Analysis Post Part 2

Skeptics (continued)

11) Info from site:
• Skeptics to meet in New York.
• Wide range of views including: change in temperature poses no threat and solar changes and ocean cycles are to blame.
• Larger companies that used to support these ideas now do not. They believe that humans are to blame. Changed views in order to change image.
• The big question to be dealt with was Has Global Warming ever been a big issue that needs to be solved?
• Models are not accurate and the changes are not due to one specific reason.
• Some Skeptics do not have scientific data. For instance one does not believe carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas although there is actual data that says differently.
• Climate changes are not happening in the real world only the computer world.

Having skeptics means that climate change is an important issue. This article from the New York Times proved that skeptics do not have scientific data to back up their claims. The skeptics that deny theories that have actual data are completely discredited. Climate change is a controversial issue, but I have not found evidence to prove that global warming is not happening. If skeptics want the public to believe them they need more than having meeting. I trust this site purely because of the newspaper’s credibility. It is also a fairly recent article dating March 8, 2009.

12)Info from site:
• “A dispute regarding the nature, causes, and consequences of global warming.”
• This dispute takes place in the media world and not in the scientific world.
• Is there a trend with skeptics?
• “Republicans tend to oppose action against a threat that they regard as unproven, while Democrats tend to support actions that they believe will reduce global warming and its effects through the control of greenhouse gas emissions.”
• More evidence leads to other problems such as: what to do and when to do it.
• Restricting carbon emissions might devastate the economy now. Others think that waiting to take action means that it will cost more.
• Are scientists under pressure to find data to fit a political mold?

I am cautious to trust Wikipedia. So what I did was look for interesting points that I did not think about before. This site made me ask myself a lot of questions. If the debate is in the media then why are we debating? Are skeptics afraid to believe the truth? The economy is in a fragile state. How we go about finding a solution depends on money. If we wait the problem could get worse. How worse we do not know. The worse it gets the more money we have to spend, but can our economy survive a solution now?

13) Info from site:
• Carbon dioxide can act as a greenhouse gas to heat the Earth.
• Carbon dioxide warms the earth slowly, not at an alarming rate that needs attention.
• Earth’s climate is “dominated by positive feedback,” which are not “settled science.”
• Current warming rates imply zero feedback.
• We do not understand enough about cooling effect and scientists are not willing to admit they are wrong.
• “Nearly all the man-made cooling aerosols are in the northern hemisphere, meaning that most all the cooling effect should be there — but the northern hemisphere has actually exhibited most of the world’s warming over the past 30 years, while the south has hardly warmed at all.”
• Man will cause very little warming over the next century.
• Scientists are slowly starting to understand natural cycle variations.

This site makes several good points. The most important is that global warming is not “settled science.” We do not know everything. Scientists are researching and using data to figure out what the cause is of the rise in temperature and climate change. Something important to remember is that weather and climate are different. It makes logical sense that humans have an impact on the Earth, but maybe it is not just us. The changes we are experiencing could be due to several things such as: natural cycles, the sun, and humans.

Solutions

14)Info from site:
• The Earth will still warm, even if humans stop emitting greenhouse gases.
• The point is that the Earth will warm anywhere from 2.5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit. The power is in our hands.
• Many countries are starting to cut emissions. Everyone can do something.
• Instead of making an enormous change in one area, researchers at Princeton University suggest we cut emissions using many different technologies (seven wedges). This way we could potentially stay at the current level of emissions for the next fifty years and possibly stabilize.
• Wedges include: improvements in energy efficiency, vehicles, increase in wind energy, increase in solar energy, increase in hydro energy, biofuels, natural gas, and nuclear power.
• There is also the possibility of capturing carbon emissions and storing them underground.
• Creating more forests and changing how we farm. This way we could “store” more carbon. By this we mean that since plants need carbon dioxide why not take advantage of them?
• There a variety of solutions. Each community can decided which option is the best.

Since this site is from national geographic I believe it is credible. What I like about it is the variety of options. Every region is different, which means that some solutions only make sense for specific areas. Like Wind Turbines are ideal for the coast not the desert. Giving people choice allows people freedom. Sometimes people feel trapped and do not know what to do.

15)Info from site
• Carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are responsible for climate change.
• Answer: Reduce emissions before it is too late. Look for renewable resources instead of depending on fossil fuels.
• Answer is not so simple.
• Our society today demands energy. Coal and petroleum are the main sources of energy.
• We have not found any alternative source of energy that can replace coal and petroleum. Other sources (like wind, solar, nuclear, and bio) show more problems and the economy plans a major role in them.
• We cannot stop carbon emissions completely, but we need to find a solution for the bigger issue and goes along with the economic growth.
• Kyoto is based on give and take, which means that industries have to do something green that equals the amount of their carbon emissions.
• The best right now solution, which will lead to finding a solution for global warming and climate change.
• This tries to balance things so maybe we can maintain the level of emissions.
• Companies can offset anywhere in the world, which means they can choose a place where it will be cheaper. By hosting one of these projects underdeveloped countries not only get an economic boost, but they are going green.
• Businesses do not have to stop their normal routine.
• Change will not happen overnight.

