulture-a-1000113.html

 

Vineyards are also under climate change in Australia where varietals have also been adapted to greater changes of weather though. California has been in drought for the past three year, but apparently as most crops have failed, vines are an exception and the wines made in the Napa Valley and Sonoma region are gaining in taste and quality, due to the drought. Bad storms create more damage than drought on Europe's crus.

Now we may have to expect some other changes as global warming moves on to the next level...

 

 

A leaked tape from an oil and gas industry conference shows how Big Carbon uses dirty tricks to undermine science, vilify its critics and discredit journalists who criticise the use of fossil fuels, writes Sharon Kelly via DeSmogBlog.

Leave it to Washington's top attack-dog lobbyist Richard Berman to verify what many always suspected: that the oil and gas industry uses dirty tricks to undermine science, vilify its critics and discredit journalists who cast doubt on the prudence of fossil fuels.

In a speech at an industry conference in June, surreptitiously recorded by an energy executive, Rick Berman ‒ the foremost go-to guy for Republican smear campaigns ‒ gave unusually candid advice to a meeting of drilling companies.

“Think of this as an endless war,” he told executives in a speech, which was leaked to the New York Times by an attendee at the conference who was offended by Berman's remarks. “And you have to budget for it.”

read more: http://www.independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/fossil-fuel-industrys-dirty-tricks-campaign-exposed,7064

 

see above: repeat and updated article from two years ago...

 

 

Stephen Henry Schneider (February 11, 1945 – July 19, 2010)[1] was Professor of Environmental Biology and Global Change at Stanford University, a Co-Director at the Center for Environment Science and Policy of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and a Senior Fellow in the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment. Schneider served as a consultant to federal agencies and White House staff in the Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations.

His research included modeling of the atmosphere, climate change, and the effect of global climate change on biological systems. Schneider was the founder and editor of the journal Climatic Change and authored or co-authored over 450 scientific papers and other publications. He was a Coordinating Lead Author in Working Group II IPCC TAR and was engaged as a co-anchor of the Key Vulnerabilities Cross-Cutting Theme for the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) at the time of his death. During the 1980s, Schneider emerged as a leading public advocate of sharp reductions of greenhouse gas emissions to combat global warming. In 2006 Professor Schneider was an Adelaide Thinker in Residence advising the South Australian Government of Premier Mike Rann on climate change and renewable energy policies.[2] In ten years South Australia went from zero to 31% of its electricity generation coming from renewables.

An annual award for outstanding climate science communication was created in Schneider's honor after his death.[3]

read more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Schneider

See also: http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/SYR_AR5_LONGERREPORT.pdf

See also : http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/19732

See also:  http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/19214

See also: http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/8789

See also: http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/19279

 

Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. Recent climate changes have had widespread impacts on human and natural systems. 

 

The military-style Hummer H1, more tank than truck, disappeared from the new car lots long ago, killed off by General Motors for the sin of guzzling a gallon of gas every 10 to 12 miles. And as the cost of gas hung above $3.50 for four years, even used Hummers languished on used lots, too.

That is, until the price of crude oil — and gasoline — started to nosedive. “We’ve sold a few just in the last few weeks,” said Blake Sharkey, an assistant sales manager at Stadium Auto in Arlington, Texas.

Over the last month, auto analysts say, consumers have shown a fresh interest in the kind of SUVs — Hummers, Lincoln Navigators, Ford Explorers — that typified America’s bigger-is-better mindset of twenty years ago. The new mindset among some car buyers is one of the most unexpected consequences of a domestic oil boom that has helped cause global crude prices to plummet in recent months, with the cost of a gallon of gas now below $3.

As oil prices hit a three-year low, Americans are starting to see price changes that could ultimately influence everything from their grocery shopping to their heating bills to their travel. The lower prices — should they be sustained, as expected, for the next few months — have the potential to nudge the U.S. further away from its dreary post-recession mindset, leaving instead a nation with more affordable air and road transportation options, higher consumer confidence, and yes, a few more gas guzzlers driving around.

read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/11/10/the-hummer-is-back-thank-falling-oil-prices/?hpid=z1

Meanwhile as this patriotic duty to burn more cheap oil kicks in, more CO2 is going the atmosphere... 

