Climate: LNG in B.C. vs Alberta tarsands

Status
Not open for further replies.
So, you expect us to believe you and your side that the IPPC who started this and whom all you are fighting for is allowed to lie and exaggerate as much as they want?
(The world is stopping in 3 days remember!)


Man Made Global Warming is all about the IPPC and the scientists that are selling it.


So if this was a real business and your staff lied and exagerated to the people as the IPPC has done, you would just say it is ok?
All the crap that AL Gore predicts that has not happened, you buy that as ok? Science has shown he is full of it yet you think that is ok.
Do you think we are all stupid?
No wonder people are now wondering what the hell your side is saying.


Well, if that is how you see it , i do not .
You go hard with your stuff that you call science and all the fairy tales your side tells.
 
Many Thanks to Kevin Trenberth for Being Open-Minded
Bob Tisdale / 5 hours ago December 2, 2014
Guest Post by Bob Tisdale

We’ve discussed the work and opinions of NCAR’s Dr. Kevin Trenberth in many blog posts over the years. As recent examples, Trenberth’s opinions on the unusual warming in the extratropical North Pacific and on the possibility the PDO may have switched phases were discussed in Axel Timmermann and Kevin Trenberth Highlight the Importance of Natural Variability in Global Warming… (WattsUpWithThat cross post.) We discussed how in 2007 Dr. Trenberth revealed the weak underbellies of climate models in the post Seven Years Ago, An IPCC Lead Author Exposed Critical Weaknesses of the IPCC Foretelling Tools. (WUWT cross post.) And with respect to the possible impacts of the 2014/15 El Niño on global surface temperatures, we have the post The 2014/15 El Niño – Part 9 – Kevin Trenberth is Looking Forward to Another “Big Jump”. (WUWT cross post.)

I recall this subject coming up on one of the WUWT threads this year, but I wanted to write a post solely about this subject, to bring it to everybody’s attention.

TRENBERTH LINKS MY BLOG POSTS AT ONE OF HIS NCAR WEBPAGES

I fully understand that this is not an endorsement by Dr. Trenberth but I also understand that this does not mean he’s disputing the content. Under the heading of “Watts Up With That postings | January 31, 2014” on his Media webpage, Dr. Trenberth provides the titles and links to 11 of my blog posts, starting in January 2013 and ending in January 2014.

Watts Up With That postings | January 31, 2014

Open Letter to Kevin Trenberth – NCAR
Trenberth Still Searching for Missing Heat
More on Trenberth’s Missing Heat
A Different Perspective on Trenberth’s Missing Heat: The Warming of the Global Oceans (0 to 2000 Meters) in Deg C
Even More about Trenberth’s Missing Heat – An Eye Opening Comment by Roger Pielke Sr.
Open Letter to the Royal Meteorological Society Regarding Dr. Trenberth’s Article “Has Global Warming Stalled?”
A Couple of Comments about the Oppenheimer and Trenberth Op-Ed in the Washington Post
Meehl et al (2013) Are Also Looking for Trenberth’s Missing Heat
Trenberth and Fasullo Try to Keep the Fantasy Alive
More on Trenberth and Fasullo (2013) “An Apparent Hiatus in Global Warming?”
Comments on the Nature Article “Climate Change: The Case of the Missing Heat”
The first post is linked to a cross post at WattsUpWithThat. The others are linked directly to my website Climate Observations.

Again, I do not take that as an endorsement of my work. But I do find it extremely remarkable that a lead author of the IPCC’s 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Assessment Reports would link blog posts written by someone who’s a student of his work on ENSO, but at the same time skeptical of his beliefs on global warming and climate change. Remarkable.

Many thanks to Kevin Trenberth for being so open-minded. It is unfortunate that there aren’t more climate scientists like him who are willing to present data-based findings that oppose their research.

Maybe someday, maybe when he retires, Dr. Trenberth and I can discuss ENSO and its long-term impacts on global surface temperatures and ocean heat.

(Just in case others at NCAR aren’t as open-minded, I’ve archived that webpage here.)
 
