Australians would dig deep to fight climate change

Good news for the government implementing an ETS. We won't stand in your way (but woe betide it turns out trust is misplaced).

A MAJOR survey of Australians' views on climate change has found an overwhelming majority think it is happening and they're prepared to pay to address it.

The study by University of Technology Sydney found Australians wanted to see cuts in the nation's greenhouse gas emissions irrespective of the actions of other countries.

The key findings include that 83.7 per cent believed global warming was occurring and, of those, 84.9 per cent said Australia should proceed with an emissions trading scheme (ETS) regardless of the international response. "The bottom line from this study is that Australians think now is the time to adopt a climate change program that has some real teeth," visiting economics professor at UTS Richard Carson said.

"They believe that climate change will cause serious problems in Australia and elsewhere in the world, and they understand there will be sizeable cost going along with it."

We want the revenue an ETS will earn, to help low-income earners cope with the changes, and middle income earners want the GST reduced. Will it be an unnecessary tax, after the cost of pollution becomes a production input?

An interesting question about the role of government arises. Is it more efficient to tax consumption, or 'externalities', that is, the social cost of pollution.

And most want 20 percent of the ETS revenue to be dedicated to climate change R&D.

Professor Carson said 58.7 per cent of participants supported spending 20 per cent of ETS revenues on R & D, in keeping with a recommendation of the Rudd Government-commissioned Garnaut Review.

"The public clearly favours spending 20 per cent of the money on R & D … even though we told them that if they did that they would redistribute less money to the public," he said.

"That shows the Australians are very forward-looking, they see it as a long-term problem and the R & D efforts will help them get over the hump."

Survey participants' views were also sought on the different government plans and opposition policies to tackle climate change.

A majority (57.1 per cent) supported the government's plan to begin emissions trading from 2010 over the Liberals' later 2012 start date.

Participants were quizzed on their political leanings and Professor Carson said Green and Labor voters were more likely to favour the government's plan.

Interestingly, more than half (53 per cent) of Liberal-aligned survey participants also favoured the earlier 2010 ETS start date instead of official policy held by the Federal Opposition.

Views were split on whether transport should be exempt for the first three years of the ETS - with just over half (50.6 per cent) for the move to temporarily delay price increases at the petrol bowser.

The study, entitled Survey on Controlling Greenhouse Gases, was conducted by the UTS Centre for the Study of Choice.

Professor Carson is a Professor of Economics at the University of California and is a Visiting Distinguished Professor at the UTS.

These figures are consistent with other surveys. If this survey gets media traction, it's the death-knell for the AGW denial industry.

Hurrican Gustav to test Obama/Biden, McCain/Palin

The damage wrought by Hurricane Katrina also ruined Bush. A point clearly not lost on all presidential candidates as they prepare to respond to the 'certain political fallout' claimed for Gustav:

Republican White House hopeful John McCain and running-mate Sarah Palin will Sunday ditch their pre-convention plans and visit people in Mississippi bracing for deadly Hurricane Gustav.

The visit comes as the fearsome category four storm's approach overshadowed the buildup to the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota on Monday, and stirred memories of the botched response to Hurricane Katrina exactly three years ago.

Katrina is still affecting the GOP.

Earlier, in an interview to be broadcast on Fox News Sunday, McCain suggested he might go as far as suspending the convention, if the storm turned into a huge human tragedy on the par with Katrina.

"It wouldn't be appropriate to have a festive occasion while a near tragedy or a terrible challenge is presented in the form of a national disaster.

"So we're monitoring it from day-to-day and I'm saying a few prayers, " he said.

..

Forecasters said the storm could hit top category five force as it moved toward the US Gulf Coast for a direct hit Monday or Tuesday. In any case, "Gustav is forecast to remain a major hurricane through landfall along the northern Gulf coast," the US National Hurricane Center said.

Obama is keeping weather eye out as well.

Will the fallout involve a discussion on the US's response to combating global warming?

Mother of all storms bearing down on New Orleans

Remember Hurricane Katrina, hitting New Orleans this time to the day three years ago?

Mayor Ray Nagin hopes so, invoking her name by omission.

New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin has ordered the city emptied tomorrow in the face of "the storm of the century", warning anyone that stays behind that they are on their own.

"I am announcing today mandatory evacuation of New Orleans starting 8am Sunday (2300 Sunday AEST) on the West bank," Nagin said at a press conference. "We want everybody... we want 100 per cent evacuation. If you decide to stay, you are on your own."

