BrianGarst.com

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

Energy and the Environment Archive

Monday

15

September 2008

0

COMMENTS

We're All Gonna Die! Pt. 11

Written by , Posted in Energy and the Environment

And by we, I mean the polar bears.

Polar bears and other rare species are in danger of dying out, scientists fear, as latest figures show the Artic sea ice is at record lows.

Scientists from the World Wildlife Fund, who are recording the ice cover over the North Pole, said less ice is predicted in the Arctic this year than in any other.

Experts say this not only means a loss of habitat to species like polar bears and loss of livelihood for indigenous peoples but could speed up global warming as water absorbs heat rather than reflecting the sun’s rays back into space.

Dr Martin Sommerkorn, senior climate change advisor at WWF International’s Arctic Programme, said: “We are expecting confirmation of 2008 being either the lowest or the second-lowest year in terms of summer ice coverage.

“This means two years in a row of record lows since we started recording Arctic sea ice coverage.

I bolded the key point there, in case you missed it.  Sometimes I wonder how smart people can be so dumb.  I don’t know exactly how long we’ve been recording sea ice coverage, but it can’t be very long, at most around 50 years.  Polar bears, to make an understatement, have been around a bit longer than that.  They’ve survived with less ice, with more ice, with warm temperatures, with cold temperatures.  They’re not so delicate as to whither and die from fluctuations within, in the perspective of earth’s climactic history, a normal temperature range.

Sunday

24

August 2008

1

COMMENTS

We're All Gonna Die! Pt. 10

Written by , Posted in Energy and the Environment, Media Bias

It’s a vicious cycle, I tell you.

Climate change could release unexpectedly huge stores of carbon dioxide from Arctic soils, which would in turn fuel a vicious circle of global warming, a new study warned Sunday.

And according to one commentary on the research, current models of climate change have not taken this extra source of greenhouse gas into account.

Commenting on the research, Christian Beer of the Max Planck Institute in Jena, Germany, pointed out that the climate change models upon which future projections are based, do not include the potential impact of the gases trapped frozen Arctic soils.

“Releasing even a portion of this carbon into the atmosphere, in the form of methane or carbon dioxide, would have an significant impact on Earth’s climate,” he noted in his commentary, also published in Nature Geoscience.

Methane, another greenhouse gas, is less abundant than carbon dioxide but several times more potent as a driver of global warming.

Our hysteria has not yet been properly calibrated to take into account this new source of doom! And to think just how much more wrong our predictions could be if we did take this new finding into account.

On a related note, I couldn’t help but scoff at reporting this pathetic:

The Nobel Prize-winning UN panel of climate change scientists project temperature increases by century’s end of up to six degrees Celsius (10.8 degrees Fahrenheit) in the Arctic region, which is more sensitive to global warming than any other part of the planet.

“The Nobel Prize-winning UN panel of climate change scientists.”  The purpose of that love-fest description is to get you to bow to the dictates of the IPCC without asking questions.  The problem is that the description is entirely misleading.  First of all, the IPCC is not a scientific panel; it’s an intergovernmental panel (hence the I in IPCC).  It’s made up of government officials, environmentalist activists and yes, some scientists.  Furthermore, it does not follow the scientific process of peer review, and many scientists involved in the reports were never given a say in the final product, but had their names attached (often over their objections) anyway.

“But it received a Nobel Prize,” the faithful will assert.  Yes, the Nobel Peace Prize, which is not awarded for scientific accomplishment, but, history suggests, for successful implementation of left-wing ideology.

AFP sells the IPCC as an award winning scientific authority, but it is nothing of the kind.  Don’t let their falsehoods intimidate you.

Wednesday

13

August 2008

0

COMMENTS

How Is This Possible?

Written by , Posted in Energy and the Environment, Free Markets

We’ve been told that we’re in an energy crises. Over and over it’s routinely asserted that any solution will require leadership. Leadership, of course, implies top down direction from governmental elites. It seems few people today think anything can be accomplished without such centrally directed leadership. They are wrong.

High gas prices cut U.S. driving for 8th month: government

Americans scaled back their driving during June by almost 5 percent in response to soaring fuel costs, the government said on Wednesday — a day after announcing the biggest six-month drop in U.S. petroleum demand in 26 years.

The Transportation Department said U.S. motorists drove 12.2 billion fewer miles in June compared to a year earlier, marking the eight month in a row that travel declined in the face of record gas prices as Americans change their driving habits, buy more fuel-efficient cars and switch to public transport.

