Posted by Wayne Jones on November 5, 2012 at 12:42 PM
This fall, several people commented that they would someday like to see the brilliant fall foliage in the northeastern U.S. when I posted shots of colorful maple, birch and beech trees. In the discussion about a post in the Landscape Gallery last week ( BBM or MBB, eh?), we learned that opportunities to photograph this colorful forest type in the United States are decreasing. Just like glaciers, arctic sea ice and polar bears, the maple-beech-birch forest type is declining due to climate change. This series of forest type maps shows that this colorful type of forest is on the move, drastically shrinking in the USA, due to climate change. (It's a major economic issue for more reasons than just scenic beauty.) I don't know how much of the Canadian geology and soils are suitable for this type of forest, but future photographers will certainly have to travel farther to see the fall leaves we enjoy now.
You may think that such changes won't be a big deal unless you are a polar bear, but NY Governor Andrew Cuomo recently made some significant remarks about the reasons why deadly severe weather events like "once in a century" storms are now happening every year or two. He said "Climate change is a reality…we are vulnerable." No matter who gets elected tomorrow, we owe it to our children, grandchildren, and future generations to get our politicians' heads out of the sand (to put it politely) NOW and take action on human influences on the environment.
It's certainly a case of "cause and effect," but the more people whose living conditions are diminished by climate change, the larger to pool of voters that will enthusiastically get rid of today's foot draggers.
Thanks Wayne for sharing this information. Those maps point out some possible sad scenarios for sure. The western states are faced with similar declines in a variety of foliage's for climate issues and the diseases and bugs that come with the temperature increases.
I have a photo taken when Preston and I were at a very colorful aspen grove in the sierras around Sage-hen pass a few years ago. It was a very healthy stand when we were there that year. The next year I drove to the area scouting out the same grove and not one tree had a leaf on it. It appeared as though some kind of blight had hit it and decimated the entire grove.
Posted by Wayne Jones on November 5, 2012 at 1:57 PM
Tkanks Hank. Unfortunately, those "standing in the way" may have enough of a future to make the future of our species dismal. The worse the environment gets, the more the economy and international peace and stability will suffer. So many people fail to see (or admit) the real connection between the environment and human existence, so the environment too often ends up as a minor issue in the minds of voters. All we can do is speak up and hope that more voters understand the overwhelming importance of environmental responsibility in public policy.
Posted by Wayne Jones on November 5, 2012 at 2:13 PM
Paul, Those aspens, as well as the forest pests now decimating millions of acres of economically important forests, are graphic examples of what is happening to this planet, but some politicians and voters would regard those as frivolous issues if they don't have a job. Maybe when enough jobs are wiped out my the lack of natural resources (like water!) to support them, voters and politicians will finally see the light. By then, it may be too late for our species. Maybe environmentally-aware people need to move from a "save the Earth" mantra to a "Save our lives!" to get people to pay attention. TOMORROW'S ELECTION will set the tone for years to come, but whatever the outcome, we can't give up, because those "economic powers" that are buying our politicians and brainwashing our voters will continue their short-sighted influence on politicians and voters no matter which party is in power. People with long-term vision must somehow get the upper hand or our grandchildren will suffer in ways that would make the hardest men cry.
Wayne, I state a small example of how things can be so twisted. In our local paper a lady in the area wrote a letter to the editor section for publication recently. I could tell she must have been part of the younger generation and thinking of how well things are right now and how she was tired of environmental groups impeding life and progress, so to speak. One of her complaints was our recent fuel shortage and the sky rocketing prices we faced in CA. Additionally she did not care one iota about the special summer blend of fuel we run here in So Cal. Again, stating environmentalists as the cause of the special blend issues.
She obviously had no history to fall back on in my opinion. If she only knew how bad it was in the 1960's here in So Cal before the environmental groups and federal government got involved to place clean air demands on vehicle manufactures and gas providers in an all out attempt to curtail the smog in the LA basin she would understand better. If it was not for those same environmental groups making such a big stink back then we could not live in this area with the number of vehicles clogging our roadways these days. The pollution levels are way down from what we lived with back then with much less traffic back at that time too.
So, as a result of all the cleanup efforts there comes a hidden false sense of security for the younger folks who have clean water and air right now. Will they understand going forward they too will have to fight the battles of prevention. Time will tell.
Posted by Miro Susta on November 6, 2012 at 2:02 AM
Hi Wayne & contributing NPN Members,
When I read newspapers, watch TV and follow discussions like this I'm always very surprised about the fact how many people believe in this funny words "Global climate change" caused by us. I agree if we say "natural cyclic global climate change".
How all of you can believe that within few years we could affect the global climate in such way?
Following just some basic calculations:
Diameter of our planet Earth is 6,353km
The air volume around it (assuming 30km layer) is 15.3 billions km3 (cube kilometers).
