Author: admin

by Patricia Mayville-Cox

Recently, the melting of a glacier in southern Chile caused a glacial lake to swell, and then empty suddenly, causing a tsunami of sorts against a river. Fortunately, no one was injured. According to glacier scientist, Gino Casassa, the melting of the Colonia glacier can be blamed on rising world temperatures. The melting of the glacier filled Cachet Lake, and then bored a 5-mile tunnel through the glacier, emptying into the Baker River.

Casassa said that temperatures were unusually high during the recent summer in the Southern Hemisphere, and that events like this occasionally take place during the summer. But are events like this one attributable to global warming? According to Casassa, the answer is yes, "the basic cause is global warming."

The water bored a 5-mile tunnel through the glacier and finally emptied into the Baker River on April 6.

"The remarkable thing is that the mass of water moved against the current of the river," Casassa told The Associated Press by telephone from the Center for Scientific Studies in the southern city of Valdivia. "It was a real river tsunami."

The lake was nearly full again by late Wednesday, he said.
 

Disappearing forests

The Zabaikalsky Krai, a region in Eastern Siberia between Lake Baikal and the Russian Far East, is one of the worst affected areas.

According to the Federal Agency for Forestry, illegal logging here accounts for more than two million cubic metres a year.

The agency warned the region could be stripped of wood reserves in five years if nothing is done to stop the criminal trade.

Last May, Yuri Trutnev, the Russian Minister for Natural Resources, paid a surprise visit and said he was shocked by what he found.

He complained that "entire bandit villages" were cutting down trees, loading them on railway sidings and sending them to China.

Vladimir Putin recently described the export of unprocessed timber as "comparable with embezzlement".

"Our neighbours continue to make billions of dollars on Russian timber, but we are doing very little to create conditions for wood processing here at home," Putin said.

Chinese wealth

A decade ago, Manzhouli was a dusty border town in a corner of Inner Mongolia in North East China. Now it is a gleaming metropolis built on the wealth of timber from the Siberian forests. I understood the Russian president’s resentment.

Standing in a vast lumber yard surrounded by piles and piles of wood, I saw a forest of cranes and, beyond them, a cluster of brightly-coloured skyscrapers.

This surreal city plays host to a stream of Russian tourists who travel for days to buy clothes, cameras and DVDs in glitzy shopping malls.

Guang Delin, the boss of just one of the 70 timber businesses in Manzhouli, took us to lunch at an extraordinary restaurant.

Outside an icy wind blew across the steppe, but inside the atmosphere was tropical.

The restaurant was decorated with lush green plants and fish tanks. On my way to our table, I noticed a couple of alligators basking on the edge of an artificial pond.

As I watched waitresses carrying plates of steaming noodles past tinkling fountains, I thought about a woman I met on the other side of the border in Russia.

Life is very hard here and now the collective farm has fallen apart there is almost no work Natasha Lives in a ‘bandit village’

Natasha lives in one of the so called "bandit villages" in Zabaikalsky Krai, seven hours drive on bad roads from the regional capital Chita. Her house has no running water – she has to fetch it by bucket from a nearby well.

"I’m a single mother with three children and one is an invalid," she told me. "Life is very hard here and now the collective farm has fallen apart there is almost no work."

Her neighbour, an elderly man in a fur hat, agreed.

"Most people have to work as black market loggers just to survive, to buy bread and feed their families.

"We used to have so much forest round here," he added, throwing his arms wide open. "But now look – there’s almost none left and they only leave the small, skinny trees – the ones we call toothpicks."

Unlicensed logging

The police have just established a new forestry division to conduct spot checks.

But many points in the new Russian Forest Code contradict each other. The lack of clarity leaves room for unlicensed logging on a large scale, with poachers avoiding taxes and pocketing huge sums of money.

But it can be dangerous to speak out against the illegal trade.

What’s worse we are destroying our environment. What kind of legacy are we leaving to our grand children? Viktor Ostanin Russian MP

One regional MP, Vladimir Baranov, who also ran a wood processing plant, was shot dead on his doorstep in 2005.

Many, including a fellow MP Viktor Ostanin, believe he was the victim of a contract killing organised by powerful business interests in the area who have links with Chinese mafia.

Ostanin, a former intelligence officer, said the best way to fight illegal logging is to create more jobs in wood processing in Russia.

"Sadly we are allowing the Chinese to buy our forest very cheaply, they process it and send furniture and flooring to other countries – that makes no sense."

"What’s worse we are destroying our environment. What kind of legacy are we leaving to our grand children?"

But can Chinese companies be blamed for exploiting weak legislation and corruption on the other side of the border?