The United States agreed to double the pace of the cuts in its emissions, reducing them to between 26% and 28% below 2005 levels by 2025.

The deal struck between President Barack Obama and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, provides an important boost to efforts to reach a global deal to fight climate change at a United Nations meeting in Paris next year. The accord also removes the Republicans’ main rationale for blocking Obama’s efforts to cut carbon pollution – the claim that China is unwilling to undertake similar cuts.

But Republicans in the US Congress reacted strongly against the deal on Wednesday. The party already held a majority in the House of Representatives, and the midterm elections last week also delivered them control of the Senate, where the Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, said Obama would not be in the White House long enough to see the plan through.

“This unrealistic plan, that the president would dump on his successor, would ensure higher utility rates and far fewer jobs,” he said.

read more: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/12/us-china-climate-deal-boosts-global-talks-but-republicans-vow-to-resist

There is too much emphasis on carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas and other forms such as ozone, methane and sulphur dioxide should receive more attention, a group of scientists say.

Writing a comment piece in the science journal Nature, the group argued that other forms of air pollutants contributed to one in eight deaths worldwide, and nearly 50 million deaths could be avoided by 2040 if emissions were cut in half.

Other types of pollutants, such as methane, had a higher global warming potential when compared to carbon dioxide, they said.

Methane was produced naturally in wetlands, but was also released from industry from natural gas systems and in the production of livestock.

Dr Julia Schmale, from Germany's Institute of Advanced Sustainability Studies, said gases and particles came from many different sources.

"Generally speaking, black carbon comes from combustion sources," Dr Schmale said.

"Ozone is produced chemically in the atmosphere, which is why it's very hard to control," she said.

More emphasis on role of gases in climate change

Dr Schmale said while the pollutants had not been ignored, more emphasis should be placed on the role they played in climate change.

"Within the context of combating climate change, they have received much less attention," Dr Schmale said.

"Only in the recent three years, after reports from the United Nations environmental program came out, these so-called climate forcing pollutants have gained much more attention and this is why there is much more debate on it right now."

The scientists argued that small improvements could be made to remove the particles – such as from black carbon – from entering the atmosphere.

Dr Schmale pointed to recent programs developed within the United Nations.

"For example, install particle filters for cars," she said.

"You can prevent leakages from pipelines when you think about methane, you can capture methane emissions from landfills or waste water treatment and actually convert it into an alternative energy source.

"To reduce many of these pollutants and then also to reduce these climate forces like carbon dioxide at the same time, is that we reduce consumption or do not burn as many fossil or biogenic fuels anymore.

"So that means that we need to change our behaviour a little bit."

READ ALL: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-20/too-much-emphasis-on-carbon-dioxide-impact-scientists-say/5905668

--------------------------------

I agree, but... CO2 is the marker, the trigger and the major offender for most of global warming... Other chemicals such as methane add to the problem. And I agree we need to reduce our emissions of these other chemicals that are detrimental to the atmosphere in which we breath and poop. CO2 will increase heat, modify water vapour behaviour in the atmosphere and with the resultant heat, more methane will be released from frozen peat pits, especially on the northern hemisphere as well as "industrial leaks". At present, the temperature for November in Sydney has been about 4 degrees Celsius above average and Brisbane, where the G20 meetings were held nearly had record temperature for the season, and was about 8 degrees above average... Just one day after the last of the presidents of the planet left, Brizzy was hit by a mega storm with massive flooding while now the city is preparing for another mega storm. 

The US is having another of these "mega" snow storms, the second one in two years running — of the "storm of the century"...