There is around 5,000GW (5 millions MW) thermal power plant capacity installed worldwide. These power plants are producing around 0.016km3 of exhaust gas each second or 505,000km3 each year.
This 505,000km 3 is representing 0.0033% from the air volume around the globe.
Even tha we assume that all other pollution sources will be at same level, i.e. 0.0033% for traffic, 0.0033% for industry and 3x0.0033% for others we will arrive at total of 0.02% per year. Don't forget the large part of this emissions will get lost in the endless space.
Conclusion? Presently we are getting through natural global climate change (not for the first time in the history of our planet) and we have to live with it.
But we should do not forget out close, ground environment. We should keep our air which we breath clean, we should not pollute our rivers and lakes, we should not accumulate rubbish around us and we should not visit any food outlet offering food and drinks on plastic and we should not accept plastic bags in supermarkets. This should be our best contribution. And I'm sure soon or later our tree will get back that beautiful fall colors as we got back the beautiful and healthy forests after forest dying period in early 80tees. Don't forget that the "Global Climate Changing" subject is the best way to be successful in politics.
Posted by Pete Jacks on November 6, 2012 at 4:14 AM
HI Miro, Right on!
Posted by John Reed on November 6, 2012 at 8:06 AM
The world is not flat. The sun does not revolve around the earth. People believed that and I'm sure supported with facts too. Climate change is not a myth. Here's the one fact that matters. There are now over 7 billion of us humans on the planet, more than ever and it will never go down. To think that we don't have an impact on the climate through our activities is ludicrous.
JR
Posted by Rick Turner on November 6, 2012 at 9:45 AM
I am with Miro on this
e
Posted by Wayne Jones on November 6, 2012 at 11:16 AM
Our view of climate change and the factors that influence it is a matter of vision.
1. There are very few people who deny that climate change is happening. If they can't see it, they are blind.
2. There are many people who deny that climate change is has been happening for many decades approximately 100 times faster than can be explained by any natural processes other than gigantic physical events such as huge volcanic eruptions, earth obit or tilt shifts, or major energy influxes from space such as near misses from gamma radiation bursts, etc. These people either have tunnel vision (from wearing blinders supplied by scientists and politicians directly or indirectly on the payroll of oil companies and related industries who would suffer from alternative energy development) or they are merely optimists wearing rose-colored glasses, or they are short-sighted, unable to see the facts contained in the past century, or the path that those trends lead into the future.
3. Some people listen to every historical observer of the earth and every scientist who is not influenced by the corporations who fear energy sources that do not depend on purchasing fossil fuels. These are the people who are not blind, who are not wearing blinders or rose-colored glasses. It is up to these people to help the others see.
PLEASE open your eyes: look at the receding glaciers; the shrinking polar ice; the rising temperatures and sea levels; the changes in weather patterns and the increases in violent storms. PLEASE open your eyes and think about the kind of future our grandchildren will have if we keep INCREASING our dependence on fossil fuels, and keep increasing destructive efforts to pull them from the earth, and keep burning them, slowly but surely shifting the delicate balance of gases in our atmosphere -- even small changes are real, and have real effects! Are there any things other than oil company profits that would suffer if we developed less harmful forms of energy? PLEASE OPEN YOUR EYES!
I used to wear rose-colored glasses, too, but my training as a scientist and my gift for truly objective thinking led me to see clearly. Perhaps the following short articles may help you see. I know how hard it is to see while wearing blinders or rose-colored glasses, but maybe this will be start for some people toward clearer vision.
Posted by Wayne Jones on November 6, 2012 at 12:25 PM
Miro, I don't know how it is in European politics, but in the United States, most politicians depend on financial contributions which originate in large corporations. There have always been some politicians that dismiss climate change as a joke, but now there are many more politicians becoming essentially silent or non-committal on the issue, fearing retribution from the financial powers.
Yes, there have been many climate changes in the past, and every one has changed life on Earth, several times resulting in massive extinction of life forms that once lived here, and more often causing slower changes, but still significant ones that transformed life on Earth drastically.
Regarding emissions, gravity keeps them in our atmosphere, rather than being launched into space.
Regardless of some technical differences like those, I am so glad WE AGREE that "We should keep our air which we breath clean, we should not pollute our rivers and lakes, we should not accumulate rubbish around us..." Regardless of whether we agree that changing our atmosphere by your figure of " 0.02% per year" has any effect on our climate, actions we both support to keep our environment healthy will be a good thing!
Your partner in supporting a healthy environment.
Posted by Miro Susta on November 6, 2012 at 10:00 PM
Wayne,
Thanks for your comments. I appreciate it. As we agree it is most important to keep our environment clean. In this respect there are great achievements worldwide (e.g. river Thames & Rhine, maybe LA basin, etc).