"I think initially they all wanted to obey Russian laws," Wen Bo, an environmental campaigner in Beijing, said.

"But if the Russians don’t care about their own forest, if Russian officials encourage them to do business illegally, bribing officials and paying money under the table, they soon learn how to do business in such an environment."

Australian Greens climate change spokesperson, Senator Christine Milne, today called on the Rudd Government to focus its Budget priorities on existing climate solutions such as energy efficiency and renewable energy, not offer up even greater subsidies to the hugely profitable coal sector.

Senator Milne said "Prime Minister Rudd’s visit to a coal fired power plant in China instead of one of their world-leading solar or wind sites is yet another ominous indicator that his Government intends to protect the coal sector from real, competitive climate solutions.

"The coal sector’s hype of ‘clean’ coal has been badly tarnished in recent years and months, with little or no progress in research and development, while renewable energy technologies have been moving in leaps and bounds, increasing their efficiency, reducing costs and developing improved energy storage technologies.

"Even John Boshier, head of the National Generators Forum and one of Australian coal’s loudest advocates, has said that early confidence in the techno-fix is fading amid growing concerns over cost and timeline blowouts, and the realisation of the mammoth scale of the problem – burying some 300 million tonnes of CO2 every year in Australia alone.

"Coal is simply being out-competed, and its desperation is evident in the increasingly strident calls for government hand-outs to one of the world’s most profitable sectors.

"The Rudd Government’s first Budget must deliver a level playing field for energy technologies that puts a price on climate pollution. When that happens, those technologies that are ready to deliver substantial emissions reductions now, like energy efficiency, solar thermal power and wind energy, will out-compete ‘clean’ coal.

"Instead of delivering a level playing field, Rudd looks set to continue the Howard Government policies of ‘picking losers’ with increased support for the coal sector.

"The coal sector is old, polluting and well entrenched. Even if climate change were not an issue, it would be outrageous that our governments add billions every year to the coffers of the rich multinational corporations that run the sector. When you add climate change considerations to the mix, ongoing fossil fuel subsidies become one of the most perverse and destructive government decisions imaginable. The polluter pays principle tells us that the companies that have profited from polluting for so long should be the ones to shoulder the burden of cleaning up their act, not the taxpayer.

"The Greens have proposed that a portion of the billions that would be saved by cutting fossil fuel subsidies should be channelled towards further research, development and commercialisation of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies through a Sun Fund, and to pay for the early stages of a systematic and systemic retrofit of Australia’s housing stock for energy efficiency set out in our EASI policy.

"I will be watching the Government’s first Budget carefully to see if its priorities follow Martin Ferguson’s industry-fuelled hype, or a sensible, realistic path to clean energy."

Why We Must Reduce U.S. and Global CO2 Emissions 80% by 2025
by David Merrill

The period from December, 2007-December, 2009 is perhaps the most important 24 months humanity has ever faced.
The Kyoto Protocol is the current operating plan for addressing global warming.  It expires in 2012 and has long been considered only a first small step in tackling this enormous environmental challenge.  Dramatically deeper cuts in emissions are urgently needed.  And in order for a successor treaty to come into force on time, a global emissions reduction deal will need to be agreed upon no later than Dec. 31, 2009.  The 193 countries attending the U.N.-sponsored climate negotiations held in Bali, Indonesia in December, 2007 have committed to this timetable.
With a deadline set for a global emissions deal to be finalized, we now face a much more daunting challenge:  agreeing upon a plan that reduces greenhouse gas emissions fast enough to truly address the global warming crisis.
An Hourglass of Ice
Before we consider what the emissions reduction target should be, let’s consider just how serious the global warming threat has become.   We need not look any further than the largest hunks of ice on earth:  the Greenland and West Antarctica ice sheets. 
"Å not much additional global warming is needed to cause loss of Arctic sea ice, the West Antarctic ice sheet, and part of the Greenland ice sheet." 
–Dr. James Hansen, NASA, March, 2007
Catastrophic melting of the West Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets would flood every coastal city in the world, ravaging civilization.  The policy implication is clear:  we must phase out fossil fuels as fast as possible, the position of GlobalWarmingSolution.org since its founding in 2003. 
What is a Climate-Safe Atmospheric CO2 Level?
Atmospheric CO2 concentration is currently at 385 parts per million (ppm).
In December, 2007 leading U.S. climate scientist Dr. James Hansen made a startling statement.  In contrast to earlier assessments that 450 ppm CO2 was a safe level, he now believed that it was no more than 350 ppm, a level passed in the 1980’s.
In comments published in the British newspaper the Guardian earlier this week, Hansen said that a target of 450 ppm was a "guaranteed disaster."   (The 450 ppm target, long dismissed by GlobalWarmingSolution.org as reckless, is the target of every major national environmental group).
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/apr/07/climatechange.carbonemissions
So is humanity in a hopeless situation?
Not yet, according to Dr. Hansen.
Climate Science and Humanity’s Deliverance
In the fall of 2007 Dr. Hansen confirmed to me that currently 43% of human-caused carbon dioxide emissions are absorbed by natural systems (mostly oceans and forests).  The other 57% remains in the atmosphere, increasing its heat-trapping capacities.  But our climate salvation lies in this dynamic as well.
Dr. Hansen also confirmed that once emissions are reduced more than 57%,  CO2 concentrations would actually start to fall,  diminishing the atmosphere’s heat-trapping capacities.
Consistent with this urgency, GlobalWarmingSolution.org advocates that global carbon dioxide emissions be reduced 80% below 1990 levels by 2025.  Our report, Rosie Revisited:  A U.S.-Led Solution to Global Warming, released in July, 2007, demonstrates how this could be done.
www.GlobalWarmingSolution.org
It is the most aggressive emissions reduction proposal of any national environmental group and is our way of defining "phasing out fossil fuels as fast as possible."   
By employing energy conservation and efficiency measures and aggressively deploying existing renewable energy technologies, humanity would dramatically transform the global energy system in the period 2010-2025.  By implementing our emissions reduction proposal, we would pass the 57% threshold in 2021, turning the corner towards cooling the earth.
Decision Time:  for the World’s GovernmentsÅ and for You
Now let’s go back to Bali and the U.N.-sponsored climate negotiations.
The strongest proposals on the table call for:

• reducing emissions of wealthy countries 25-40% by 2020.
• reducing global emissions 50% below 1990 levels by 2050.

If this becomes the plan for addressing global warming, when will atmospheric CO2 concentrations start to go down?
The answer:  Never.  (they would never reach the required 57%+ reduction threshold)
Ponder for a moment the children of the world, perhaps even your own.  The only home they will ever have is planet Earth.  In December, 2007, on the brink of environmental catastrophe, the world’s governments gathered for an urgent international climate meeting, and decided to work towards an agreement that guarantees that global warming will continue to spin out of control, that our children will be left on a ruined planet.
As with surgeons and airline pilots, when it comes to the question of preserving a livable planet, what is most crucial is performance, not intention,.  And as the responsible citizens of the decisive country in the international climate negotiations, we must now look beyond official words of concern and consider the actual agreement they are reaching.  In the time remaining from now until Dec. 31, 2009 we need to change the goal from cutting global emissions 50% by 2050, to cutting them 80% by 2025.
But of course no such dramatic political shift will occur without an enormous upwelling in grassroots citizen pressure on the federal government.  That is to say, the success of this emergency plan rests on you, the American citizen.  Be confident that any significant change in the global warming conversation in the United States would immediately transform the international negotiations.
The two strongest bills in both houses of the U.S. Congress call for reducing U.S. emissions 80% by 2050.  No chance that will do the job.  Therefore we need bills in both houses of Congress that would commit the U.S. to reducing emissions 80% by 2025, and that include a provision calling for the President to make that the U.S. negotiating position for global emissions reductions as well.
The start date should be 2010.  Even if all the details of treaty implementation can’t be worked out by then, the emissions reductions could, and should begin then.  Conservation and efficiency measures could certainly make up the needed 5.5% per year reductions for 2010 and 2011.  The reductions would then continue until emissions are reduced 80% by 2025.
How You Can Apply Pressure
Join us in emailing your member of Congress and tell them you want them to pass legislation that commits the U.S. to reducing CO2 emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2025, and that the legislation must include a provision stipulating that the President make that the negotiating position of the United States in the current U.N.- sponsored climate talks.
Email your U.S. Representative:
https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml
Email your U.S. Senator:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Make sure you get a prompt response from them (no more than two weeks).  Then please forward it to us at info@globalwarmingsolution.org .  This will enable us to use this valuable information in our Congressional lobbying campaign.
Epilogue:
Certain urgent facts are clear at this point:

• Human civilization is in grave danger.
• Our governments are refusing to mount an adequate response.
• The habitability of our children’s only home now rests in our tender hands.

If we want to retain any prospect of passing on a livable planet to them, it is imperative that the global warming conversation in the United States shifts from contemplating a gradual transformation of our energy system, to phasing out fossil fuels, here and globally, as fast as possible.
The 24-month hourglass is now down to less than 21 months.
David Merrill