“Changes in consumer behavior have essentially erased five years of growth in gasoline demand,” the American Petroleum Institute said on Wednesday in a separate report that showed gasoline use during the first seven months of 2008 fell by 2.1 percent to the lowest level for the period in five years.

This is, or should be, the common sense predicted outcome. Consumers adjust their behavior in response to changes in prices. Facing higher energy prices, users will seek more cost effective traveling methods. Knowing this, where is the crisis we hear so much about? What, exactly, do we need leadership for that can’t be accomplished by the dynamic free market? The fact of the matter is there is no energy crisis, but rather a political crisis, otherwise known as a presidential election.

Thursday

7

August 2008

0

COMMENTS

Strategic Reserve Or Vote Buying Stash?

Written by , Posted in Election Time, Energy and the Environment

Barack Obama has a solution to high gas prices: use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR).

Sen. Barack Obama called Monday for using oil from the nation’s strategic reserves to lower gasoline prices, the second time in less than a week that he has modified a position on energy issues, as he and Sen. John McCain seek to find solutions to a topic that is increasingly dominating the presidential race.

…His proposal comes a month after Obama said he would consider using oil from the reserves only in a “genuine emergency,” such as “terrorist acts.” Aides said the plan is not a reversal because he would replace light crude oil in the reserves with less-expensive heavy crude. They also noted that the senator from Illinois last week described the country’s economic conditions as an “emergency.”

So not only is this yet another in a long line of flip flops, it’s also a stupid idea. Granted, it’s not as morally repulsive and economically damaging as his rehashed call for government sanctioned thievery (“windfall profits tax”), but it’s a blatant misuse of the strategic reserve for the purpose of electoral benefit.

The SPR was established in response to the Arab oil embargo. Its purpose is to provide a temporary cushion against physical shortages in the oil supply, thus protecting the economy from excessive damage during emergency situations and also to discourage attempts at using oil as a political weapon. The key point here is that SPR is intended to be used for transient emergencies.

There is no such physical shortage at present. The price of gasoline right now is reflective of growth in global demand, not dramatic decreases in supply. Opening SPR would likely have a depressive affect on gas prices, but it would be temporary and would do nothing to solve the issue that has created those prices in the first place. Unlike the situations SPR was designed for, this is not one we can just wait out. Furthermore, as oil demand grows the size of the reserve that is needed to successfully protect the economy during times of physical disruption increases. Using SPR now would only make it more difficult to protect the economy should a true shortage or interruption arise in the future.

Although the reserve has been used for political purposes in the past (in the nineties some was sold off to trick people into thinking the government had become fiscally responsible), such actions should be opposed. The SPR is not a vote buying slush fund to get Barack Obama elected.

Monday

7

July 2008

0

COMMENTS

We're All Gonna Die! Pt. 9

Written by , Posted in Energy and the Environment

I’m sure you’ve all been wondering, “When, exactly, are we all going to die?”  Well now you know.  Let the seven year countdown begin!

The head of the UN’s Nobel-winning panel of climate scientists on Friday said only seven years remained for stabilising emissions of global-warming gases at a level widely considered safe.

…He issued a stark warning that time was running out for dealing with the threat.

In the 20th century, the temperature had already risen on average by 0.74 degrees Celsius (1.32 degrees Fahrenheit), he said.

The EU wants to limit the overall warming since pre-industrial times to 2 C (3.6 F), a goal that is shared by many scientists.

To do this, said Pachauri, “we would have to stabilise the greenhouse-gas concentration at more or less the level at which we are today.

“(…)But in order to do that, we have a window of opportunity of only seven years because emissions will have to peak by 2015 and reduce after that. We cannot permit a longer delay.”

Well at least it’s not tomorrow.

Tuesday

1

July 2008

0

COMMENTS

We're All Gonna Die! Pt. 8

Written by , Posted in Energy and the Environment

It’s a double whammy:

The facts are unequivocal, and point to a troubling future ahead. Over 850 fires, scorching some 200,000 acres, have set a new 2008 record for early-season wildfires in California. And from March to May precipitation has been the lowest since the inception of record keeping in 1894. In California as well as throughout the West, mountain snowmelts are occurring earlier, and winter storms are arriving later, extending the fire season by at least several weeks.