I'm a Power Generation Engineer and can confirm the fact about successful thermal power plants pollution reduction measures during last two decades. There is still lot of to do in this sector, but whatever we do we cannot reduce the emissions to zero.
From my calculations it is obvious that the pollution (emissions) which we are producing is still very, very small. I agree that globe gravity is still keeping part of it in the atmosphere-stratosphere, but this "vessel" is not 100% tight and so part of the pollution escapes to the space.
You will see that one day our glaciers will start grooving again. We may be able to witness this or not. If we cannot, our children, grandchildren will do.
I don't understand how you can recommend as reference the following link "NASA scientist links climate change, extreme weather" which is from CNN, profit making organization which is ready to publish everything related to publicity and money making. Already the photo with stack emitting heavy smoke is misleading. This is a past in large part o the world. Even China's government started to close down old coal fired power plants some years ago.
Attached please find a photo of 2,100MW (2.1GW) coal fired power plant in Malaysia. In this power plant we have applied all possible pollution reduction measured (sulphur separation, ash removal from flue gas, low NOx burners etc..). That what can be seen at the chimney outlet is not a polluting gas, it is mostly white steam (evaporated rest water contained in the coal).
What I will say, engineers are everyday trying to reduce the emissions with more or less success. But if we like to enjoy energy advantages (to watch TV, to cool down air in our houses, to keep food in fridge, to take a car for shopping or holiday trip, etc..) we have to accept some kind of pollution. Keeping eyes open does not solve the problem.
Instead of keeping eyes open, we have to do something positive. Reduce using a car? Not using AC? Not watching TV? I don't think this will bring much.
Better improvement would be helping poor undeveloped countries to fight the pollution. Have you seen town waste disposal place in Havana or in some Central America countries? Have you seen Managua Lake in Nicaragua? Have you seen the waste disposals in Tanzania? Do you know how much dangerous CO2 gases such disposal sites are producing? Do you know how these disposals are affecting ground waters? This is a real problem we have to fight and solve, rather to fight and spend billions in war in Middle East. I hope that everybody understands my point.
Posted by Wayne Jones on November 6, 2012 at 10:41 PM
Thank you Miro! You have added a lot to this discussion from the standpoint of a real expert in the field of power generation. I believe I do understand your point, and that we agree that there is much work to do on MANY fronts, especially in the "third world." (I don't recall ever saying that mass power generation is the only problem, and I am sorry if it seemed that way to you.)
I posted the CNN link because it was more concise and easy to read than the government reports and congressional testimony they quoted. The fact that CNN makes a profit does not change the facts in this particular article, but I agree that profit is a powerful incentive to dispute facts -- we have a vivid experience of that with the American tobacco industry). Since CNN is commonly seen as biased, I'll try to avoid listing them in the future. (I appreciate your advice on that.) However, many not-for-profit information sources are at least as biased on both sides, so concise and unbiased information can be difficult to find.
Thanks also for all you are doing to reduce harmful power generation emissions. Hopefully work like yours will be done wherever fossil fuels are burned in the world someday. And hopefully public policy in all nations will someday encourage the clean energy work you are doing, as well as other ways to generate power on any scale with as little adverse impact on the Earth as feasible. From what you say, I gather that you agree that is the responsible thing to do, no matter what your opinion on climate change is.
Posted by Miro Susta on November 7, 2012 at 1:44 AM
Hi Wayne,
That was a great statement from you. Thank you. I still believe that this planet has not taking a course to any natural disaster. But you are right; we have to care about our environment.
Just to complete my information, and to finish my contribution to this very important subject I wish to stress that beside of being an engineer involved in thermal power plants engineering, I was for many years following my hobby, renewable energy.
On this subject I've delivered a paper on Powergen International Conference in Las Vegas in 2003.
You can see the paper on:
http://www.mrsphoto.net/4-IMTE%20AG/2-PGI-2003.pdf
And I was involved in with UNIDO in biogas production projects in Tanzania, Cuba, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Brazil and Peru. I'm proud that I was able to contribute in reduction of pollution in these countries.
I wish you and all NPN active members all the best and also congratulate you all to US President Election 2012.
Posted by Wayne Jones on November 7, 2012 at 9:54 AM
Thank you Miro, again.
Now we are aware of even more reasons to appreciate you, in addition to your beautiful photography.
If anyone has not yet seen Miro's Web site, your eyes will get a treat when you click on his www link.
P.S. I just read Miro's Paper ADVANTAGES OF COMBINED WIND-BIOGAS ENERGY UTILIZATION FOR DISTRIBUTED POWER GENERATION. It is a good example of how humans can more efficiently and cleanly produce energy while providing more employment for people in building and maintaining local power systems, and at the same time reduce our dependence on dwindling fossil fuels. There ARE options -- and there will be even more in the near future -- that will put people to work and improve our environment at the same time. Now it is up to us to make sure our governments and businesses all over the world encourage them!