"This is the mother of all storms," Nagin said. "This storm is so powerful and growing more powerful every day that I'm not sure we've seen anything like it."

Nagin estimated that less than half of the city's population has left despite days of dire warnings.

"This is the real deal," Nagin said. "Riding this storm out would be one of the biggest mistakes you could make in your life."

Nagin said police, fire and other emergency personnel are being pulled from the city to safer areas. A "skeleton crew" of fewer than 50 city workers will be left behind, according to officials.

Hurricane Gustav is on course to crash ashore near New Orleans. Nagin told anyone planning to stay behind to "make sure you have an axe because you will be busting your way out to get on your roof with waters surrounding you."

Gustav has left around 85 people dead in Caribbean nations.

In 2005, New Orleans was hammered by Hurricane Katrina which caused widespread flooding and left tens of thousands of people homeless.

While there is temporal symmetry with Hurricane Katrina there have been fewer hurricanes this year, or hurricane season is late.

How about those freaks who are staying?

Google Insights for Search on al gore, global warming, climate change

Google Insights for Search (GIS) is Google's latest functionette on offer. It is fascinating, but not all it could be. More like a tease.

GIS provides a graphical output for up to five search terms. Numbers on the graph reflect how many searches have been done for a particular term, relative to the total number of searches done on Google over time. They don't represent absolute search volume numbers, because the data is normalized and presented on a scale from 0-100; each point on the graph is divided by the highest point, or 100.

So away I went, plugging in two terms, global warming; and climate change for parameters, worldwide, and for all recorded time (2004 - present).

Interesting graph (I also chucked in Al Gore). GIS also scales countries of the world. Here's the top ten countries sorted on global warming.

Top regions for global warming
Region	al gore	global warming	climate change
Indonesia	19	100	25
Philippines	41	77	29
India	18	76	27
South Africa	37	69	43
Australia	47	54	80
United States	100	51	19
New Zealand	38	49	56
Singapore	36	43	29
Canada	63	42	37
Kenya	0	39	100

Still, it's a cool tool.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Aussie solar generation — where are you?

Casting around me in Sydney to see what our suburban twenty+ year olds are into today, and well, it seems to be, well,.... themselves only. iPoded up (it's not called the usPod, is it?) they listen long enough to think of what they are going to say next when in conversation.

My question: It's your future, where's the protest over the mismanagement of your environmental inheritance? The younger you are, the more you have at stake, I would have thought.

Not so in India with SolarGeneration.

Solar Generation India is a part of the Solar Generation, an international group of young people working in creative ways to demand 'Clean Energy Now!' We started as a group in the early months of 2005; February 16th, to be precise. There were about 60 students at the time of our first organized concert against climate change and since then we've moved on. From one tree to another- for those who saw our tree top concert Now we have support groups at 20 colleges in Bangalore and Hyderabad and well wishers at Cochin as well. We have a long way to go. Also, we are a bit more organized- not in the dangerous sense of the word which it proposes to be- quintessentially, more together....and we would like to leave things there! We have around 15 member in the core group and quite a number of volunteers who are there at crisis times. We have much to do and much to give back...

Good luck. Their modus operandi seems to be bearing witness to local impacts of climate change, and in this post they film the results of sea-level rise, and 'ecogees' that have fled Orissa on the east coast of India, near the Bay of Bengal.

Investigating Solar Generation further I find that Greenpeace is behind it, and it was launched in 2003:

Solar Generation taking their future in their own hands

Solar Generation is made up of young people from all over the world taking action against climate change and calling for a clean energy future. Solar Generation, initiated by Greenpeace in 2003, is now active in Germany, Switzerland, France, China, Thailand, the Philippines, India, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Indonesia, Togo, Kenya, Uganda, US and Australia

The number of countries involved in Solar Generation is rapidly growing. All around the world, we are showing that change is possible and you can make it happen yourself.

Waiting quietly for politicians to act is not an option; Solar Generation are taking the future into our own hands.

Here are just a couple of examples of our achievements and activities:

• Convincing several universities in the US and Australia to start purchasing clean energy and installing solar panels

• Involved in over 120 solar panel installation projects in Switzerland

• Solar Generation member Abigail from the Philippines gave the opening speech at the Renewables 2004 Conference

• Celebrated the Kyoto Protocol entering into force with activities worldwide.

Solar Generation raise public awareness about climate change and the solutions and move politicians to act. Solar Generation organise solar powered concerts and hand out information about our work at other concerts.

We also install solar panels, support energy efficiency and start discussions in our universities. We show that action against climate change works: "While politicians are still talking, we are getting active!"