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2025131826_seastarfolodiseasexml.html

As climate warms, more outbreaks of disease for sea life
It’s not clear if a virus wiping out millions of sea stars is being influenced by climate change. But scientists say rising temperatures likely will make ocean disease outbreaks more problematic in the future.


By Craig Welch
Seattle Times environment reporter

An ochre sea star is seen in May on the Oregon coast with one leg disintegrating from star wasting syndrome. Scientists wonder if global warming is somehow influencing the disease’s alarming spread south to California and north to Alaska.

Enlarge this photo
ELIZABETH CERNY-CHIPMAN / OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY / AP

An ochre sea star is seen in May on the Oregon coast with one leg disintegrating from star wasting syndrome. Scientists wonder if global warming is somehow influencing the disease’s alarming spread south to California and north to Alaska.

RELATED
Virus linked to mass die-off of sea stars
READER COMMENTS
HIDE / SHOW COMMENTS
Man oh man, the midterms are over and all the sudden we're getting brow-beat with a plethora of "climate change"... (November 30, 2014) MORE
@user1007666 First off, the 97% number is bogus. Please stop repeating a lie, it makes you look foolish. The 97% number... (November 30, 2014) MORE
Nobody believes this crap any more except the people who will profit from it. (November 29, 2014) MORE
Read all 199 comments Post a comment
advertising

Click here
The shellfish pathogen that hit California’s Channel Islands in the 1980s began to quickly kill one of the tideland’s most important animals — black abalone.

But what unnerved scientists was what they learned next: Whenever ocean waters grew warmer, the deadly infection known as withering syndrome spread and killed even more abalone.

By the 2000s, this phenomenon had helped transform black abalone into an endangered species — and a symbol of how much climate change may one day influence the spread of marine diseases.

Long before a virus would kill West Coast sea stars by the millions, scientists had begun to wonder when a major human-caused marine-disease outbreak would strike. Now they’re wondering if so-called sea-star wasting disease is an example of the threat they predicted — or just part of a natural cycle they don’t yet understand.

This month, scientists announced they’d identified the culprit responsible for a mass die-off of 20 species of starfish that started in Washington last year, and then spread to Southern California and north to Alaska. The cause was a virus that had been found in sea stars since at least the 1940s. But it had never killed anywhere near as many creatures or across so vast an area.

It’s too soon to say whether the sudden explosion of this starfish disease is linked to environmental changes wrought by humans, such as global warming or ocean acidification, which is the souring of seas by carbon-dioxide emissions.

But scientists say the die-off may be the most extensive marine-disease event ever documented. Few experts believe it will be the last.

“The most dire interpretation of the sea-star event is that it could just be the first in a wave of similar events,” said Bruce Menge, a marine-biology professor at Oregon State University.

In fact, from work with corals and eelgrass, dolphins, seals and fish, researchers increasingly are finding that climate change is likely to affect disease susceptibility and transmission in a host of important ways.

“A warmer world is a sicker world,” said C. Drew Harvell, a marine epidemiologist and coral-disease expert from Cornell University who has played a key role in studying the sea-star die-off. “A warming world can cause disease to increase, both by compromising the host and because a lot of microorganisms become more virulent or are happier at warmer temperatures.”

Wider outbreak

A parasite that affects East Coast oysters offers one of the clearest examples of how a warming world may change ocean diseases.

The pathogen can kill masses of oysters but was rarely seen north of the Chesapeake Bay. Then, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, a warm-water system allowed the parasite to quickly spread from Maryland to Cape Cod, Mass., and beyond. There, it infected more oysters faster than before and killed them far quicker.

Many pathogens tend to get knocked back by cold winters. But as the marine world continues to warm, their survivability and suitable habitat just expands.

“In my opinion, we’re going to see more infectious-disease outbreaks in the ocean,” said Colleen Burge, a research associate at the University of Washington and lead author of a of ocean pathogens published last year.

And as climate change and ocean acidification alter the food chain, the growth of plants and animals, and the timing of their interactions, those factors also will affect how diseases spread.