Posted by Ross Warner on November 7, 2012 at 6:18 PM
So the question seems to be; Are man-made conditions the driving factor in "why deadly severe weather events like "once in a century" storms are now happening every year or two. He said "Climate change is a reality…we are vulnerable." No matter who gets elected tomorrow, we owe it to our children, grandchildren, and future generations to get our politicians' heads out of the sand (to put it politely) NOW and take action on human influences on the environment" or are natural conditions causing the majority of "climate change" that which will continue no matter what humans do to alleviate the minimal effects Miro discusses? I support doing things with the least minimal effect on the environment however I don't want to waste scarce resources and tax dollars on pie in the sky solutions which it seems every dopey pol is willing to ardently support..
Posted by Wayne Jones on November 7, 2012 at 10:11 PM
Ross,
THANKS for reading all of this! It shows you care. Your questions deserve answers. However, a tiny handful of people on NPN can't possibly sort it all out. Thousands of scientists tell us they have answers about what's happening; hundreds tell us they know why; and hundreds of others dispute it. Each one of us must try to sort out the confusing information, or at least which sources of information we trust. We need to consider where it comes from, and which powers behind the info have axes to grind, such as big profits on the line. I don't know which "dopey" politicians are eager to spend tax dollars on what they think are solutions, but I do know that LOTS of politicians would be afraid to admit that the Sun rose this morning if those in control of their campaign funds -- AND other campaign funds capable of making sure they don't get elected again -- have a "sunrise is not real" agenda.
Unfortunately, answers are easier to find than the truth. If you think that nobody can hide the truth for years, purchase scientists to dispute facts, and hire public relations experts to produce very convincing messages built on half-truths and lies, just study the history of the tobacco industry in the mid-20th century.
But it's not as simple as "good versus evil." To make finding the truth even more elusive, just consider that some of the people who tell us we don't need to take action are good people trying to do the right thing. Some of them are very smart people who just don't know all the facts, or understand or believe what is happening. This issue is so big, but at the same time so delicate and complex that it just does not seem to make sense to many. "Common sense," however, does not work when you don't have all the facts, even if you are very smart; and good intentions intentions cannot keep us from continuing on a self-destructive path. Remember life depends on a delicate balance in our environment, and that where there is balance, a grain of sand can tip the scale! Unlike all the other creatures that have come and gone before us, humans can significantly change our environment. That is both a blessing and a curse.
There is SO much more to explore and discuss here, but it could quickly get so big and contentious that we would lose our "audience," especially considering that this is a friendly photography forum. Those who have the interest need to follow the science and get involved in the issue in more appropriate places. I just hope that this thread has sparked the interest in some of our members to do that. Explore; Learn; Get Involved!
Posted by Basil Greber on November 11, 2012 at 8:56 AM
Wayne, thanks for bringing this issue up. And I'm sorry for keeping things going in spite of your last message. But I can not remain silent.
Miro - I'm sure you know what the percentage of carbon dioxide is in the athmosphere, and hence you must realize that your "little calculation" above is ill-suited to relieve any concerns. Just sayin'. While I appreciate that you openly declare your serious conflict of interest, I don't really like the kind of argument you're putting forward. We've seen this numerous times already - creationists, the tobacco lobby, you name it. In the end, the truth content of those arguments was (and is), well, not very high. Science is a method that has a fairly decent track record in finding truth, or at least in finding good approximations of it. Declaring true what you'd wish to be true hasn't.
Whether or not the change in climate we're currently facing is man made (though it clearly is) we should be concerned because changing climate spells trouble for humanity. Though maybe not so much for us in the developed world - developing countries will, as always, be struck first. The irony.
Posted by Basil Greber on November 11, 2012 at 9:00 AM
Attached please find a photo of 2,100MW (2.1GW) coal fired power plant in Malaysia. In this power plant we have applied all possible pollution reduction measured (sulphur separation, ash removal from flue gas, low NOx burners etc..). That what can be seen at the chimney outlet is not a polluting gas, it is mostly white steam (evaporated rest water contained in the coal).
If that's not a polluting gas, I gather you've captured all the carbon dioxide, too?
So, before the industrial revolution, the planet was in a state of homeostasis? I think not.
I'm all for good stewardship, and responsible living with regards to the environment. I think we should be making every effort to reduce our impact. I'm not for using the topic for political leverage, or gain. I'm not for regulating ourselves back to the stone age. A lot of the proposals I'm hearing are not really economically possible for many/most people. I can't afford to go drop 40,000.00 bucks on an electric/hybrid that doesn't fulfill my needs. I have a 1999 Grand Cherokee with 120,000 miles on it. I keep it in good running order. It passes it's annual smog test in the upper 25%.