…Meanwhile, global warming is known to fuel mega-wildfires, particularly in the northern Rocky Mountains. In addition, over the past two decades mountain ecosystems across the West ranging from 5,300 to more than 8,000 feet above sea level have had the largest increase in big fires. It is these mountain ecosystems that are important for retaining snowfall and releasing it slowly into reservoirs. There are at least 350,000 homes in California that are on the urban/wildland interface and they remain at high risk to ever-increasing threat of wildfires.

Global warming is also significantly impacting our security by impinging upon our water supply. Even though average snowfalls in California from December to February of 2008 were recorded, by May state-wide water reservoirs that feed, drive and grow the state’s economy — the eighth mightiest on the planet — were only slightly above 53 percent of their respective capacities.

Seeing as how global temperatures have not risen in over a decade, how exactly is global warming responsible for there being more fires in 2008 than, say, 2004? Oh, nevermind…we’re all gonna die!

Wednesday

25

June 2008

0

COMMENTS

We're All Gonna Die! Pt. 7

Written by , Posted in Energy and the Environment, Media Bias

This installment of “We’re All Gonna Die!” covers a bit more than just global warming, but this article was just too hysterical not to highlight.

Everything is seemingly spinning out of control

Is everything spinning out of control?

Midwestern levees are bursting. Polar bears are adrift. Gas prices are skyrocketing. Home values are abysmal. Air fares, college tuition and health care border on unaffordable. Wars without end rage in Iraq, Afghanistan and against terrorism.

Horatio Alger, twist in your grave.

The can-do, bootstrap approach embedded in the American psyche is under assault. Eroding it is a dour powerlessness that is chipping away at the country’s sturdy conviction that destiny can be commanded with sheer courage and perseverance.

The sense of helplessness is even reflected in this year’s presidential election. Each contender offers a sense of order — and hope. Republican John McCain promises an experienced hand in a frightening time. Democrat Barack Obama promises bright and shiny change, and his large crowds believe his exhortation, “Yes, we can.”

Even so, a battered public seems discouraged by the onslaught of dispiriting things. An Associated Press-Ipsos poll says a barrel-scraping 17 percent of people surveyed believe the country is moving in the right direction. That is the lowest reading since the survey began in 2003.

Gee, I wonder why the public might be pessimistic.  Wouldn’t have anything to do with the excessively gloomy and irrational news coverage, now would it?

If that opening paragraph doesn’t scream “we’re all gonna die,” I don’t know what does.

Monday

23

June 2008

0

COMMENTS

We're All Gonna Die! Pt. 6

Written by , Posted in Energy and the Environment, Media Bias

This is just too good. The headline proclaims: “Today’s Quakes Deadlier Than In Past.” The subheading: “Study: Seismic Activity 5 Times More Energetic Than 20 Years Ago Because Of Global Warming.”

New research compiled by Australian scientist Dr. Tom Chalko shows that global seismic activity on Earth is now five times more energetic than it was just 20 years ago.

The research proves that destructive ability of earthquakes on Earth increases alarmingly fast and that this trend is set to continue, unless the problem of “global warming” is comprehensively and urgently addressed.

The analysis of more than 386,000 earthquakes between 1973 and 2007 recorded on the US Geological Survey database proved that the global annual energy of earthquakes on Earth began increasing very fast since 1990.

Dr. Chalko said that global seismic activity was increasing faster than any other global warming indicator on Earth and that this increase is extremely alarming.

“The most serious environmental danger we face on Earth may not be climate change, but rapidly and systematically increasing seismic, tectonic and volcanic activity,” said Dr. Chalko.

“Increase in the annual energy of earthquakes is the strongest symptom yet of planetary overheating.

The link to the article is here. Yes, that is the real link, and yes, it leads to a 404 error page. That’s because CBS pulled the story. A screenshot of the story on CBS can be found here.

It turns out CBS was duped or, more likely, tried to pull a fast one. The article, which CBS claimed was an AP story (of which there is no evidence and AP denies), was an exact copy of a press release by Dr. Tom Chalko, the “scientist” whose alarming research was the feature of the story.

Dr. Tom Chalko turns out to be Dr. Nutjob. A simple google background check reveals a man who claims to practice telepathy and astral travel. His previous global warming claims included the hilarious declaration that the planet would explode. Of course, CBS is too busy to do this kind of fact checking, especially when something pops up to support their predispositions. They’d rather just copy/paste and falsely attribute the story to someone else. Do they take responsibility when they get caught with their hand in the cookie jar? Nope. They just deleted the article as if it never existed, issuing no apology or retraction.