“Any organism that is going to be under more stress or has fewer numbers or lower genetic diversity is going to be more highly susceptible,” Burge said.

One place where that’s already true is the Caribbean, where disease has hit more than two-thirds of coral reefs.

“There’s been a big uptick in these infectious diseases that are affecting coral, and the impacts are really huge,” said Harvell. “Partly that’s because corals live so close to their upper thermal limits that any kind of warming puts them over the edge.”

So when corals experience warm waters, sometimes that causes them to jettison the algae that lends them color, turning them white in a process known as bleaching. That in turn, can make them more vulnerable to disease.

During one warm-water period off the Florida Keys in 2005, corals that experienced bleaching were more likely to soon become infected with deadly white-plague disease.

Meanwhile, ocean acidification is expected to make it harder for corals to grow, which may reduce some corals’ ability to fight off infection.

Sometimes it isn’t a weakened host that’s the problem, but a more virulent bug.

Many coral diseases, parasites and fungal infections also spread more rapidly when waters warm, sometimes up to 14 times more rapidly.

In fact, bacterial infections also have been known to cause coral bleaching. During that same warm period in Florida in 2005, corals and sea fans already suffering from splotchy purple or gray patches known as dark-spot disease were found to be more likely to bleach than healthy corals.

And sometimes the spread is more complicated as the fabric of an ecosystem changes. Thirty years ago a disease wiped out black sea urchins in an area of the Caribbean. Without the urchins to chomp down on plant life, algae took over 90 percent of leaflike elkhorn corals and branching staghorn corals. Warming temperatures have so beaten back remaining corals that the environment and all that lives there has been completely transformed.

But predicting how and where these issues might surface is inherently difficult. Just as climate change alters the environment in complex but fundamental ways, diseases, too, are influenced by many factors. And it can take years before the important ones are understood.

No simple explanation

The reason scientists worry about the sea-star die-off is that starfish play an important role in tidal environments. Their absence will fundamentally change how those nearshore areas function.

But the difficulty in understanding what triggered the sea-star virus to suddenly become so deadly this time is that little about the outbreak has been consistent.

In some areas in British Columbia, sea stars had become so abundant that researchers wondered if the virus somehow was just working as a natural check to keep sea-star numbers down. But in other regions, starfish numbers were already way down.

“We certainly have some populations where they were arm to arm to arm, but if you go back and look, it wasn’t necessarily those high-density sites that were hit first,” said Ben Miner, a Western Washington University professor who has tracked the sea-star epidemic.

In addition, some sites with few sea stars still were hit again.

Researchers have seen some relationship between the starfish outbreak and warm waters. But the disease hit Oregon when waters were cool and spread into Alaska just as summer turned to fall.

Menge, for one, suspects acidification may have played a role, because the death of sea stars in Oregon often corresponded to times when winds drew waters to shore from down deep. Those waters — already naturally rich in CO2 — now are more sour than they used to be, thanks to the absorption of fossil-fuel emissions from the atmosphere.

Other scientists believe it could be a combination of several factors at once.

The one thing most agree on now is that it will take time to figure out, and may never be entirely understood. And the same could prove true with future marine outbreaks.

“We all want it to be something that’s really clear,” said Burge, the UW researcher, “but with diseases, it often just is not.”

Craig Welch: 206-464-2093 or cwelch@seattletimes.com. On Twitter @craigawelch
 
Of course he does he defends everything he opposed.
4 sure SV. Ever notice how the same industries hire the same PR buffoons? Big oil, tobacco and open net-cage aquaculture hire Hill & Knowleton and Moore. I guess it is profitable business selling your soul for money. Been the story since creation.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Patrick_Moore : "He was President of Greenpeace Canada between 1977 and 1986 and as Director of Greenpeace International.
From 1984 he became involved in a family business, Quatsino Seafarms Ltd, farming salmon on Vancouver Island. Until 1991 he was President of the company and between 1986 and 1989 was President of British Columbia Salmon Farmers Association.
Following claims by the United Fishermans and Allied Workers Union about pollution by the industry generally, the Vancouver Sun reported "Moore called the union's concerns 'phoney', saying that we are not causing pollution and there is no such thing as genetic pollution.
"(1)

"In 2014 Moore said that he "fear a global cooling" and insisted that recent statistics show the US is cooling and that there has been "no global warming for nearly 18 years".

Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore tells US Senate there is "no proof" humans cause climate change
http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...roof-humans-cause-climate-change-9159627.html

Big oil's friend:
http://www.capp.ca/canadaIndustry/oilSands/Innovation/media/Pages/PatrickMoore.aspx
 
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141127212346.htm

Another human footprint in the ocean: Rising anthropogenic nitrate levels in North Pacific Ocean
Date: November 27, 2014
Source: University of Hawaii at Manoa
Summary: Human-induced changes to Earth's carbon cycle -- for example, rising atmospheric carbon dioxide and ocean acidification -- have been observed for decades. However, a new study has shown that human activities, in particular industrial and agricultural processes, have also had significant impacts on the upper ocean nitrogen cycle.
 
New video on 2 effects of climate change

[d6_Aze-q4Q0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6_Aze-q4Q0
 
Seven Years Ago, An IPCC Lead Author Exposed Critical Weaknesses of the IPCC Foretelling Tools

NCAR’s Dr. Kevin Trenberth was a lead author of the IPCC’s 2nd, 3rd and 4th Assessment Reports. Near to the publication of the IPCC’s 4th Assessment Report 7 years ago, Dr. Trenberth penned a blog post at Nature.com Predictions of climate—a blog post that exposed many critical weaknesses in the climate models used by the IPCC for divining the future of climate on Earth. The post was filled with extraordinary quotes, including:


…none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate.
In particular, the state of the oceans, sea ice, and soil moisture has no relationship to the observed state at any recent time in any of the IPCC models.
Moreover, the starting climate state in several of the models may depart significantly from the real climate owing to model errors.
… if the current state is one of drought then it is unlikely to get drier, but unrealistic model states and model biases can easily violate such constraints and project drier conditions.
However, the science is not done because we do not have reliable or regional predictions of climate.
So the science is just beginning.
We will adapt to climate change. The question is whether it will be planned or not?
Those are powerful statements. Please read Trenberth’s blog post in its entirety. You’ll find those quotes were reinforced by much of the remaining text. Occasionally, Trenberth interjected what could be considered global warming dogma to temper the critical aspects of the remainder.

One of Trenberth’s statements stands out as self-deception, plain and simple:

The current projection method works to the extent it does because it utilizes differences from one time to another and the main model bias and systematic errors are thereby subtracted out. This assumes linearity.

Seven years later everyone knows the “current projection method” does not work. The climate science community has known all along that Earth’s climate is chaotic and non-linear. It was only a matter of time until their “current projection method” failed, and it didn’t take long.

Additionally, if the “current projection method” had worked, the climate-science community would presently not be scrambling to come up with excuses for the slow-down (hiatus) in global surface temperature warming. And they’ve come up with so many excuses, I’ve lost count.

I reminded people of this Trenberth blog post in a comment on the WattsUpWithThat cross post of one of my recent blog posts On the Elusive Absolute Global Mean Surface Temperature – A Model-Data Comparison. In the WUWT comment, I quoted the Trenbeth blog post:

None of the models used by IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate.

Then I noted: In other words, the models used by the IPCC were never intended to replicate Earth’s climate. They, therefore, cannot be validated or invalidated.
 
Only three days left to save The Earth
Prof Penny Sackett, Herald Sun December 04, 2009
We’ve got 5 years to save world says Australia’s chief scientist Professor Penny Sackett
THE planet has just five years to avoid disastrous global warming, says the Federal Government’s chief scientist.
Prof Penny Sackett yesterday urged all Australians to reduce their carbon footprint.
The professor said even if all the world stopped producing carbon dioxide immediately, temperature increases of 1.3C were unavoidable.
Asked to explain data that showed the earth had been cooling in recent years, the trained astrophysicist acknowledged air temperatures had leveled during the La Nina weather pattern, now nearing an end.”
Disastrous Global Warming will be locked in by Thursday I would say. Start packing the bunker.
Penny Sackett was the director of the Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics (a part of ANU) for five years. From 2008 – 2011 she was appointed Chief Scientist of Australia.