I won't argue that we are not having an influence on the changes happening. To what percentage that is, I don't know. The climate has ebbed and flowed naturally, we know this. Deserts were once oceans and rainforests were once deserts. We are going to have to live with it, wether we like it or not. So maybe the effort should be put into finding ways to do that.
I love fall the autumn season, and snow on the mountain tops. Some of the changes are probably beyond our control to change/reverse. It's sad, but probably the harsh reality. I'm not a climate change denier, so hope my stance doesn't imply that. I just wonder where the reality in all of this lies.
Chris
Posted by Ross Warner on November 11, 2012 at 3:57 PM
Ok, the problem is identified. Increase in carbon dioxide percentage in the atmosphere. What should be done to reduce the percentage? What produces carbon dioxide and how do we eliminate whatever produces it?
Posted by Ross Warner on November 11, 2012 at 3:59 PM
Ok, the problem is identified. Increase in carbon dioxide percentage in the atmosphere. What should be done to reduce the percentage? What produces carbon dioxide and how do we eliminate whatever produces it?
Posted by Miro Susta on November 11, 2012 at 6:02 PM
Ross I give you simple response.
Please stop using your car, stop traveling by airplane, disconnect your house from electricity supply, stop breading cattle (because Producing 1kg of beef results in more CO2 emissions than going for a three-hour drive while leaving all the lights on at home running), stop using any synthetic materials, processed food etc..
If everybody follows you we will not have ant CO2 problems.
Or you can improve our industry to zero CO2 emissions level?
It is easy to talk about it, but very difficult to take satisfactory actions because people are not ready to give up comfortable life. Are you?
Have a great week.
So, if no one will stop driving their cars, flying in airplanes, or disconnect their houses, we should be talking about doable, sustainable, and realistic actions and solutions. I think when politicians want to start walking the walk that will be a good start. When a politician flies overseas with an entourage of 200 or more people, in multiple airplanes, they create a bigger carbon footprint than I do in a year or years! It's not us poor folks doing all the mass poluting! I'm just saying it would be nice if the people on the soap boxes started "leading by example".
Chris
Posted by Ross Warner on November 11, 2012 at 11:09 PM
Miro, I mostly eat fish, chicken and venison. Most of my clothing is made of wool or cotton. I use fluorescent light bulbs. I guess I'm doing my share. I need a vehicle to get to work. 16 miles round trip. So that may be a negative. But as Chris points out how much CO2 was created just but the traveling for the presidential election. Talk about generating hot air creating global warming. How much CO2 is created just in studying global warming causes? Remember ethanol the great savior from global warming which now seems to be worse that gasoline. What kind of dopes thought ethanol was the solution to CO2?
Posted by Miro Susta on November 12, 2012 at 6:31 AM
Hi Chris & Ross, I agree with both of you. We can do whatever we can, we can try hard but we cannot stop even Tiger Woods from flying around the globe in his private jet just for few rounds of golf, not talking about politicians.
Also we cannot stop progress but we, all of us, must try hard. And it starts, as I mentioned earlier, in burger shop around the corner which serving food on one way plastic...
And as I said earlier, we have to help poor nations to learn how to reduce pollution. During my professional life I tried very hard, I don't know whether are you close to some kind of engineering, if yes please visit my WEB section where you can see some examples from my work on renewable energies, like producing biogas from town waste in Havana, from sisal waste in Tanzania or from palm oil waste in Malaysia and others. This is a small contribution, but many small positive contributions can help a bit.
Guide to my WEB:
open
www.mrsphoto.net
open
More Information
open
Links
open
IMTE AG
open
Clean Energy or Conferences
Wish you a great time.
Posted by Gary Gulash on November 19, 2012 at 8:41 PM
On a tangential note re the OP and fall foliage changes in deciduous forests, a recent CBC radio program I listened to concluded that Canada's maple syrup production is experiencing unprecedented declines in sap flow because of changes in our climate. By the middle of this century Maple Syrup production on a commercial scale will end based on current trends.
Discussion
27 repliesYou may think that such changes won't be a big deal unless you are a polar bear, but NY Governor Andrew Cuomo recently made some significant remarks about the reasons why deadly severe weather events like "once in a century" storms are now happening every year or two. He said "Climate change is a reality…we are vulnerable." No matter who gets elected tomorrow, we owe it to our children, grandchildren, and future generations to get our politicians' heads out of the sand (to put it politely) NOW and take action on human influences on the environment.
Politicos standing in the way have little future.
I have a photo taken when Preston and I were at a very colorful aspen grove in the sierras around Sage-hen pass a few years ago. It was a very healthy stand when we were there that year. The next year I drove to the area scouting out the same grove and not one tree had a leaf on it. It appeared as though some kind of blight had hit it and decimated the entire grove.
