US Storm an Opportunity for Research

With more than 6300 (some estimates say 10000+) flights cancelled due to the massive storm covering two thirds of the US, this could prove to be a twice in a lifetime opportunity for scientists to study our low atmosphere with significantly reduced airplane emissions.



The last time was Sept. 11th 2001.

"The national airspace was shut down for three days, something that had not yet occurred since the jet age began in the 1960s and is not likely to occur ever again. Scientists took advantage of this unique three day period in history that lacked contrails. What they learned was shocking and is enough evidence to effectively silence any counterargument to their case. One measure of climate is the average daily temperature range (DTR). For thirty years this had been recorded and extra cirrus clouds in the atmosphere would reduce this range by trapping heat. “September 11 – 14, 2001 had the biggest diurnal temperature range of any three-day period in the past 30 years,” said Andrew M. Carleton1. Not in three decades had there been such a large temperature spread between the daytime highs and the nighttime lows. Furthermore, the increase in DTR during those three days was more than double the national average for regions of the United States where contrail coverage was previously known to be most abundant, such as the Midwest, northeast, and northwest regions. The specific increase in the range was 2°F, which in three days was twice the amount the average temperature had increased by over thirty years time1." (1. Carleton, Andrew M. “Climatology: Contrails Reduce Daily Temperature Range.” Nature. 8 August 2002.) By Nick Onkow

"Contrails form a layer of high clouds that seem to cool things off during the day. However, that effect is deceptive. It turns out that the clouds also reduce the temperature difference between night and day by trapping "long-wave radiation" -- which means heat -- and not letting it escape into outer space. "They tend to heat the upper troposphere more than they warm the surface," explained Patrick Minnis of NASA's Langley Research Center. "The debate now is whether the warming is larger than the albedo."" Larry O'Hanlon, Discovery News

"I remember walking to and from my office (during that time) and thinking how incredibly clear the skies were," recalled Carleton. He mentioned this to a colleague and former doctoral-degree student of his, David Travis of the University of Wisconsin, who had noticed the same thing. "Then we started thinking that we should look at the temperature conditions" during those days in September and compare them to years past, Carleton said." Physorg


Of course, considering the condition of the skies, the research will probably need to be accomplished via satellite. Infrared, radar etc. I can't wait to see what new information comes to put the silver lining on this very dark cloud. (well, dark from below, quite bright from above)

And the Survey Says: Americans Say "No" to Attacks on Pollution Safeguards, Gingrich Plan to Dismantle EPA

NRDC - 2/2/11 - Press contact: Elizabeth Heyd, 202-289-2424, eheyd at nrdc.org

"Americans Pick Health of Families Over More Pollution From Corporations: 77 Percent of Americans -- Including 61 Percent of Republicans -- Say: "Congress Should Let the EPA Do Its Job."


"WASHINGTON (February 2, 2011) -- More than three out of four Americans (77 percent) -- including a clear majority of Republicans (61 percent) -- oppose efforts in Congress to block Clean Air Act updates for carbon, smog and other pollution, according to a national opinion survey by Opinion Research Corporation (ORC) International for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). The new poll is being released today as a major House/Senate bill is introduced in Congress to kill the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to continue its work on updating key anti-pollution safeguards."

Read the rest of this press release at NRDC.org


Bush's Schrodinger's Email: - NY Times 1/25/08

"The White House in December refused to accept the Environmental Protection Agency’s conclusion that greenhouse gases are pollutants that must be controlled, telling agency officials that an e-mail message containing the document would not be opened, senior E.P.A. officials said last week."


Controversial Bush-Era EPA E-mail Released: - CBSNews 10/13/09

"(AP) A controversial e-mail message buried by the Bush administration because of its conclusions on global warming surfaced Tuesday, nearly two years after it was first sent to the White House and never opened.The e-mail and the 28-page document attached to it, released Tuesday by the Environmental Protection Agency, show that back in December of 2007 the agency concluded that six gases linked to global warming pose dangers to public welfare, and wanted to take steps to regulate their release from automobiles and the burning of gasoline."