Only 2 days left before the world ends. (You packed yet?).
I love it how your side does not even listen to your own scientists.

So, if you are so good, you write him and tell him of your claim.
Put your email and his reply up here so we can all see it.
Better do it tonight as the earth is going to end as your side said.
Lets see if the world ends in the next two days shall we?

By the way, your group as you call them put out more crap than anyone.
Still waiting for your defence of the world is ending. She is one of you!
If the world does not stop in 2 days, then you can explain the following predictions for Al Gore.
Dont forget now, all science, no mabeys.
And if you are able to do this dont forget to tell us why we have not died?

I had no problem looking it up.
Have to be quick as the world ends on the 4th.

So, you expect us to believe you and your side that the IPPC who started this and whom all you are fighting for is allowed to lie and exaggerate as much as they want?
(The world is stopping in 3 days remember!)

My have we have gone from "Save the world" to the "World will end" in such a short time with your posts OBD. That's how your side rolls it seems. Take one thing then change it to another.
Regardless....
Did you bother to search for this quote or find out what was really said? I didn't think so..... The reporter made the claim in the headline of this rag. The climate denial echo chamber has since ramped it and your team fell for the bait..... Typical.

Do you even know what the article was about? Could it be she was talking about POLICY.... Saying we have 5 years to get the policy correct to keep us from 1.3 c by 2100. My understanding is she has been proven to be right as currently we are on track for 4-6 c ..... We missed that window on 1.3 c and we will never see that unless we find ways to remove carbon from the atmosphere. That ship has sailed and we were left on the dock no small thanks to your team.

Next year (2015) we might have policy that keeps us to 2 c but we will see if that happens. I hopeful that morally bankrupt voices on your team will not be heard at the next negotiations.
 
Global Sea Ice Area Up 700,000 km^2 Over Past Decade
Posted on December 2, 2014 by stevengoddard
The area of sea ice on Earth has increased 700,000 km² over the past decade. This is the exact opposite of both expert forecasts, and current claims made by experts – who lack in both competence and honesty.



arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.global.anom.1979-2008
 
Global Sea Ice Area Up 700,000 km^2 Over Past Decade
Posted on December 2, 2014 by stevengoddard
The area of sea ice on Earth has increased 700,000 km² over the past decade. This is the exact opposite of both expert forecasts, and current claims made by experts – who lack in both competence and honesty.
arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/timeseries.global.anom.1979-2008
Do you know what the columns from your weblink indicate, OBD? The 1st column shows a decrease. Also - you also understand the difference between area verses volume? Remember one of the numerous posts explained all this before?
 