Don't be shy, say that global warming is adding a 2 to 3 percentage point on the parameters of "normal storms" or "normal conditions" but this small increment represent a massive change of weather. It does not take much to turn cream sour. When it would have been autumnal rains, it's now fall massive snow storms... When it would have been a nice day, it's oppressively hot days with humidity running high as well — because CO2 modifies the behaviour of water vapour. What would normally be cloud, becomes clear steam, letting more heat from the sun through.... 

And we are running out of time to fix this MAJOR PROBLEM...

Of course Our Turdy Tony is on top of (sh)it and makes fart noises that indicates he has NOT UNDERSTOOD ANYTHING because HE wants to sell MORE COAL, nonetheless ...

Tony ABBOTT IS A SAD IDDIOTT...

Next December, 196 nations will meet in Paris to agree a course of action to respond to climate change. They will do so under the auspices of the UN framework convention on climate change. This is an international treaty negotiated at the Earth summit in Rio in 1992 with the objective to “stabilise greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that will prevent dangerous human interference with the climate system”.

The discussions in Paris in 2015 will be informed by the latest climate science. In our play 2071, which recently completed its inaugural run at the Royal Court theatre in London, directed by Katie Mitchell, we explore the science, its implications and the options before us. A key aim is to leave the audience better placed to participate in the public discourse, in which we all need to play a part.

Climate change is a controversial subject that can raise strong emotions. We are all susceptible to being less open-minded and rational about it than we may appreciate. The climate system is very complex, yet its discussion is often oversimplified. There are gaps in our knowledge, and many scientific uncertainties, some of which are fundamentally unknowable. This makes it extremely difficult to predict precisely what the future holds and to determine exactly what actions, if any, to take. In addition there are economic considerations, political implications and ethical questions that further complicate the way forward.

In 2071 we describe how satellites allow us to probe and map our planet’s key components – atmosphere, oceans, ice, and land – in unprecedented ways. By using computer models to bring together the space data with a myriad measurements made in situ, and by combining these with our understanding of underlying physical laws, it is possible to begin to make sense of what is observed. This provides a grand perspective of the Earth’s system as a whole, of its component parts and the interconnections between them.

The system behaves in complex and often counterintuitive ways. But the fundamental principles of it are quite simple: its component parts interact with each other such that, over time, the amount of energy leaving the planet is equal to the amount entering it from the Sun. The interactions between the atmosphere, the oceans, and the ice on land and sea drive the natural variability of the climate. The system is very responsive. Even a small change in one component can trigger a chain of consequences in the other parts. When such changes alter the energy balance, the effects are felt throughout the entire system, while it adjusts to reach a new balance.

Changing oceans

Since the majority of inbound solar energy is absorbed by the oceans, which cover 70% of the planet’s surface and are dark, any imbalance should be most readily observable there. Sea levels rise as water temperature increases, acting as a global thermometer. By combining data gleaned from beach structures and archaeological data, we know that during the latter part of the Holocene, the unusually stable climatic period the planet has undergone since the end of the last Ice Age, sea-level changes did not exceed 0.2mm per year. Information from tide gauges, and more recently, satellite radars, show that in the late 19th century, sea levels began to rise. Over the 20th century the rate of rise averaged 1.8mm per year. Over the last two decades, the rate has further increased to 3.3mm per year. This may not seem much, but it is geologically significant. The current rate is approaching the 10mm per year which occurred during the transition from the last Ice Age to the current warm interglacial, a major climatic shift. And it is occurring during the warm interglacial, at a time unrelated to the natural ice age cycle.

In 1978 John Mercer, a US glaciologist, described how, in a warming world, a successive collapse of ice shelves extending down the Antarctic Peninsula might occur. He suggested that this would be a warning sign of a more significant sequence of events to come. The Antarctic Peninsula connects to an area of the Antarctic called West Antarctica, where the massive ice sheet sits on bedrock that is up to 2km below sea level. Mercer’s concern was that if the successive collapse reached this far, the pressure of the warmer water at depth would lift the ice sheet, causing water to penetrate deeper and deeper below the ice, reducing friction between the ice and rock, leading to an unstoppable collapse. This would result in a rise in sea levels over time of many metres, as the total volume of ice in West Antarctica is equivalent to a six-metre rise.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/nov/22/-sp-climate-change-special-report

 

Follow Gus' global warming rants on this site...