Hooking Your Toilet to the Kitchen Tap: -Sierra Club 6/11/09

"Atlanta, GA -- In most states, it's illegal to connect your toilet so that it drains through your tap. But on a larger scale, the Bush EPA is prepared to declare that this is, in effect, allowed under the Clean Water Act. At least that's what the agency told a conference of water managers here will be permitted by a new agency rule."


EPA Plans to Loosen Air-quality Rules near National Parks: - 5/16/08

"Call us crazy, but rewriting the Clean Air Act to ease the way for new coal plants near national parks seems to fly in the face of that whole 'clean air' thing. But sure enough, the U.S. EPA plans to make a change allowing the government to calculate the average annual emissions of power plants near parks and wilderness areas, instead of tracking (and potentially punishing) the spikes in pollution spewed during peak energy times. 'It's like if you're pulled over by a cop for going 75 miles per hour in a 55 miles-per-hour zone, and you say, 'If you look at how I've driven all year, I've averaged 55 miles per hour,'' explains Mark Wenzler of the National Parks Conservation Association."


Click on the label 'EPA' below to view all my posts on the subject.

Republicans Seek Cuts to Energy Star, Weatherization, Advanced Energy Research, Puppies..

Start with the obvious: There are no cuts to America's bloated military budget, which was somewhere north of $660 billion in 2010, more than the rest of the world's defense spending combined. And there are no cuts to the sprawling, opaque Department of Homeland Security, which costs more than $50 billion a year. In maintaining global empire and expanding the security state, every dollar is sacred.

There are also no cuts to fossil-fuel or corn-ethanol subsidies. No corporate contributor to the Republican Party will find anything to fear. The bill might as well be called the Thumbing Liberals In the Eye Act of 2011. It's a laundry list of targets conservatives have been after for decades, most of which will make no appreciable difference to the nation's fiscal health.

Here are a few proposed cuts that might be of particular interest to Grist readers:

Energy Star Program: $52 million a year.

Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants: $2.5 billion a year.

DOE Weatherization Grants to States: $530 million a year.

Amtrak Subsidies: $1.565 billion a year. (There are no cuts to highway subsidies, of course.)

Technology Innovation Program: $70 million a year. (Wait, I thought support for innovation was "post-partisan"!)

Applied Research at Department of Energy: $1.27 billion a year.New Starts Transit: $2 billion a year.

Subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: $12.5 million a year.

Title X Family Planning: $318 million a year.
Appalachian Regional Commission: $76 million a year. (Why do we need this? They already have coal mines there!)

FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership: $200 million a year.

Subsidy for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority: $150 million a year.

National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program: $56.2 million a year.

Read the whole story HERE.

Wolfing Down Fossil Fuels

The Annual Energy Outlook from the U.S. Energy Information Administration sums up the government’s best estimates of energy trends through 2035. Buried in the projections is a seismic change in energy policy, and it’s about coal. The EIA is projecting that utilities won’t build any new coal-fired electricity plants in the United States, aside from the projects already under construction or built as “clean coal” experiments. The projections say that all our new electricity plants are expected to be either renewables like wind and solar, or natural gas (which releases about half the carbon emissions of coal).

BUT:





But if you look at the long-term projections, the amazing thing is how little the energy mix will change in 25 years. Right now, we get 84 percent of our energy from fossil fuels. In 2035, we’ll still be getting 78 percent of our energy from fossil fuels. Read the rest Here.

Bush's 'Schrodinger's Email'

EPA Determines that Carbon Pollution Threatens Health

Historic Step Will Allow Agency to Address Cause of Global Warming

WASHINGTON (December 7, 2009) -- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson is expected to announce a final determination today that carbon pollution, which causes global warming, is a danger to public health and welfare. This will enable the EPA to move forward with implementing the 2007 Supreme Court ruling, which found that carbon pollution can be curbed under the Clean Air Act.

Following is a statement by David Doniger, Policy Director of the Climate Center at the Natural Resources Defense Council:

“This is a concrete sign that we need to address the rising impact of carbon pollution, which threatens our health -- and is causing glaciers to melt, sea levels to rise and more extreme weather to occur. Today’s announcement shows that the U.S. government is serious about tackling this problem and putting limits on the largest sources of carbon pollution, including vehicles and coal-fired plants. The Obama administration is prepared to use existing laws, even as it works with Congress on new ones, to move our country toward cleaner energy that will protect the health of people and of future generations."
“As world leaders gather in Copenhagen, this action is an important piece of the puzzle that will move the nation -- and the world -- toward a cleaner future.” NRDC Press Release

We could have had a year to work on this, had our last president not decided to apply whatever twisted lesson he might have learned regarding the Schrodinger's Cat theory to the quandary of whether or not to open an email containing this very information in 2008.

