Você está na página 1de 45

CLIMATE CHANGE: TO VIEW : http://www.climateconcerns.com/, http://www.ecn.ac.uk/Education/explanatory_notes_for_teachers.htm, http://www.ecn.ac.uk/Education/index.html, http://www.ecn.ac.uk/Education/climate_change.htm, http://www.ecn.ac.uk/Education/factors_affecting_climate.htm, http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/climatechange/whyclimate/factors.htm, http://sei-international.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climatemitigation-adaptation/reducinggreenhousegasemissions-india.

pdf,

A new variable in the Climate Change formula.?

Scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have discovered a key element of the climate science behind global warming water vapor. Water vapor has long played a part in the formula for climate modeling. In fact water vapor is considered to be one of the most prevalent greenhouse effect creating emissions. The difference provided by this report is the importance of where water vapor was and is located. Previous climate modeling measured and accounted for the water vapor that appeared near the Earths surface, the water vapor discovered by the NOAA is at the outer edge of the atmosphere in the stratosphere. The report states that water vapor in the stratosphere has decreased by nearly 10% since the year 2000. This may explain why the rate of global warming attributed to water vapor started to decrease during that same time. The NOAA scientists are not sure what the precise variables are that create changes in the amount of water vapor present in the stratosphere, however this is a key find that could help climate scientists with future climate modeling and predictions as well as understanding the affects of water vapor and other directly introduced to the upper atmosphere particles on global warming and cooling.
http://globalwarming.com/2009/01/a-new-variable-in-the-climate-changeformula/ 22.05.2011

= = = = = = =. SUSTAINABLE EARTH SUSTAINABLE FUTURE A SUSTAINABILITY

What is climate change?

While some would call climate change a theory, others would call it a proven set of facts. Opinions differ vehemently. Let us consider climate change to be both a premise that the environment of the world as we know it is slowly, but very surely increasing in overall air and water temperature, and a promise that if whatever is causing this trend is not interrupted or challenged life on earth will dynamically be affected. The prevailing counter opinion is that all that is presently perceived to be climate change is simply the result of a normal climactic swing in the direction of increased temperature. Many proponents of this climate change ideology have definitive social and financial interests in these claims. Global warming and climate change are aspects of our environment that cannot be easily or quickly discounted. Many factions still strongly feel that the changes our Earth is seeing are the result of a natural climatic adjustment. Regardless of ones perspective the effects of climate change are a quantifiable set of environmental results that are in addition to any normal changes in climate. That is why the effects of global warming have catastrophic potential. Climate change may well be the straw that breaks the camels back. It could turn out to be the difference between a category three hurricane and a category four. Climate change as caused by greenhouse gas emissions can lead us to a definite imbalance of nature. The premise of climate change as an issue of debate is that industrial growth coupled with non-structured methods we as humans use to sustain ourselves has created a situation where our planet is getting progressively hotter. We have seemingly negatively effected our environment by a cycle of harmful processes that now seem to be feeding upon themselves to exponentially increase the damage to our ecosystem.
http://globalwarming.com/2009/03/what-is-global-warming/ 22.05.2011

=========.

Causes of Climate Change


Let us start our examination of Climate change with a study of its causes. Climate change is an overall state of existence that is the cumulative effect of hundreds of environmental factors. All of these join together in both a linear and random model to show climate change as a chain of events. Most modern attention to the problem of climate change began with discussion of depletion of the Earths Ozone layer. Ozone (O3) is a molecular form of Oxygen. The Ozone layer is a relatively thin strata of these molecules set in the lower portion of the Earths stratosphere. Depletion of the Earths Ozone layer has resulted in a large increase in Ultra Violet Radiation reaching the surface of the earth. Does this increase in UV rays equate to climate change? Not really. In fact most scientific opinion is that depletion of the Ozone layer results in cooling of both the stratosphere and troposphere. So why mention depletion of the Ozone layer as regards to climate change? Because it represents a needed balance between harmful radiation being allowed to reach the earths surface and our desire to stem the rapid increase in our air and water temperature. Remember, we are viewing global warming as a chain of events.

What is the most significant cause of global warming?


The primary cause of climate change is Carbon Dioxide emissions. CO2 is being pumped into our atmosphere at an insane pace; 8 billion tons of CO2 entered the air last year. Of course some of this is due to natural activity such as volcanic eruptions and people breathing. But the Earth is equipped to easily absorb those into the normal regenerative process. No, the beginning of global warming was caused by fossil fuels being burned and emitting plenty of CO2. Currently in the world 40% of all CO2 emissions are caused by power plants. These are burning coal, natural gas and diesel fuel. Some power plants burn garbage. Some burn methane made from garbage. And discounting those super green electrical generating plants designed to issue negligible pollutants, all of our power plants let loose into the atmosphere CO2. 33% of all the CO2 sent forth is the product of cars and trucks. Internal combustion engines burning fossil fuelsgasoline and diesel spew forth a retching amount of CO2.

3.5% of all CO2 emissions are released from aircraft traveling our friendly skies. Unfortunately, jets and other aircraft deliver their payload of pollutants directly into the troposphere.

