| |
|
Monday, December 17, 2007
|
|
Political Wire: "There's no real change substantive changes in the national primary according to the latest USA Today/Gallup survey taken over the weekend. Among Republicans, Rudy Giuliani leads with 27%, followed by Mike Huckabee at 16%, Sen. John McCain at 14%, Fred Thompson at 14%, and Mitt Romney at 14%. Among Democrats, Sen. Hillary Clinton leads with 45%, followed by Sen. Barack Obama at 27%, and John Edwards at 15%."
"2008 pres"
4:27:42 PM 
|
|
Walter in Denver: "Ron Paul just keeps going: Six Million more dollars for his campaign today. Just wow."
"2008 pres"
10:12:35 AM
|
|
Captain's Quarters: "The number two man in al-Qaeda has decided to take the British turnover of Basra to the Iraqi central government out for a little jihadi spin. Ayman al-Zawahiri claims that Britain has not left Basra because of a successful transition to Iraqi security forces, but because of successful action by the 'mujaheddin' in Basra. Of course, the al-Qaeda 'mujaheddin' haven't come within a hundred miles of Basra, but Zawahiri doesn't let that interfere with his propaganda.
Captain's Quarters: "The US has had an interesting change in strategic planning for the coming drawdown in Iraq when the surge troops depart. Originally, the Army planned on making most of their significant reductions in Baghdad. Now they have decided that the western provinces can manage themselves better than expected, while Baghdad will require a stronger American presence longer.
"2008 pres"
9:26:34 AM
|
|
It seems that almost everyone agrees now that climate change is effecting water supplies and the ability to predict them in the future. Here's an article about the impending clash between those that would build more storage and those that oppose new dams due to the damage they can do to riparian environments, from The Durango Herald. From the article:
We should build more dams, water managers say. Global warming might melt the snow earlier, making it all the more important to store water through the longer, hotter summers. But environmentalists remain critical of dams. The Natural Resources Defense Council's report on global warming and the water supply - titled "In Hot Water" [pdf] - argues against reservoirs.
New dams might not be effective, said Brad Udall, head of Western Water Assessment, a federal office in Boulder. The problem, Udall said, is global warming will reduce the average - or mean - flow of rivers. "No amount of storage is going to recover that lost mean amount," Udall said. Besides, he said, the Colorado is one of the world's most heavily dammed rivers already, with 60 million acre feet of reservoir storage on a river that carries less than 15 million acre feet a year. If the river gets drier, there will be extra space available in current reservoirs, he said.
But Marc Waage, head of raw water supply for Denver Water, said dams bring some certainty for water managers in the unpredictable era of global warming. "There's always going to be the need to shift where water's available to where it's needed for societal or environmental purposes. It usually takes a reservoir to do that," Waage said..."The more efficient you become, without adding new supply to your system, the more susceptible you are going to be to climate change," Waage said. "It's a tough dilemma for water providers."
Here's another article on climate change from The Durango Herald. They write:
Among other tasks, these computers are helping run the center's Community Climate System Model, which makes predictions about global warming. The model requires the computers to do 3 trillion math problems to simulate a single day of weather on Planet Earth. The model covers decades, and scientists run it repeatedly. It is just one of the models used by 2,500 scientists around the world on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Over and over, they come to the same conclusion: It's very likely that Earth is getting hotter because of extra greenhouse gases, caused by human use of fossil fuels and agriculture. Average temperatures around the globe are likely to rise 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit by 2029, even if we cut back our greenhouse gas emissions today, according to the IPCC. And for the Western United States, there's a simple conclusion: hotter means drier. Summer temperatures in the Southwest are expected to rise. And winter snows probably will melt earlier. That poses a problem for farmers, who will get a rush of water earlier than normal, then have to cope with dry summers.
"You've got to love these things and you've got to hate 'em," Udall said of the climate models. "We have a good sense of what's coming at us now in terms of temperature. What they don't do well is precipitation." Not even the best global computers can make predictions for individual rivers. That's a problem for anyone concerned about the Colorado River Basin, which encompasses the Southwest and includes Colorado's Four Corners. So Udall closely monitors other researchers who focus on the Colorado River. All six major studies Udall has tracked show a reduction in Colorado River flows. The studies vary widely, but share a common element: The river is drying up. The latest two are from 2006. One predicts a 10 percent reduction by the end of the century. The other predicts a 45 percent drop by 2060...
Werner has brought in an IPCC critic, Roger Pielke Sr., to talk to [the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District] board. Pielke argues that climate models overstate the role humans play in warming the globe. And the models aren't useful for long-term local climate predictions, says Pielke, a professor at the University of Colorado's Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences. Northern managers pay close attention to the issue, Werner said, but he's not sold on the certainty of a drier future. "I'm not sure anybody can say we're going to have 14 percent less water, and there's some out there saying that," Werner said...
Other researchers try for a simpler approach and don't try to predict rainfall. Pat Flood with Wright Water Engineers in Denver examined how a 1-degree Celsius rise in temperature would affect the Colorado River Basin, even if the same amount of rain and snow fell every year. She found it would suck an average of 1.7 million acre-feet a year out of the four upstream states. That's a lot for a basin that is legally entitled to 7.5 million acre-feet at best. Blame it on thirsty trees. When the summers are longer, plants sprout earlier and take more water. It's true for forests, farms and suburban lawns. Flood wants to have her study peer-reviewed and published. Her boss, Ken Wright, hopes to call attention to the simple calculations that led to the alarming conclusion. Wright has an office in Durango and has done research on the ancient waterworks at Mesa Verde National Park. "We wanted to make sure we didn't get into arguments and politics," Wright said. "We didn't want to get into global warming. We said we'd stick with physics."[...]