White House Refused to Open Pollutants E-Mail
By FELICITY BARRINGER
Published: June 25, 2008

The White House in December refused to accept the Environmental Protection Agency’s conclusion that greenhouse gases are pollutants that must be controlled, telling agency officials that an e-mail message containing the document would not be opened, senior E.P.A. officials said last week.

The document, which ended up in e-mail limbo, without official status, was the E.P.A.’s answer to a 2007 Supreme Court ruling that required it to determine whether greenhouse gases represent a danger to health or the environment, the officials said.

This week, more than six months later, the E.P.A. is set to respond to that order by releasing a watered-down version of the original proposal that offers no conclusion. Instead, the document reviews the legal and economic issues presented by declaring greenhouse gases a pollutant. Read the whole story Here.

Controversial Bush-Era EPA E-mail Released WASHINGTON, Oct. 13, 2009

Message Buried by Bush Administration Because of Its Conclusions on Global Warming Surfaces

(AP) A controversial e-mail message buried by the Bush administration because of its conclusions on global warming surfaced Tuesday, nearly two years after it was first sent to the White House and never opened.The e-mail and the 28-page document attached to it, released Tuesday by the Environmental Protection Agency, show that back in December of 2007 the agency concluded that six gases linked to global warming pose dangers to public welfare, and wanted to take steps to regulate their release from automobiles and the burning of gasoline.

Adora Andy, a spokeswoman for EPA administrator Lisa Jackson, said Tuesday that the science in 2007 was as clear as it is today. "The conclusions reached then by the EPA scientists should have been made public and should have been considered," she said. Read the whole story Here.

Sarah Palin: DOH!

"Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin acknowledges global warming is affecting her state,

But the former GOP vice presidential candidate contends gas drilling will help curb rising temperatures"

Update: US wind usage animation below appears to show NO ONE in Alaska has heard the wind howling and thought to take advantage of it.

"We Alaskans are living with the changes that you are observing in Washington," she said. "The dramatic decreases in the extent of summer sea ice, increased coastal erosion, melting of permafrost, decrease in alpine glaciers and overall ecosystem changes are very real to us." At Tuesday's hearing, she made it clear that she recognizes the problem of global warming and cast energy development as part of the answer. Conservation groups warn that plunging drilling pads into the frozen Beaufort and Chukchi Seas and in Bristol Bay could open the door to a catastrophic oil spill in one of the Earth's most fragile environments. Read the entire article HERE.

And, just as a reminder:

Exxonmobil pays skeptic groups. Defending their right to profits before congress, why would they pay for something if they could get it for free? Click HERE

"The southeast Alaska Panhandle has wind resources consistent with utility-scale production. Major areas of excellent and outstanding resource are found on the ridge crests throughout the region and on the interior marine passageways. Population centers located close to excellent resource areas on these marine passageways include Ketchikan, Petersburg, Juneau, and Skagway."

Click HERE

Wind Turbine - A Social Network; A Wind Powering America Supporting Partner

UPDATE: The good folks at WindTurbines.net have posted a US wind usage animation. I've added and linked it below. Having the most potential for energy doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone in Alaska yet.

(End Edit)

With such an abundant, 'God Given' resource available, why is she still talking about oil? What could her motives POSSIBLY be? Oh... Oil Money of course! ('08 cycle alone, KNOWING the Democrats were coming into the majority)

Cheap Drills - Deception to Triumph?

Update: Here is the link to contact your representatives, originally to be included at the end of the posting. http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml 091208

"The American News Project has put together a great video highlighting how little drilling would do to lower gas prices, as well as the amount of money the oil industry has given to Republican candidates. It features regular Grist contributor Joe Romm, and provides some good insight into the current energy debate on the Hill:"





Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and other Democratic leaders in the House have outlined a new energy plan that proposes allowing drilling 100 miles off the Atlantic coast and Florida's Gulf coast. The buffer zone could be reduced to 50 miles if a state's governor and legislature consent (which is a big "if"). The plan, which hasn't yet been formally released, also contains increased funding for renewable energy. They're calling it the "Comprehensive American Energy Security & Taxpayer Protection Act," and it includes a number of measures that have stalled previously -- curbing energy speculators, establishing a renewable electricity standard, and repealing subsidies to Big Oil.