Oh I almost forgot, and this should probably go without saying, but the claims about increasing earthquake intensity are bogus.

One thing is for certain: whether global warming gets us all or not, the concept of responsible journalism is long since dead and buried.

Sunday

22

June 2008

0

COMMENTS

Kill The Speculators!

Written by , Posted in Energy and the Environment, Free Markets, Liberty & Limited Government

Democrats have responded to rising oil prices as one would predict: not by seeking to alleviate the primary cause of price increases (a widening gap between growth in supply versus demand), but by finding a new boogeyman to justify increasing government involvement in and control over markets.

The evil-doer behind the conspiracy to hurt average people at the gas station? Oil speculators!

Obama vows to crack down on oil speculation

U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama offered new steps on Sunday to crack down on speculation in oil markets, saying his plan would help rein in runaway fuel costs.

A jump in gasoline prices above $4 a gallon has spurred consumer anger and is a top theme in the race between Obama and his Republican rival in the November election, John McCain, who has proposed more U.S. offshore oil exploration as a way to boost energy supplies.

“I think everyone believes there’s too much speculation in the oil markets,” said New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, an Obama ally who announced the proposals in a conference call with reporters. “A lot of the price of oil, I think, people put at the doorstep of speculators bidding up and holding supplies off the market.”

Corzine said Obama’s plan aims to close the so-called Enron loophole, which exempts some energy speculators who trade electronically from U.S. regulation. It takes its name from the now-collapsed energy firm that benefited from the law.

Obama would require U.S. energy futures to trade on regulated exchanges. The campaign also said he backed legislation that would direct the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the top U.S. futures market regulator, to investigate proposals such as increasing margin requirements in the market.

In addition, the Illinois senator wants to see more transparency and oversight of institutional investors in commodities markets.

“Too much speculation!” cries Corzine. These people are vultures, preying on the misery of average Americans! Or are they? To listen to democrats, you wouldn’t even know speculators served a valuable economic purpose.

Speculators correct false prices in markets, allowing them to function more efficiently. This is not to say that prices are always at the appropriate level in the short run. Irrational exuberance can drive prices to unjustifiable heights, as we’ve seen in both the 90’s tech-bubble and the recent housing-bubble. But both of these bubbles were popped, and price followed with sustained down periods.

Market critics often sight the alleged near-sightedness of capitalism. Speculators incorporate future considerations into the current price of goods. If a war is likely to break out in several oil producing countries, thereby disrupting supply, speculators who buy now, and thus increase current prices, in anticipation of selling when supplies are more scarce, give markets time to react to coming changes and encourage reductions in consumption. This behavior softens the blow of sudden changes in market conditions.

Whether or not the current prices are at the correct (most efficient) level remains to be seen, but central authorities don’t have the capacity to make that determination. People may want lower prices for themselves, but that doesn’t make such prices are the correct ones. Pressuring the market either through price controls or regulation to implement lower prices will result in greater inefficiencies such as shortages. If people really desire such prices, they should argue for increases in supply, not greater regulation or a disruption in the functioning of speculators.

Thursday

19

June 2008

0

COMMENTS

We're All Gonna Die! Pt. 5

Written by , Posted in Energy and the Environment

In part 5 of our series on the perpetual doom and gloom of the global warming cult we get not only hysterical fear-mongering, but an administration turned Judas.

The chances for extreme weather in the U.S. such as the record rainfall and flooding in Iowa this month are increasing as worldwide temperatures rise, a government agency that researches climate change said.

North America may get more abnormally hot days and nights, heavier downpours and deadlier storms from global warming, today’s report from the Bush administration’s U.S. Climate Change Science Program said. Elevated temperatures in recent decades already have led to more intense rainstorms in the Midwest, Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions, said Thomas Karl, co-chairman of the report.

“The probability of heavy downpours is increasing, which leads to events like what we’re seeing in the Midwest,” said Karl, director of the National Climatic Data Center at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in an interview.

We’re all going to drown! Nevermind that temperatures haven’t increased in a decade, or that so many of these computer models serving as the foundation of climate alarmism use bogus methodology. The important thing to remember is that we’re all going to die…unless we stop being evil capitalists who refuse to hand over our property to the state.