You can do something too!

Are you interested in starting a Solar Generation Group and getting active in your own country? Look at the bottom of this page for the email of your local contact person or check out the websites from where you live.

Is your country not on the list?

Send an email to our international office and see what the possibilities are of starting a Solar Generation campaign in your country.

The answer to that is no. Though I note that some universities have had solar installed and are purchasing clean energy.

Climate science, the public, and the Whiplash Effect

Andrew Dressler of the Dept. of Atmospheric Sciences at Texas A&M University spent time as a Senior Policy Analyst in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. While there, he became extremely interested in how science gets used in policy decisions. He has published The Science and Politics of Global Climate Change: A Guide to the debate (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2006).

In a new post he discusses the whiplash effect that the public experience because of the nature of science, as postulated by Andy Revkin in The New York Times.

When science is testing new ideas, the result is often a two-papers-forward-one-paper-back intellectual tussle among competing research teams.

When the work touches on issues that worry the public, affect the economy or polarize politics, the news media and advocates of all stripes dive in. Under nonstop scrutiny, conflicting findings can make news coverage veer from one extreme to another, resulting in a kind of journalistic whiplash for the public.

Dressler says an 'understanding of how science works sheds a lot of light on this problem'.

If one focuses on the turbulent interface, science always looks uncertain because, by definition, the turbulent interface exists where the science is uncertain.

Because the turbulent interface is the focus of the scientific community, it is also, unfortunately or not, the focus of the media. And this can give the general public a view of science that is more uncertain than reality.

In climate change science, there is lots that we don't know. We don't know with precision how precipitation will change as the climate warms, or how climate change will vary from one region to another over the next century, or exactly how clouds and aerosols affect each other, etc.

One should not take this to mean that our knowledge of the climate is poor. In fact, our understanding of the climate is quite good. We know that greenhouse gases warm our planet. We know that changing greenhouse gases have been associated with changing climate on most timescales over the last hundred million years at least. We also know that humans are increasing the abundance of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Given the paleoclimate record, as well as simulations from climate models, we can expect warming of several degrees Celsius over the next century if atmospheric greenhouse gas abundance continues to grow throughout this century.

Since these observations are well known, they are generally not at the center of the scientific debate. Rather, the scientific community is working to expand our understanding of the details of the theory of climate.

The whiplash effect does not work in isolation, but is reinforced by the denial industry and their agenda of pushing "uncertainty."

The ultimate solution is for the general public to become more savvy about how science works. Arguments about Greenland ice melts should not cast doubt on the fundamental certainty of climate change. In the meantime, I'm not terribly optimistic that things will improve.

I'm not sure how to take that last line. It sure sounds glum.

Technorati Tags: global warming, climate change

LOLdenialists pr-revus teh klimit siens

Tim Lambert has posted submissions to LOLdenialists, a bit of fun. L. Ron Bolt cops it again, this time from Gummo Trotsky, for his insistence that his HadCRUT 'cooling since 2002 ' has significance. Itz teh underling tend, stewpid, by moi. Nexus 6's brilliant Global Warmin LOL is there plus a little dig at Littlemore LOL, and Stefan's Phlogiston is a riot. And there's more...

All good LOLs, and contagious. I went again...



Klik 4 wot strtd me on LOLdenialists.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Explain

clipped from thoughtsonglobalwarming.blogspot.com "Found on a city street.. via :: Flickr

Hansen — Mankind now controls climate

Set aside an hour for yourself, and hear it from Dr James Hansen



C/o 回転ドア Revolving Doors

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

James Hanson tips cold water on sun theory

This takes The Great Global Warming Swindle down with it...

clipped from www.desmogblog.com In another section of his recent "trip report " (see "westling" post below), James Hansen, head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, answers in careful but fairly accessible detail, the question of whether the sun can reasonably be blamed for recent global warming. His conclusion: Thus if the sun remains “out”, i.e., stuck for a long period in the current solar minimum, it can offset only about 7 years of CO2 increase. The human-made greenhouse gas climate forcing is now relentlessly, monotonically, increasing at a rate that overwhelms variability of natural climate forcings. Unforced variability of global temperature is great, as shown in Figure 4, but the global temperature trend on decadal and longer time scales is now determined by the larger human-made climate forcing. Speculation that we may have entered a solar-driven long-term cooling trend must be dismissed as a pipe-dream.

LOLdenialists goes vrial

My entry... LOLlronbolt

moar funny pictures

Inspired by Tim Lambert, who was inspired by Jennifer Ouellette of Cocktail Party Physics who came up with LOLdenialists.