Koren Nydick with the Mountain Studies Institute is paying attention. From offices in Durango and Silverton, she is leading a study of alpine plants. She's also organizing the San Juan Mountain Climate Initiative, a community group that hopes to produce a plan for mitigating and coping with climate change in Southwest Colorado. Next June, MSI will bring 120 of the region's top researchers to Silverton for a conference. The institute is working with a Rutgers University graduate student on a detailed look at area streamflows, rain, snow and temperature - something that's never been done for the local mountains, Nydick said. The results should be ready in time for the Silverton conference, she said. Nydick expects to find several clues to climate change in her research - animals fleeing the heat by migrating up mountains; earlier snowmelt; earlier flowering of plants. "Some things, we're going to have a hard time," Nydick said. "In terms of water, we'll have a hard time. Ecosystems will change. But I also think there's a lot of room for us to figure out how to adapt and eventually halt these changes."
Here's a recap on the recent climate change conference in Bali from The Denver Post. From the article:
Delegates from nearly 190 countries emerged from a final 24 hours of bruising negotiations Saturday with an agreement on a new framework for tackling global warming, one that for the first time calls on both the industrialized world and rapidly developing nations to commit themselves to measurable, verifiable steps. The deal, which will form the basis for a two- year, United Nations-sponsored process aimed at forging a binding international climate pact by the end of 2009, could transform the way rich and poor nations work together to preserve a rapidly warming Earth, observers said. But it also postponed many tough decisions and provided more in the way of incentives than penalties when it comes to addressing global warming. The consensus document was accepted by acclamation after an acrimonious confrontation among delegates, who hissed and booed the U.S. delegation and accused Washington in blunt terms of pressing them for commitments while refusing to make its own. Finally, after a succession of delegates lambasted the American position, the United States delegation acceded to language pledging industrialized countries to provide quantifiable technological and financial aid to less well-off nations, including the burgeoning economies of China, India and Brazil. In a session marked by high drama and a series of temporary setbacks, the developing nations also agreed to take specific steps to reduce their greenhouse-gas emissions with the assistance of wealthier nations...
Bush administration officials, who fought vigorously to keep mentions of specific emissions targets out of the document, said they were pleased with the ultimate result. The agreement will guide negotiators in their quest to produce an accord outlining how deeply industrialized countries should cut their emissions between 2012 and 2016, after the 1997 Kyoto Protocol -- which the U.S. never accepted -- expires. "We, in coming here to Bali, have not foreclosed options," said Paula Dobriansky, U.S. undersecretary for democracy and global affairs. " There's a real need to look at the developed countries and the developing countries, especially the major emerging economies, and pull together on behalf of the planet."
The consensus among the delegates here, however, came about only after two weeks of tense and emotional discussions that included last-minute exhortations by former Vice President Al Gore and U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon -- as well as a final, hostile confrontation in which the developing nations took turns chastising the United States for not, in their view, doing its part. Despite the difficult bargaining that lies ahead to produce an actual treaty, a number of participants said the conference's success in reaching a compromise showed that politicians no longer feel they can afford to ignore public concern over global warming...
...the Bali session nearly collapsed after Dobriansky told the delegates that the United States was "not willing to accept" language calling on industrialized nations to deliver "measurable, reportable and verifiable" assistance. Her comments sparked a stunning round of boos and hisses from the audience and sharp rebukes from representatives of developing countries. Then, the delegate from Papua New Guinea leaned into his microphone. "We seek your leadership," Kevin Conrad told the Americans. "But if for some reason you are not willing to lead, leave it to the rest of us. Please get out of the way." The conference exploded with applause...
In many ways, the Bali "road map" agreement marks a turning point. Rapidly industrializing nations such as China and Brazil pledged to account for their global-warming contributions as long as developed nations provide them with clean energy technology and help bolster their ability to respond to the impact of climate change.
The Kyoto Protocol, to be replaced by the new pact, exempted emerging economies from climate obligations, even though they are poised to overtake industrialized nations in greenhouse-gas emissions within year.
Here are the key points of the Bali agreement from The Los Angeles Times "reg":
Greenhouse gas emissions: It recognizes that "deep cuts" in global emissions will be required to prevent dangerous human interference in the climate. It makes reference to scientific reports that suggest a range of cuts between 25% to 40% by 2020, but prescribes no targets.
Deadline: Negotiations for the next climate accord should last two years and conclude in 2009 in order to allow enough time to implement it at the end of 2012. Four major climate meetings will take place next year.
Rich and poor: Negotiators should consider binding reductions of gas emissions by industrialized countries, while developing countries should consider moves to control the growth of their emissions. Wealthier countries should work to transfer climate-friendly technology to poorer nations.
Adjusting to climate change: Negotiators should support urgent steps to help developing countries adapt to inevitable effects of global warming, such as building sea walls to guard against rising oceans.
Deforestation: Negotiators should consider "positive incentives" for reducing deforestation in developing countries, many of which are seeking international compensation for preserving their forests that absorb carbon dioxide.
More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
"2008 pres"
8:04:43 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2009 John Orr.
Last update: 3/15/09; 1:52:22 PM.
|
|
|