Continue reading at Grist


It has become very, very clear that unless you personally and directly profit from the increased cost of gas or oil, such as stockholder, then opening up sensitive areas for drilling and decreasing the current regulations in place to keep us safe would not benefit you at all. By the time the pennies worth of savings trickle down to you (if they do) they won't be worth what it took to get them there. Our belief in this lie will keep the funding from flowing into alternative, locally produced, clean energy that will truly free us of our dependence on foreign powers. At the price oil is selling for today, the fact that our oil industries still receive the subsidies and special tax incentives they do, and the millions they spend lobbying to keep them, is disgusting as well as standing in the way of our energy independence. The oil companies couldn't have gotten where they are are today, an embedded part of our infrastructure, without that public support and neither can Alternative Energy. When you have a leg to stand on, when you are on the side of the science and the people, you don't resort to propaganda and lies. That's what big oil has done, and are still doing. The time to stop them is now.

Below find just a few of the thousands of articles and blogs, scientists and professionals from all walks screaming and waving flags in the air in an attempt to warn you and I. This is a VERY important, time sensitive issue, please schedule some time to review and consider them carefully. Further down, you will find links to contact your elected officials, and ideas about what to say to convey what you feel and what you've learned and how you would like them to represent you on the matter.

Drill here, drill now: a pipe dream
12,954 Nuclear Power Plants - That's how many nuclear plants the world would need to build to replace its current fossil-fuel-based energy.

Newt Gingrich-led 527 group behind 'drill baby drill'
The slogan “Drill here. Drill now. Pay less.” is fueling Gingrich’s American Solutions for Winning the Future, a so-called 527 group not subject to federal campaign finance law and its limits on donations. So far this election cycle, it has raised $13.1 million.

Study links oil prices to investor speculation
"We have clear evidence the fund flow pushed prices up and the fund flow pushed prices down," said Michael Masters of Masters Capital Management. (perhaps you remember Michael Masters from a previous posting of his testimony before congress on the matter ,"McCain Not Helping". here's the link to the testimony)

Exposing the Big Oil Lie
The Center for Economic and Policy Research found that the news media has mindlessly amplified that lie. The hundreds of broadcasts on “proposed drilling for oil in environmentally sensitive zones in the United States” almost completely ignored the EIA report.

Drill drill drill, then sell to Japan
Dear Secretary Bodman,
On June 3, 2008 and July 30, 2008 respectively, your Department issued and affirmed an order pursuant to Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act that will allow two major integrated oil companies – ConocoPhillips and Marathon Oil – to export 98.1 billion cubic feet of Alaskan natural gas to Japan and other Pacific Rim countries. This order, which will allow the export of as much natural gas as is used by 1.4 million American families in a year, comes at a time when the President had demanded that the moratoria on oil and gas drilling along our environmentally-sensitive coastal areas be lifted and Americans are being warned that their winter heating bills are going to be dramatically higher.

Pimping for Oil
Currently the crisis is energy, and with the Bush administration’s expenses on military security topping 500 billion dollars this year only 1 percent is being spent on energy security. The grim prospect of Thomas Fingar who is the top US Intelligence analyst predicts military strength will be the least important goal compared to the acquisition of water, food and energy.

Prices are Down, not due to drilling
There are arguments that much of the price movement is due to speculation. But the driving public also forced gasoline prices down all by themselves, and they did it in quick fashion. They did it by reducing their demand for gasoline. They simply drove less; they took public transportation; they shared car pools and yes, they inflated their tires. And where they had a choice, they chose more fuel efficient vehicles and got rid of their gas guzzlers (or used them less)

Alaska drilling will have little effect on Prices
The opening of the ANWR 1002 Area to oil and natural gas development is projected to increase domestic crude oil production starting in 2018. In the mean ANWR oil resource case, additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR reaches 780,000 barrels per day in 2027 and then declines to 710,000 barrels per day in 2030. (we use 21 million barrels per day currently, according to this same site)

Drill baby drill is a Lie

• It'll take 10 years at a minimum to get outer continental shelf (OCS) oil to market.
• there’s not enough deep sea drilling rigs to punch more holes in the OCS for something like 5 years.
• A RAND Corporation study says that the savings from making shale-based oil available is only 3-5% and that it’ll be 2020 at the earliest before any oil could be available. And More....