http://climate.nasa.gov/news/2197/
West Antarctic melt rate has tripled


By Carol Rasmussen,
NASA's Earth Science News Team
December 2, 2014


2197_westantarcica_768_60.jpg


A comprehensive, 21-year analysis of the fastest-melting region of Antarctica has found that the melt rate of glaciers there has tripled during the last decade.
The glaciers in the Amundsen Sea Embayment in West Antarctica are hemorrhaging ice faster than any other part of Antarctica and are the most significant Antarctic contributors to sea level rise. This study by scientists at the University of California, Irvine (UCI), and NASA is the first to evaluate and reconcile observations from four different measurement techniques to produce an authoritative estimate of the amount and the rate of loss over the last two decades.
<figure class="inline_figure left" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0.3em 1.2em 0.8em 0px; max-width: 50%; float: left; color: rgb(43, 43, 43); font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 22.3999996185303px; width: 275px;"><figcaption style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 0.8em; font-size: 0.88em; color: rgb(90, 100, 112);">The Amundsen Sea Embayment in West Antarctica. Credit: NASA</figcaption></figure>“The mass loss of these glaciers is increasing at an amazing rate," said scientist Isabella Velicogna, jointly of UCI and NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California. Velicogna is a coauthor of a paper on the results, which has been accepted for publication in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.Lead author Tyler Sutterley, a doctoral candidate at UCI, and his team did the analysis to verify that the melting in this part of Antarctica is shifting into high gear. "Previous studies had suggested that this region is starting to change very dramatically since the 1990s, and we wanted to see how all the different techniques compared," Sutterley said. "The remarkable agreement among the techniques gave us confidence that we are getting this right."
The researchers reconciled measurements of the mass balance of glaciers flowing into the Amundsen Sea Embayment. Mass balance is a measure of how much ice the glaciers gain and lose over time from accumulating or melting snow, discharges of ice as icebergs, and other causes. Measurements from all four techniques were available from 2003 to 2009. Combined, the four data sets span the years 1992 to 2013.
The glaciers in the embayment lost mass throughout the entire period. The researchers calculated two separate quantities: the total amount of loss, and the changes in the rate of loss.
The total amount of loss averaged 83 gigatons per year (91.5 billion U.S. tons). By comparison, Mt. Everest weighs about 161 gigatons, meaning the Antarctic glaciers lost an amount of water weight equivalent to Mt. Everest every two years over the last 21 years.
The rate of loss accelerated an average of 6.1 gigatons (6.7 billion U.S. tons) per year since 1992.
During the period when the four observational techniques overlapped, the melt rate increased an average of 16.3 gigatons per year — almost three times the rate of increase for the full 21-year period. The total amount of loss was close to the average at 84 gigatons.
The four sets of observations include NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment satellites, laser altimetry from NASA's Operation IceBridge airborne campaign and the earlier ICESat satellite, radar altimetry from the European Space Agency's Envisat satellite, and mass budget analyses using radars and the University of Utrecht’s Regional Atmospheric Climate Model.
The scientists noted that glacier and ice sheet behavior worldwide is by far the greatest uncertainty in predicting future sea level. "We have an excellent observing network now. It’s critical that we maintain this network to continue monitoring the changes," Velicogna said, "because the changes are proceeding very fast."


And in other news .... I guy named "steve" said I have a website that proves the ice did not melt .... in fact everything is normal and NASA should not be trusted because they want to tax air. What does NASA know .. It's not like they have rocket scientists there... do they?
 
10817413_640544437873_151224351_o.jpg

Canadian Youth Delegation Open Letter to Government


To the Government of Canada:

We are the Canadian Youth Delegation, supported by more than sixty environmental non-profits, labour groups, and youth organizations. We are youth from across Canada who are attending the upcoming UN international climate change negotiations (COP 20) in Lima, Peru. As we prepare for our participation at the negotiations, we realize how important it is for us to introduce ourselves and tell you that we refuse to tolerate the inaction of the Canadian Government when it comes to climate change. We intend to hold you accountable for the decisions you make at COP 20.

We have grown up in a world threatened by the impacts of a changing climate. For our entire lives, world leaders have been aware of the irreversible damage that humans are inflicting on our planet, but have done almost nothing to reverse it. You, the Government of Canada, have made it clear that you are more interested in the profit and power you gain from a fossil fuel based economy than you are in ensuring a sustainable and livable planet for generations to come. Since assuming power you have:


  • withdrawn from the Kyoto Protocol in 2012 and continually blocked progress at international climate negotiations;
  • refused to put meaningful effort into supporting climate change adaptation and mitigation efforts;
  • lowered and reneged on emissions reductions commitments and zealously lobbied other governments to do the same;
  • pushed back relentlessly on the Climate Change Accountability Act (Bill C-311) and silenced the young people who protested its failure in October 2009 by dragging them from the House of Commons, where you laughed at them for demanding collective and ambitious climate action and policy;
  • championed an omnibus bill in 2012 that stripped federal environmental protections and muzzled climate scientists;
  • systematically audited and threatened organizations that aim to shed light on the disgraceful actions of the government;
  • and denied the treaty rights of Indigenous peoples in this country.
We, the Canadian Youth Delegation, stand alongside the millions of young people worldwide who refuse to inherit a planet in crisis. We stand beside Indigenous peoples, front-line communities, people of colour and low income populations who are living the frightening realities and injustices of climate change, and who will continue to be disproportionately impacted in the absence of sufficient action.