This solution has a lot of benefits. Taking green solutions to poor countries would also bring economic growth. There are also a lot of problems. This site blame carbon emissions, but scientists are not one hundred percent sure it is emissions alone. This site also dismisses other alternative resources. Nothing is a permanent fix, but there are many options out there for reducing our emissions. I think this solution could work, but I do not think this is the only solution.

16)Info from site:
• Renewable energy can be replenished in a short period of time.
• The five most used are biomass, hydropower, wind, solar, and geothermal
• In 2008, renewable energy counted as seven percent of all energy used across the U.S.
• Renewable energy is primarily used to produce electricity. It is also used to heat homes and fuel (ethanol) cars.
• By using renewable sources we can reduce carbon emissions. Renewable sources of energy do not directly emit greenhouse gases.
• In the past, this energy has been more expensive. Other problems include location.
• Sources are growing, but we still depend on non-renewable energy sources to meet our energy needs.

So this site is made for kids. It has games and activities. I think the information given is very good. It is straight forward and does not get into the scientific language, which makes it easy to understand. What I did not mention above is that it defines each of the five main renewable energies. The only two I have not mentioned in my blog thus far are biomass (organic material that when burned releases heat) and geothermal (heat from inside the Earth).

Economy

17) Info from site:
• It is possible to put a cap on carbon emissions now at a minimal cost (less than one percent of U.S. gross domestic product in 2030) to our economy according to Dr. Keohane, director of economic policy and analysis.
• The longer we wait the more expensive it will be.
• We are taking a big risk by not doing anything.
• Effects Americans might see if we carbon-cap: new jobs, total job loss would be minimal, household consumption is expected to decrease, and households will see a small increase in energy costs.
• Cap and Trade: Allows companies flexibility be setting their own cap on emissions. If a company caps more they can sell their extra allowances to others for profit.
• Companies pay for the fuel, but not the pollution. Now that pollution has a value, companies will be influenced to pollute less.
• Cost will remain low only if we act now.
• This would give us time to research new technologies.

This site believes that we can help in the environment without devastating the economy even further. At first glance this solution looks promising, but I am still concerned about money. The reality is that a human cannot survive in this world without money. What if it turns out to be a huge waste of money? What if companies do not cap their carbon emissions? You would have to create a law requiring companies to cap and trade. With any solution there are possible negative outcomes.

18)Info from site:
• Article titled: Is a Bad Economy Good for the Environment?
• In the past people believed that economic growth came first, but now people are shifting their beliefs and feel the environment is more important.
• Weak Economy means that industrial production is down, which then means that emissions are also down. This slows growth in atmosphere and global warming.
• There is a lower demand for wood, which means that forests are not being chopped down. Since plants absorb carbon this is great news.
• Power demand is down.
• The point is that this gives us a little more time to make some big decisions of what to do in the future with global warming and climate change.
• Stimulate the economy by green effects.
• Green programs offer many jobs.
• The problem comes in with passing some kind of bill through legislature.
• Solutions: carbon tax or cap and trade. If the economy was stronger it would not as hard for the Obama administration to pass one of these ideas.
• Cap and Trade: revenue- 600 billion, which would fund programs to fight climate change and be returned as tax cuts.
• Increase price of fossil fuels. Would boost energy efficiency.

This article brings up an interesting point. Finding the light in a period of darkness. I think that it is possible to make changes for the environment without adding severe consequences to the economy. This article is from the Christian Science Monitor. I have never heard of this site, but the information seems to confirm what I have found on other sites.

19)Info from site:
• Solve the environment and economy at the same time.
• Not every country is putting money into renewable resources.
• The UN needs to step in. Assign a commissioner who would encourage countries to present green messages in everything.
• “Private money needs to be siphoned into a sustainable future through more forward-looking banks and finance houses.”
• More public money needs to be put into research and development of new energy resources.
• Industrialized countries need to encourage other countries to use green energy.
• Energy efficiency. Financial incentives can boost people’s concerns.
• Carbon Taxing.

This site confirmed the information I have collected so far. This article talks about how we can do both. So many people feel like we have to pick the economy or the environment. In reality we do not have to choose. What will have to do is give and take. If everyone makes sacrifices our problems might just be solved.

What is at stake?

20)Info from site:
• “The consequences are interrelated and actually start to compound each other as the earth's temperature continues to rise.”
• Melting glaciers: Polar ice caps could melt completely. Sea level rises.
• Intense Weather: More heat energy which fuels Earth’s weather patterns.
• Health issues: Strong heat waves may cause deaths. Allergies and Asthma will increase. Severe diseases will put millions of people at stake.
• Wildlife: Extinction of species. Coral reefs are at stake due to temperature increase of the water.

These are only predicted consequences. We do not know what will happen. I think that humans do have an impact on the Earth and the Earth has an impact on humans. In order to survive we have to make changes. I am not saying we have to make drastic changes, but I do not personally want to be responsible for wiping out a species. It is time for a change. All I know is that we cannot keep on polluting the Earth. It makes sense that pollution will make the Earth sick just like humans.