She obviously had no history to fall back on in my opinion. If she only knew how bad it was in the 1960's here in So Cal before the environmental groups and federal government got involved to place clean air demands on vehicle manufactures and gas providers in an all out attempt to curtail the smog in the LA basin she would understand better. If it was not for those same environmental groups making such a big stink back then we could not live in this area with the number of vehicles clogging our roadways these days. The pollution levels are way down from what we lived with back then with much less traffic back at that time too.
So, as a result of all the cleanup efforts there comes a hidden false sense of security for the younger folks who have clean water and air right now. Will they understand going forward they too will have to fight the battles of prevention. Time will tell.
When I read newspapers, watch TV and follow discussions like this I'm always very surprised about the fact how many people believe in this funny words "Global climate change" caused by us. I agree if we say "natural cyclic global climate change".
How all of you can believe that within few years we could affect the global climate in such way?
Following just some basic calculations:
Diameter of our planet Earth is 6,353km
The air volume around it (assuming 30km layer) is 15.3 billions km3 (cube kilometers).
There is around 5,000GW (5 millions MW) thermal power plant capacity installed worldwide. These power plants are producing around 0.016km3 of exhaust gas each second or 505,000km3 each year.
This 505,000km 3 is representing 0.0033% from the air volume around the globe.
Even tha we assume that all other pollution sources will be at same level, i.e. 0.0033% for traffic, 0.0033% for industry and 3x0.0033% for others we will arrive at total of 0.02% per year. Don't forget the large part of this emissions will get lost in the endless space.
Conclusion? Presently we are getting through natural global climate change (not for the first time in the history of our planet) and we have to live with it.
But we should do not forget out close, ground environment. We should keep our air which we breath clean, we should not pollute our rivers and lakes, we should not accumulate rubbish around us and we should not visit any food outlet offering food and drinks on plastic and we should not accept plastic bags in supermarkets. This should be our best contribution. And I'm sure soon or later our tree will get back that beautiful fall colors as we got back the beautiful and healthy forests after forest dying period in early 80tees. Don't forget that the "Global Climate Changing" subject is the best way to be successful in politics.
JR
e
1. There are very few people who deny that climate change is happening. If they can't see it, they are blind.
2. There are many people who deny that climate change is has been happening for many decades approximately 100 times faster than can be explained by any natural processes other than gigantic physical events such as huge volcanic eruptions, earth obit or tilt shifts, or major energy influxes from space such as near misses from gamma radiation bursts, etc. These people either have tunnel vision (from wearing blinders supplied by scientists and politicians directly or indirectly on the payroll of oil companies and related industries who would suffer from alternative energy development) or they are merely optimists wearing rose-colored glasses, or they are short-sighted, unable to see the facts contained in the past century, or the path that those trends lead into the future.
3. Some people listen to every historical observer of the earth and every scientist who is not influenced by the corporations who fear energy sources that do not depend on purchasing fossil fuels. These are the people who are not blind, who are not wearing blinders or rose-colored glasses. It is up to these people to help the others see.
PLEASE open your eyes: look at the receding glaciers; the shrinking polar ice; the rising temperatures and sea levels; the changes in weather patterns and the increases in violent storms. PLEASE open your eyes and think about the kind of future our grandchildren will have if we keep INCREASING our dependence on fossil fuels, and keep increasing destructive efforts to pull them from the earth, and keep burning them, slowly but surely shifting the delicate balance of gases in our atmosphere -- even small changes are real, and have real effects! Are there any things other than oil company profits that would suffer if we developed less harmful forms of energy? PLEASE OPEN YOUR EYES!
I used to wear rose-colored glasses, too, but my training as a scientist and my gift for truly objective thinking led me to see clearly. Perhaps the following short articles may help you see. I know how hard it is to see while wearing blinders or rose-colored glasses, but maybe this will be start for some people toward clearer vision.
See a series of forest type prediction maps
NASA scientist links climate change, extreme weather
And, yes there are some authoritative-sounding people who deny that climate change is a problem. If you believe them, read this: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/04/26/more-debunking-of-the-ex-nasa-49-climate-change-deniers/
Yes, there have been many climate changes in the past, and every one has changed life on Earth, several times resulting in massive extinction of life forms that once lived here, and more often causing slower changes, but still significant ones that transformed life on Earth drastically.
Regarding emissions, gravity keeps them in our atmosphere, rather than being launched into space.
Regardless of some technical differences like those, I am so glad WE AGREE that "We should keep our air which we breath clean, we should not pollute our rivers and lakes, we should not accumulate rubbish around us..." Regardless of whether we agree that changing our atmosphere by your figure of " 0.02% per year" has any effect on our climate, actions we both support to keep our environment healthy will be a good thing!
