NYC Mayor Bloomberg Blames Global Warming For Hurricane Sandy…

Will global warming bring storm barriers to New York Harbor? 

• Governor Cuomo makes unprecedented suggestion of a possible levee being built for the city
• 
  
• Despite a chorus of support for the climate change link, some experts deny there is sufficient evidence to blame global warming for the storm
• 
  

By DAILY MAIL REPORTER

PUBLISHED: 16:48 EST, 30 October 2012 | UPDATED: 19:20 EST, 30 October 2012

Hurricane Sandy may have seemed uniquely damaging to those caught in its path, but some have suggested that global warming could bring even more devastating storms to the U.S. in coming years. 

New York governor Andrew Cuomo and mayor Michael Bloomberg both pointed to climate change as the culprit for Sandy's ravages as they addressed the scale of the destruction on Tuesday morning. 

And Cuomo even raised the possibility of a levee being built in New York Harbor, an unprecedented move to protect the 400-year-old city.

Enlarge 

Both Andrew Cuomo (left) and Michael Bloomberg agree that climate change is a cause of the superstorm

Many observers have pointed out that it is almost impossible to pinpoint climate change as the cause of specific weather events. 

Moreover, the U.S. has long been subject to hurricanes and other damaging storms which have been just as violent as Sandy. 

But the terrors wrought by Sandy, combined with last year's destructive Hurricane Irene, have led New York's top officials to raise the spectre of global warming. 

At a press conference in Manhattan on Tuesday, Cuomo said he had told President Obama that 'we have a 100-year flood every two years now'. 

He added: 'There has been a series of extreme weather incidents. That is not a political statement. That is a factual statement. 

'Anyone who says there's not a dramatic change in weather patterns, I think is denying reality.' 

Bloomberg echoed the sentiment, saying: 'What is clear is that the storms we've experienced in the last year or so around this country and around the world are much more severe than before.

Vua: Daily Mail

Continue Reading...

Report: Global Warming Stopped 16 Years Ago

The figures reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012 there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures

This means that the ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996

The world stopped getting warmer almost 16 years ago, according to new data released last week. 
The figures, which have triggered debate among climate scientists, reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012, there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures.
This means that the ‘plateau’ or ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996. Before that, temperatures had been stable or declining for about 40 years. 

global temperature changes

Research: The new figures mean that the 'pause' in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996. This picture shows an iceberg melting in Eastern Greenland

The new data, compiled from more than 3,000 measuring points on land and sea, was issued  quietly on the internet, without any media fanfare, and, until today, it has not been reported. 
This stands in sharp contrast  to the release of the previous  figures six months ago, which went only to the end of 2010 – a very warm year. 
Ending the data then means it is possible to show a slight warming trend since 1997, but 2011 and the first eight months of 2012 were much cooler, and thus this trend is erased.

Via: Daily Mail

Continue Reading...

Study: Green Cars Cause As Much Or More Pollution Than Gas Cars

Electric cars might cause as much or more pollution than conventional gas vehicles, according to researchers at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology.

According to a study published in the Journal of Industrial Ecology, “the production phase of electric vehicles proved substantially more environmentally intensive” than the production process for traditional gas-powered cars.

Specifically, the study found that electric car factories can emit more toxic waste than gas-burning car factories. And greenhouse gas emissions rise exponentially if coal is used to produce the electricity necessary to charge “green” vehicles, according to the study.

The researchers compared the overall life-cycle impact of petrol or diesel-powered cars and electric vehicles and concluded that the latter can significantly damage the climate.

“The global warming potential from electric vehicle production is about twice that of conventional vehicles,” the report said. “It is counterproductive to promote electric vehicles in regions where electricity is primarily produced from lignite, coal or even heavy oil combustion.”

Batteries and electric motors are composed of minerals like  nickel, copper and aluminum, which are toxic.

The authors of the study acknowledged, however, that “a more significant reduction in global warming could potentially be achieved by increasing fuel efficiency or shifting from petrol to diesel.”

Via: The Daily Caller

Continue Reading...

The Second Coming of Cap and Trade?

The Obama Administration, at this sensitive time, is playing down its expansive regulatory agenda, but some insiders are predicting a new onslaught of costly rules—including the imposition of cap-and-trade schemes on industry.

Although Congress rejected cap-and-trade legislation in 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) remains intent on effectively rationing the use of fossil fuels. A court ruling earlier this year upheld the agency’s “finding” that emissions of carbon dioxide pose a threat to public health. The ruling has only emboldened the EPA’s regulatory impulses. According to Carol Browner, former administrator of the agency, the EPA is now poised for “piecemeal progress on cap-and-trade.”

Browner’s forecast came Wednesday during a panel discussion on “Energy and the Presidency” sponsored byPolitico this week. As reported by The Hill, “Browner offered that Obama would use the [Clean Water Act] and the [Clean Air Act] to go even further in his attempts to regulate air pollution.”

Such talk is certainly bad news for the energy and manufacturing sectors, which have borne the brunt of Obama’s regulatory hyperactivity. But revived prospects for cap-and-trade might well hearten the environmental lobby, which has criticized President Obama for (supposedly) ignoring global warming despite his declaration that the 2008 election “was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”

While the President may appear to avoid direct reference to the global warming issue, his regulatory record bespeaks allegiance to drastic and unwarranted cutbacks in emissions of carbon dioxide—the supposed source of looming environmental cataclysm.

For example, the consulting group ICF International estimates that 20 percent of America’s coal power plants could be retired as soon as 2020 because of the Administration’s regulatory actions. Indeed, the EPA’s newestmercury and air toxics rule alone could cost as much as $100 billion per year, according to the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council.

Whether the President overtly pursues a costly cap-and-trade scheme remains to be seen. But there’s no question that his Administration is aggressively imposing regulations that have much the same effect—i.e., inflating the cost of fossil fuel energy in order to reduce some of the disadvantages of solar and wind power.

One might hope that today’s disappointing jobs report—and all the others like it during the previous three years—would persuade Obama that his regulatory agenda is doing more harm than good. But hope for such wisdom from this Administration appears to be in vain.

VIa: The Foundry

Continue Reading...

REPUBLICAN CONVENTION BACKUP PLAN: JUST READ OBAMA'S 2008 PROMISES FROM THE PODIUM

If, as George Orwell once observed, the greatest enemy of any left-wing government is its previous propaganda, then Barack Obama’s most fearsome enemy is a small volume his campaign published in 2008: Change We Can Believe In: Barack Obama's Plan to Renew America's Promise. I bought it after Obama won the presidency that November, and it makes for very entertaining--and somewhat sad--reading nearly four years later.

Among the many promises Obama makes are the following: “Send Rebate Checks of $1,000 to American Families,” “Staff the Government Based on Talent, Not Political Loyalties,” and “Eliminate North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons Programs.” Some of the pledges combine hubris with bad policy: “Create Five Million New Green Jobs,” “Create Automatic Workplace Pensions.” Others are just silly: “Create a ‘Craigslist’ for Service.”

No matter who you are, there’s a broken promise in this book for you. Seniors? Obama promised to “Preserve Social Security” and “Put Medicare on Solid Footing.” Greens? Obama said he would “Rally the World to Stop Global Warming.” Chicago residents? Obama pledged to “End the Dangerous Cycle of Youth Violence.” The scale of Obama’s cult of personality can be measured by the wide scope of his disappointments today.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...