From coast to coast to coast First Nations, Inuit, and Métis, industry workers, new immigrants, parents, farmers, fishers, unions, students and many more are demanding climate justice. Yet the Government of Canada continues to lead us down a highway of unfettered expansion of the tar sands, paired with unwieldy trade agreements, and a complete lack of respect for Indigenous land and treaty rights. We reject the notion that the environment and the economy are mutually exclusive or pitted against each other. There is no price tag on forests, rivers, wetlands, air, culture, communities, or our lives and livelihoods. We know that it is not for lack of technological advancement, public opinion, or financial resources that we have not stopped climate change in its tracks; the culprit is lack of political will. Along with action on climate change, we demand that the Government of Canada honour the treaties and land rights of Indigenous people in this country.

You have the opportunity to be a leader in creating a just transition to a clean energy future, but you consistently fail to rise to the challenge. By now, any excuses for delay have long expired, yet we anticipate with heavy hearts that you will continue to stall negotiations at COP 20 and promote carbon-intensive projects at home. If this is the case, we will continue to challenge the ongoing development of the single most destructive development anywhere on Earth, and we will not give up until you acknowledge and take urgent and ambitious action to demonstrate that our future is more important to you than the money in your pockets, the oil on your hands, or the power you hold. To us, our future is everything, and we will do all that we can to protect it. Let it echo through the halls and boardrooms of every legislating body and corporate headquarters in this country: we deserve better.

Sincerely,

The Canadian Youth Delegation to COP 20
350.org
Bringing Youth Towards Equality (BYTE)
Canadian Federation of Students
Canadian Labour Congress
Canadian Unitarians for Social Justice
Canadian Youth Climate Coalition
ClimateFast
Climate Justice Saskatoon
Committee for Future Generations
Conservation Council of New Brunswick
Council of Canadians
Dalhousie Student Union Office of Sustainability
Divest Dalhousie
Divest McGill
Divest Mount Allison
Divest UVic
Divest York
Douglas Channel Watch
Ecology Action Centre
Ecology North
Ecology Ottawa
Environmental Studies Student Association, University of Saskatchewan
Fossil Fuel Divestment at Grenfell
Fossil Free Guelph
Fossil Free Kwantlen
Fossil Free Lakehead
Fossil Free McMaster
Fossil Free uOttawa
Friends of the Earth Canada
Geography, Planning and Environmental Graduate Students of Concordia University
Greenpeace Canada
Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Co-operative
Keepers of the Athabasca
Leadnow.ca
Living Oceans Society
Mother Earth Action Co-operative Ltd.
Nova Scotia Native Women’s Association
Pro Information Pro Environmental United People (PIPE UP) Network
Polaris Institute
Public Interest Alberta
Queen’s Backing Action on Climate Change
rabble.ca
RPIC (Renewable Power - the Intelligent Choice)
Saskatoon Peoples’ Climate March
Saskatchewan Citizens’ Hearings on Climate Change Organizing Committee
Saskatchewan Eco-Network
Sierra Club BC
Sierra Club Canada Foundation
Simon Fraser Public Interest Research Group
Starfish Canada
Stop Energy East Halifax
Sustainable SFU
Sustainable Trent
Student’s Society of McGill University
Toronto350.org
Transition Initiative Kenora
UBCC350
UofT350.org
UR Sustainability
Vegans and Vegetarians of Alberta
West Coast Environmental Law Association
Wilderness Committee

International
Aotearoa New Zealand Human Rights Lawyers Association
Australian Youth Climate Coalition
Generation Zero
New Zealand Youth Delegation
P3 Foundation
SustainUS: U.S. Youth for Sustainable Development
Young Friends of the Earth Europe
 