Your partner in supporting a healthy environment.
Thanks for your comments. I appreciate it. As we agree it is most important to keep our environment clean. In this respect there are great achievements worldwide (e.g. river Thames & Rhine, maybe LA basin, etc).
I'm a Power Generation Engineer and can confirm the fact about successful thermal power plants pollution reduction measures during last two decades. There is still lot of to do in this sector, but whatever we do we cannot reduce the emissions to zero.
From my calculations it is obvious that the pollution (emissions) which we are producing is still very, very small. I agree that globe gravity is still keeping part of it in the atmosphere-stratosphere, but this "vessel" is not 100% tight and so part of the pollution escapes to the space.
You will see that one day our glaciers will start grooving again. We may be able to witness this or not. If we cannot, our children, grandchildren will do.
I don't understand how you can recommend as reference the following link "NASA scientist links climate change, extreme weather" which is from CNN, profit making organization which is ready to publish everything related to publicity and money making. Already the photo with stack emitting heavy smoke is misleading. This is a past in large part o the world. Even China's government started to close down old coal fired power plants some years ago.
Attached please find a photo of 2,100MW (2.1GW) coal fired power plant in Malaysia. In this power plant we have applied all possible pollution reduction measured (sulphur separation, ash removal from flue gas, low NOx burners etc..). That what can be seen at the chimney outlet is not a polluting gas, it is mostly white steam (evaporated rest water contained in the coal).
What I will say, engineers are everyday trying to reduce the emissions with more or less success. But if we like to enjoy energy advantages (to watch TV, to cool down air in our houses, to keep food in fridge, to take a car for shopping or holiday trip, etc..) we have to accept some kind of pollution. Keeping eyes open does not solve the problem.
Instead of keeping eyes open, we have to do something positive. Reduce using a car? Not using AC? Not watching TV? I don't think this will bring much.
Better improvement would be helping poor undeveloped countries to fight the pollution. Have you seen town waste disposal place in Havana or in some Central America countries? Have you seen Managua Lake in Nicaragua? Have you seen the waste disposals in Tanzania? Do you know how much dangerous CO2 gases such disposal sites are producing? Do you know how these disposals are affecting ground waters? This is a real problem we have to fight and solve, rather to fight and spend billions in war in Middle East. I hope that everybody understands my point.
I posted the CNN link because it was more concise and easy to read than the government reports and congressional testimony they quoted. The fact that CNN makes a profit does not change the facts in this particular article, but I agree that profit is a powerful incentive to dispute facts -- we have a vivid experience of that with the American tobacco industry). Since CNN is commonly seen as biased, I'll try to avoid listing them in the future. (I appreciate your advice on that.) However, many not-for-profit information sources are at least as biased on both sides, so concise and unbiased information can be difficult to find.
Thanks also for all you are doing to reduce harmful power generation emissions. Hopefully work like yours will be done wherever fossil fuels are burned in the world someday. And hopefully public policy in all nations will someday encourage the clean energy work you are doing, as well as other ways to generate power on any scale with as little adverse impact on the Earth as feasible. From what you say, I gather that you agree that is the responsible thing to do, no matter what your opinion on climate change is.
That was a great statement from you. Thank you. I still believe that this planet has not taking a course to any natural disaster. But you are right; we have to care about our environment.
Just to complete my information, and to finish my contribution to this very important subject I wish to stress that beside of being an engineer involved in thermal power plants engineering, I was for many years following my hobby, renewable energy.
On this subject I've delivered a paper on Powergen International Conference in Las Vegas in 2003.
You can see the paper on:
http://www.mrsphoto.net/4-IMTE%20AG/2-PGI-2003.pdf
And I was involved in with UNIDO in biogas production projects in Tanzania, Cuba, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Brazil and Peru. I'm proud that I was able to contribute in reduction of pollution in these countries.
I wish you and all NPN active members all the best and also congratulate you all to US President Election 2012.
Now we are aware of even more reasons to appreciate you, in addition to your beautiful photography.
If anyone has not yet seen Miro's Web site, your eyes will get a treat when you click on his www link.
P.S. I just read Miro's Paper ADVANTAGES OF COMBINED WIND-BIOGAS ENERGY UTILIZATION FOR DISTRIBUTED POWER GENERATION. It is a good example of how humans can more efficiently and cleanly produce energy while providing more employment for people in building and maintaining local power systems, and at the same time reduce our dependence on dwindling fossil fuels. There ARE options -- and there will be even more in the near future -- that will put people to work and improve our environment at the same time. Now it is up to us to make sure our governments and businesses all over the world encourage them!