Update: Thread has been picked up by Nexus 6, who is always good for a laugh



Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Monckton vs. Littlemore Debate audio

Monckton vs. Littlemore Debate audio

Monckton vs Littlemore Debate audio

Technorati Tags: global warming, climate change

ratS delgnapS rennaB

Unbelievable.


Rice looks shocked.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

60 Minutes in denial over climate change

In the 60 Minutes story on climate change denial called Crunch Time, Rudd came off like he needs media-training on the issue.

PM KEVIN RUDD: I'm not going to lie to you and say this is going to be cost free. This is a tough decision, we need to take it for the country's long-term future and its long-term economic future. But economic cost of not acting is massive, it's through the roof. Think about food production, the Murray, think about the impact on tourism in QLD, no more Barrier Reef, Kakadu, no more Kakadu. Think about the impact on jobs, it's huge.

TARA BROWN: How certain are you that mankind is the cause behind global warming?

PM KEVIN RUDD: Well, I just look at what the scientists say. There's a group of scientists called the International Panel on Climate Change - 4000 of them. Guys in white coats who run around and don't have a sense of humour. They just measure things. And what they say to us is it's happening and it's caused by human activity.

Kevin Rudd, you have the broad brush-strokes down well, but if you are going to deliver on your election promises to implement an ETS, and politically remain in a position to be able to do so, then you have to pay attention to the many niggling details.

Firstly, you don't want to lose your franchise with the voters who support the ETS and who do understand climate change. Secondly, you can't afford to give professional denialists like L. Ron Bolt any traction. Their product, doubt, is an easier sell than action to tackle an unseen threat. By way of exmple, here's Bolt swooping in: Rudd feels the heat on 60 Minutes.

PM KEVIN RUDD: Well, I just look at what the scientists say. There’s a group of scientists called the International Panel on Climate Change - 4000 of them.

No, it’s actually called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. And no, there are not 4000 IPCC scientists. Try 2500, instead. Rudd is lucky that this exaggeration wasn’t picked up by Brown. What’s more, a number of those 2500 don’t stand by the IPCC conclusion on man’s effect on the climate. Many others were not even consulted over the report’s bottom-line finding.

One mistake, and L Ron pounces, then thows red meat to his flying monkeys, to rip apart, who affirm these denialist talking point just as they have been programmed to.

Andrew Bolt is incorrect in his correcting Rudd, strictly speaking. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC is essentially the world's largest review of peer-review climate-science research by a panel of UN goverment member representatives and World Meterolical Organisation (WMO) scientists. They draw on the research of 2500 climate scientists.

In short, the IPCC reports on the body of scientific literature produced by 2500 climate scientists to develop policy responses. It is right Mr Rudd (and Ms Wong before him) should state he relies on this, and he needs to say it clearly and simply.

Especially when 60 Minutes is doing a clear Denier's Special. Here they are balancing the scientific views of 2500 of specialist climate scientists, with the unscientific view of one computer program architect.

TARA BROWN: No doubt the ice is melting, but the big question is - are we to blame? The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change reports it is 90% certain we are. But other equally eminent scientists believe what were seeing is just part of Nature's great cycle.

DAVID EVANS: Now since 1990, western governments have spent about $50 billion looking for evidence that carbon causes global warming and they haven't found any.

TARA BROWN: Dr David Evans has six university degrees and once worked for the Australian Government's Greenhouse Office. But he no longer thinks global warming is caused by our carbon dioxide and so isn't concerned about his or any one else's carbon footprint. So does that mean don't give up your V8 cars? Does that mean continue flying, don't worry about changing light bulbs, don't worry about trying to capture carbon or shutting down coal-fired power stations? Is that what that means?

As his resume shows, David Evans was just a computer programmer at the AGO. 60 Minutes missed out reporting that detail in favour of blowing hot air up his balloon.

UPDATE
Desmogblog clear the air: Evans is a self-promoting computer geek, not a science geek.

Oh the gravitas you lend this code-cowboy, 60 Minutes. You should be ashamed.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

AGW deniers — sue Hansen, Al Gore! Or shut up

The normally collegiate International Journal of Inactivism has thrown down the gauntlet to deniers like Christopher Monckton, Anthony Watts, James Inhofe, et al, to back their threats of legal action against Al Gore and Hansen .

It is unusual for this esteemed institution, one that is known to be cautious almost to the point of inertia, to be publicly challenging the deniers like this.

Something must be up. Look for the sign.

Technorati Tags: global warming, climate change