All Eyes on Lima as Climate Negotiations begin Crucial Period

The major UN climate talks of the year (COP20) get underway in Lima next week, offering up an opportunity to ramp up climate action while kicking off an intense 12 months of the global climate negotiations. In just a year’s time, governments from around the world are expected to sign off a new global climate agreement, which will see all countries, big and small, accept emissions targets.
In the last few months alone we’ve seen mass mobilisations around the world, the UN Secretary General’s climate summit, a stark report from the world’s climate scientists, and demands for action from a diverse community of voices including business and religious groups – all driving climate change back to the top of the political agenda. Governments can no longer afford to ignore the calls to scale up their transition from dirty fossil fuels to renewable energy. With China, the US and the EU all unveiling climate action plans in recent weeks, and nearly US $9.6 billion raised in climate finance pledges, a strong sense of political momentum accompanies the next fortnight of talks. But much work is still to be done.
Governments have a heavy list of Lima deliverables if they want to build a foundation strong enough to support a new climate agreement in Paris at the end of next year. At the heart of that new agreement, and expected to be at the top of the two week agenda, is countries’ individual climate action commitments – known as their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions, or INDCs. For the first time, every country will put specific climate action commitments forward; and in doing so, send the world’s first collective signal of the end of the fossil fuel age. Countries are due to submit their INDCs in the first quarter of next year, so Lima has to deliver clarity on what these commitments should contain, how long they should last, how they should be presented, and how to ensure the commitments are the strongest a country has to offer.
The US, China and the EU have led the way. And while these pledges send a strong political signal that the world’s largest emitters are serious about climate change, they also show us that much more ambition is necessary to keep global warming below the internationally agreed threshold of 2C of warming. With the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – the world’s leading climate science body – making it clear that fossil fuels must be phased down to zero, the current pledges must be seen as the floor and not the ceiling of action; and all countries must come forward with effective plans that show the that the world is committed to stick to a carbon budget, and that rich countries are ready to support poorer countries financially and technologically to act.
In addition to INDCs and the wider scope of ongoing work toward a 2015 deal, scaling up climate action in the near-term will be a major focus in Lima. More countries will need to ratify an agreed extension of the Kyoto Protocol before it can take effect; governments will make a decision on a new round of workshops to help them understand and adopt best-practice policies for near-term emissions cuts; and work is also expected on a “Lima Action Agenda” to maintain and accelerate cooperation on climate issues by all actors, building on climate action pledges made at the UN Climate Summit in New York earlier this year.
With this momentum in the rear-view mirror and Paris now just a year away, the stakes and expectations for COP20 in Lima are high.
- See more at: http://tcktcktck.org/2014/11/daily-...gin-crucial-period/65546#sthash.2xrRVzOP.dpuf
 
Greenland Ice Sheet Surface Mass Budget: DMI

The amount of ice which accumulates on Greenland’s surface is much greater than the amount of melt. This autumn, accumulation is at a record high.

Some skeptics fall into the trap of believing alarmist BS about “total mass balance” and “basal melt” Those are things which can’t be measured accurately, and are a response to the surface mass balance. If the amount of ice accumulating on the surface increases or decreases, then the amount of ice flowing to the sea will eventually adjust to match the surface mass balance – and return to steady state equilibrium.

The only interesting long-term metric is the surface mass balance. which shows that more snow falls on Greenland every year than melts. This tells us that Greenland is absolutely not melting
 
Hydraulic fracturing, better known as “fracking,” is a practice that involves pumping water, sand, and a complex brew of chemicals into an oil or gas well to increase production. However, evolution in technology and changes in the application of this process have made “unconventional drilling” the new convention. (Learn more about conventional vs. unconventional drilling here) - See more at: http://skytruth.org/issues/oil-gas/fracking/#sthash.QgkSZIwk.dpuf
<iframe width="592" height="444" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/eqvVugUwNuE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top