 

Gol Gol wine grape and rockmelon grower Dennis Mills described it as a 'tornado' that obliterated crops.

"When you look down the rows and you see these thousands upon thousands of melons, you actually don't know what you are going to do.

"I've spoken to a few people, and one of my neighbours last night estimates it's probably cost him a million and a half dollars in both this year and what the damage will be next year."

The Sunraysia Tablegrape Growers' Association's John Argiro says the hail wiped out his crops in the Merbein and Yelta districts.

"My father has been out here for 50 years and he told me, as a kid growing up, he says it follows the river. I've certainly, it's the first time I can remember a hail storm like this going through and making a mess the way it has."

read more: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-24/sunraysia-storm/5912912

 

See also: the grapes of climate wrath...

 

 

Up to 17,000 residents in the west of Scotland were left without power as a "weather bomb" of wet and windy conditions battered parts of Britain with gusts expected to reach up to 130 kph.

A weather bomb occurs when storms quickly intensify and pressure drops rapidly.

Heavy rain and winds hit Scotland, Northern Ireland and northern England overnight with an amber wind warning, meaning there was a potential risk to life and property, in place across Scotland's western Isles and northern Shetland Islands.

Britain's Met Office warned people to expect gales, storm force winds and large waves across several parts of northern and central Britain throughout the day.

"The public should be prepared for dangerous conditions, especially along causeways and coastal roads exposed to the west," it said on its website.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-11/weather-bomb-sweeps-across-the-uk/5959594

Gus addendum: The marine prediction for a couple more typhoons in the Philippines has gone from 80 per cent to zero. Meanwhile the storm that was about to hit the west coast of the US has gone further north to the Canadian/Alaskan border. Serious storms are respectively shaking the north-east and north-central Pacific Ocean at present.

 

MEANWHILE AT QUEENSLAND CENTRAL:

The estimated insurance loss from Brisbane's super cell storm two weeks ago has skyrocketed to $804 million.

The Insurance Council of Australia (ICA) released the updated figures this morning, up from the $482 million estimated loss from this time last week.

The storm, which tore through Brisbane on November 27, resulted in 86,800 claims from property and motor vehicle owners – 22,000 for house and contents policies, 4,000 for commercial property and business, 58,000 for domestic motor vehicles and 2,800 commercial motor claims.

The updated figures come as Queensland's south-east prepares for another potential battering by Mother Nature with an increased chance for severe thunderstorms later today.

The Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) also forecast heavy rainfall possibly exceeding 100mm in Brisbane and 140mm on the Sunshine Coast tomorrow.

ICA CEO Rob Whelan said insurers were focused on sending assessors to damaged homes and examining hail-damaged vehicles, many high-priority claims have now been assessed.

He said the large number of motor vehicle claims meant policyholders with hail-damaged vehicles should talk to their insurer about Queensland's laws on written-off cars.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-11/queensland-storms-estimated-insurance-loss-hits-804-million/5960032

 

In the blog above I wrote:

Meanwhile the storm that was about to hit the west coast of the US has gone further north to the Canadian/Alaskan border. Serious storms are respectively shaking the north-east and north-central Pacific Ocean at present.

In fact the FIRST prediction was correct... The storm shifted southward instead of moving northward:

A major storm that pummelled northern California and the Pacific Northwest, killing two people, has moved south, prompting evacuation orders in areas prone to floods and mud flows.

The National Weather Service forecast the system to track through south-western California, bringing the possibility of strong thunderstorms, as well as waterspouts and small tornadoes along the coast.

As the storm loomed, officials in the Los Angeles suburb of Glendora issued a mandatory evacuation order in the area impacted by the Colby Fire that burned about 809 hectares in January.