Exxonmobil Spent Nearly $16 Million to Fund Skeptic Groups, Create Confusion.
Honestly, if you want to boil it all down to business, does a corporation spend this kind of cash to fund skeptics and risk bad press and shareholder backlash (they did, actually, get pummeled by their investors) if they had science and environmental groups behind them for free?

You can re-visit my other postings by clicking on any of the pertinent tags below, or along the right side of the blog for further study before you reach out to your representatives and local media.

You will want to keep your messages brief and to the point, but clear. For recorded messages on answering systems, think along these lines:

"Hi, my name is xxx xxx, I live in Xcounty, State (or other area designation, so they know you are their constituent) and continuing the current ban on drilling is important to me. I have looked into the details and am convinced it will not result in enough of a benefit in the long or short term and considering our current level of technology, combined with the current global energy situation. Please vote to continue restrictions on drilling, and stand firm in your vote to support funding and incentives for alternative energy. Thank you, xxx."

You can use a form of this, personalized of course, in email and written correspondence. In emails, include links to the postings that made the most impressions on you. In my case, the governments own EIA website, Micheal Masters testimony to congress and the report from the union of concerned scientists regarding the money spent by Exxon to confuse us really stand out. When sending written correspondence, include a page for each bit of information you find critical and remember not to send a book that will simply be set aside. If you can make the time, try to schedule an appointment with your local representatives. Get your family involved, give them each a piece of the information and let them work out a bit to say on it. It will make a strong statement to your representative and be a fabulous community action activity for your family. The same goes for your friends, co-workers and neighbors. A well thought out, well planned, informative, respectful presentation will be well appreciated and your concerns will be heard even more loudly than in email. Dropping a line to local media advising them of your appointment and the topic of your meeting may garner you some publicity and further support.

Together, We Can Repower America

Repower America

We must rebuild our economy, lower fuel costs, free ourselves from our addiction to oil, and save ourselves from the climate crisis. To do this, we need to demand that we Repower America with 100% clean electricity within 10 years. Meeting this ambitious goal would create millions of new jobs, lead to lower energy costs for families and help America lead the fight against global warming.More than a million people are standing up for solutions.

Please join them and sign our petition today: “To our leaders: We demand 100% clean electricity in 10 years.” Click here to sign and send this petition along with more than a million others.

EPA Dangerous Until Bush is Gone

EPA Plans to Loosen Air-quality Rules near National Parks
Posted at 11:45 AM on 16 May 2008 - Grist

"Call us crazy, but rewriting the Clean Air Act to ease the way for new coal plants near national parks seems to fly in the face of that whole 'clean air' thing. But sure enough, the U.S. EPA plans to make a change allowing the government to calculate the average annual emissions of power plants near parks and wilderness areas, instead of tracking (and potentially punishing) the spikes in pollution spewed during peak energy times. 'It's like if you're pulled over by a cop for going 75 miles per hour in a 55 miles-per-hour zone, and you say, 'If you look at how I've driven all year, I've averaged 55 miles per hour,'' explains Mark Wenzler of the National Parks Conservation Association. The NPCA estimates that the rule change will ease construction of 28 new coal plants within 186 miles of 10 national parks. And those parks are hazy enough as it is, laments one National Park Service engineer: 'It would really be a setback in trying to make progress.' "
sources: The Washington Post, Reuters
straight to the NPCA report: Dark Horizons

I've been keeping a lazy eye on the news when it comes to some of the agencies that are supposed to protect us, commenting on articles when necessary and a blog here and there; EPA Missing in Action - and FEC and FHA and . The damage this administration is causing as it high tails it out the back door is massive, far reaching and in some cases, irreversible.

See also: Auto Industry Takes Over Federal Auto Safety Agency