THANKS for reading all of this! It shows you care. Your questions deserve answers. However, a tiny handful of people on NPN can't possibly sort it all out. Thousands of scientists tell us they have answers about what's happening; hundreds tell us they know why; and hundreds of others dispute it. Each one of us must try to sort out the confusing information, or at least which sources of information we trust. We need to consider where it comes from, and which powers behind the info have axes to grind, such as big profits on the line. I don't know which "dopey" politicians are eager to spend tax dollars on what they think are solutions, but I do know that LOTS of politicians would be afraid to admit that the Sun rose this morning if those in control of their campaign funds -- AND other campaign funds capable of making sure they don't get elected again -- have a "sunrise is not real" agenda.
Unfortunately, answers are easier to find than the truth. If you think that nobody can hide the truth for years, purchase scientists to dispute facts, and hire public relations experts to produce very convincing messages built on half-truths and lies, just study the history of the tobacco industry in the mid-20th century.
But it's not as simple as "good versus evil." To make finding the truth even more elusive, just consider that some of the people who tell us we don't need to take action are good people trying to do the right thing. Some of them are very smart people who just don't know all the facts, or understand or believe what is happening. This issue is so big, but at the same time so delicate and complex that it just does not seem to make sense to many. "Common sense," however, does not work when you don't have all the facts, even if you are very smart; and good intentions intentions cannot keep us from continuing on a self-destructive path. Remember life depends on a delicate balance in our environment, and that where there is balance, a grain of sand can tip the scale! Unlike all the other creatures that have come and gone before us, humans can significantly change our environment. That is both a blessing and a curse.
There is SO much more to explore and discuss here, but it could quickly get so big and contentious that we would lose our "audience," especially considering that this is a friendly photography forum. Those who have the interest need to follow the science and get involved in the issue in more appropriate places. I just hope that this thread has sparked the interest in some of our members to do that. Explore; Learn; Get Involved!
Miro - I'm sure you know what the percentage of carbon dioxide is in the athmosphere, and hence you must realize that your "little calculation" above is ill-suited to relieve any concerns. Just sayin'. While I appreciate that you openly declare your serious conflict of interest, I don't really like the kind of argument you're putting forward. We've seen this numerous times already - creationists, the tobacco lobby, you name it. In the end, the truth content of those arguments was (and is), well, not very high. Science is a method that has a fairly decent track record in finding truth, or at least in finding good approximations of it. Declaring true what you'd wish to be true hasn't.
Whether or not the change in climate we're currently facing is man made (though it clearly is) we should be concerned because changing climate spells trouble for humanity. Though maybe not so much for us in the developed world - developing countries will, as always, be struck first. The irony.
If that's not a polluting gas, I gather you've captured all the carbon dioxide, too?
I'm all for good stewardship, and responsible living with regards to the environment. I think we should be making every effort to reduce our impact. I'm not for using the topic for political leverage, or gain. I'm not for regulating ourselves back to the stone age. A lot of the proposals I'm hearing are not really economically possible for many/most people. I can't afford to go drop 40,000.00 bucks on an electric/hybrid that doesn't fulfill my needs. I have a 1999 Grand Cherokee with 120,000 miles on it. I keep it in good running order. It passes it's annual smog test in the upper 25%.
I won't argue that we are not having an influence on the changes happening. To what percentage that is, I don't know. The climate has ebbed and flowed naturally, we know this. Deserts were once oceans and rainforests were once deserts. We are going to have to live with it, wether we like it or not. So maybe the effort should be put into finding ways to do that.
I love fall the autumn season, and snow on the mountain tops. Some of the changes are probably beyond our control to change/reverse. It's sad, but probably the harsh reality. I'm not a climate change denier, so hope my stance doesn't imply that. I just wonder where the reality in all of this lies.
Chris
Please stop using your car, stop traveling by airplane, disconnect your house from electricity supply, stop breading cattle (because Producing 1kg of beef results in more CO2 emissions than going for a three-hour drive while leaving all the lights on at home running), stop using any synthetic materials, processed food etc..
If everybody follows you we will not have ant CO2 problems.
Or you can improve our industry to zero CO2 emissions level?
It is easy to talk about it, but very difficult to take satisfactory actions because people are not ready to give up comfortable life. Are you?
Have a great week.
Chris
Also we cannot stop progress but we, all of us, must try hard. And it starts, as I mentioned earlier, in burger shop around the corner which serving food on one way plastic...
And as I said earlier, we have to help poor nations to learn how to reduce pollution. During my professional life I tried very hard, I don't know whether are you close to some kind of engineering, if yes please visit my WEB section where you can see some examples from my work on renewable energies, like producing biogas from town waste in Havana, from sisal waste in Tanzania or from palm oil waste in Malaysia and others. This is a small contribution, but many small positive contributions can help a bit.
Guide to my WEB:
open
www.mrsphoto.net
open
More Information
open
Links
open
IMTE AG
open
Clean Energy or Conferences
Wish you a great time.