The Riverside County Sheriff's Department also ordered some residents in San Jacinto to evacuate. The city saw mud flows during a large storm last week that damaged homes and vehicles.

The system drenched northern California on Thursday, flooding some streets and intersections in the San Francisco area. Many local schools were closed.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-12/storm-hits-us-northwest-forcing-evacuations-and-cancellations/5964932

 

Slip, slop, slap. It was a cartoon seagull wearing shorts, t-shirt and a hat that famously urged sun-loving Australians in the 1980s to protect themselves from damaging ultraviolet rays.

While sunblock has shielded generations from harm, it is also being used to safeguard the health and vitality of Australian grapes as the nation reflects on another scorching year when temperature records continued to tumble.

At Tyrrell's vineyard in the Hunter Valley, 165km north of Sydney, the midday sun beats down on some of Australia's oldest vines. They date back to the late 1800s, and have thrived in tough conditions.

The quality of the vintage depends not only on the sun and the soil, but the temperature. Very hot weather can inflict serious damage, and too much heat can cause the berries to shrivel or suffer sunburn.

"You put sunscreen on your kids when they go out in the sun, so we put it on our grapevines. That just goes on like a normal spray," says Bruce Tyrrell, the chief executive of Tyrrell's Wines.

"Your vineyard gets this funny white-blue colour, and you look on the berries and there is a little coating on them. It is just like putting sunscreen on and it gives it some protection."

It's not only science that is helping to protect the crop, but also sound husbandry in a region where temperatures can exceed 45C (113F).

"It is a matter of having your vineyard laid out to handle your conditions," Mr Tyrrell tells the BBC.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-30660063

 

Read about vines damage from global warming — from top....

 

The global coal industry has mounted a “cynical and misleading campaign” to present coal as a solution to world poverty, according to former US vice-president Al Gore and global investment manager David Blood.

Writing in the Guardian on Thursday, the pair said that as investors have grown increasingly worried about coal assets being overvalued, coal’s industrial masters and political friends have embarked on a desperate fightback based on tenuous arguments and exploits an urgent humanitarian need.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates more than 1.3 billion people lack access to electricity – 95% of whom live in sub-Saharan Africa and developing regions in Asia. The coal industry and coal producing nations have repeatedly cited this crisis as a moral imperative for the continued expansion of coal power in the developing world.

But Gore and Blood said coal power would not only fail to deliver electricity to those suffering from energy poverty, it would actively degrade their lives.

“... As the coal industry fights for survival, it has begun to rely on novel and increasingly tenuous arguments. It has embarked on a global campaign to promote coal as the solution to energy poverty. This disingenuous claim is predicated on the notion that coal is the cheapest way of providing electricity to the one-fifth of the world’s population lacking access to an electricity grid,” they said.

read more: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/16/al-gore-coal-industry-campaign-on-energy-poverty-is-extremely-misleading

 

We often hear that climate change is radically reshaping the Arctic, a place many of us have never visited. As a result, it can be pretty hard to feel directly affected by what's happening up in a distant land of polar bears, ice floes and something odd called permafrost.

A new booklet from the US National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council, Arctic Matters: The Global Connection to Changes in the Arctic (2015) wants to change that.

Synthesising much past academy work on the Arctic region, the booklet - being released just before the United States assumes the chairmanship of the eight-nation Arctic Council later this month - has this message: "What happens in the Arctic doesn't stay in the Arctic".

Here are four potential ways that changes in the Arctic will reverberate well beyond it and, in some cases, have planet-wide consequences:

 

1. Changing your weather.

This is controversial, but there is growing scientific research backing the still-contested conclusion that changes to the Arctic are leading to changes in weather in the mid latitudes. The basic idea is that a warmer Arctic plays games with the jet stream, the stream of air high above us in the stratosphere that carries our weather and that is driven by temperature contrasts between the mid and high latitudes.

read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/warming-of-the-arctic-will-have-global-consequences-20150417-1mmyth.html