The numbers can be confusing


12% of all CO2 released into the atmosphere is related to buildings. This figure varies from one source to the next. Some place the percentage of emissions from buildings as high as 33%. What most of these figures do not address is the actual cause of the CO2 emissions. In newly constructed buildings, production of materials used in building and energy used during construction are sited as the cause of carbon dioxide emissions. In existing buildings the CO2 created by the energy upkeep of the building is the root of the emissions quotient. The general comparison is that buildings consume energy in the way that cars burn fuel. But the pollutants created in providing power for heating, airconditioning, lights and other usage in buildings has already been factored. Honestly this double billing accounting is more the product of auto manufacturers looking to point the blame for global warming away from gas guzzling cars. The point to remember is that 98% of all CO2 emissions are related to energy production and 80% of these emissions become greenhouse gases.

Continuing the chain


Which now mentioned allows us to follow our chain of events leading to global warming into the next most defined cause Methane gas. Methane is released into the atmosphere from a dozen major sources. These include natural and man made emissions. Natural release of Methane is primarily from wetlands, (including agriculture) termites, the ocean, and hydrates. Non-organic releases are based from, landfills, livestock, waste treatment, and biomass burning. (More energy production). Almost all of this is offset by the Earths ability to absorb around 97% of the methane released into the air. But that remaining 3% is a serious problem. The molecular

structure of Methane makes it 20 times as powerful a Greenhouse gas than CO2. So while there is a great deal less Methane to contend with than CO2, it is still the second largest link in the global warming events chain. Not every Greenhouse gas is as obvious a villain as Methane. The next most potent problem is simple H2O water. How can water be a cause of global warming? Our atmosphere contains a set parameter of water as vapor. This vapor absorbs and radiates heat as does every molecule in the air. But when the lower atmosphere (troposphere) has excess water vapor that gaseous H2O is a potent greenhouse gas. Another of the more commonplace greenhouse gases is Nitrous Oxide. NO2 can make your car go faster, or make you relax at the dentist. It has quite few beneficial uses. But as a greenhouse gas all it manages to accomplish is to be one more ingredient in out atmospheric soup. Cars using catalytic converters, fertilizer plants, manufacture of nylon, and nitric acid as well as being produced naturally in our oceans and rain forests, produce Nitrous Oxide. All of the above plus quite a few other greenhouse gases comprise the foundation of global warming. As above and in all discussion of global warming they are cumulatively referred to as greenhouse gases. To understand the importance of these as the start and endpoint of global warming we must digress into a brief explanation of the greenhouse effect.
http://globalwarming.com/2009/03/causes-of-global-warming/ 22.05.2011. ======.

The Greenhouse Effect

Anyone who has either spent time in a greenhouse for plants or simply gotten into a car on a hot summer day has personally experienced the greenhouse effect. Heat enters an enclosed area and then reflects back and forth building upon itself. While the ambient temperature outside might be 85 degrees Fahrenheit, inside an automobile the temperature easily zooms upward to 130F.

Simply put, the greenhouse effect is what happens when heat is trapped in one way or another and then increases as more heat radiation is added. This is fine if you are an orchid or other tropical plant. But living things, including people, require set parameters of climate. When we discuss the greenhouse effect as regarding global warming we place the effect into a specific environment. That is the Earths atmosphere. When referencing the Earth, our entire planet becomes the interior of an automobile in the heat of summer. The Earth of course does not have a metal roof or a glass dome around it to trap heat and reflect solar radiation back to its surface. Indeed when drawings depict and descriptions explain the greenhouse effect the principle is simplified to imply that this is the case. Actually the greenhouse effect for the Earth is somewhat different. When solar radiation passes through out atmosphere the molecules that constitute our air absorb it. The majority of solar heat is absorbed by our planets surface. Different types of surfaces absorb or reflect heat in different ways. A white blanket of snow will reflect much more heat than freshly paved asphalt. Still everything that the suns rays fall upon either absorbs or reflects heat. In the case of out snowy Polar Regions that heat is reflected back from the planet. In the case of our cities it is trapped on the surface. From there it radiates outward where living things attempt to adjust to the relative heat or cold. Our planets original design was for a balance of all the components. Our atmosphere absorbs enough heat to keep us warm but hopefully not bake us. The angle of the sun in areas such as the poles creates an environment suited to North and South Pole inhabitants. The people, creatures and plant life at the Earths equator have acclimated to their section of the world. The greenhouse effect occurs planet wide when solar radiation either bounces off of or is radiated forth from the earth and instead of passing through our atmosphere and outward into space, is absorbed by all kinds of extra amounts of and extraneous gases and particles. These gases et al absorb heat and then radiate it outward in all directions, one of those directions, being the surface of the Earth. From there the process repeats itself until we have a global version of a car with the windows rolled up parked in the noonday sun.
http://globalwarming.com/2009/03/the-greenhouse-effect/22.05.2011. = = = = == =

Global warming as a chain of events


Once again remember we are attempting to define global warming as a chain of events. The first several of these links is an over abundance of solar radiation absorbing gases and other particles floating about in our atmosphere. The next grouping of events concerns what happens when the small percentage of increased heat on our planets surface and in our air begins to effect long standing conditions. Currently the measured effect of global warming as caused by the greenhouse effect on the planet overall is approximately a 1 degree Celsius increase over the last 50 years. This would seem to mean nothing. One asks, How could one degree more or less effect anyone or anything. In terms of that anyone, the effect of a one-degree difference in ambient temperature will probably go unnoticed. Our bodies are designed to adjust to a huge range of climatic conditions. No one of us will notice that today it is 71 degrees

outside and fifty years ago it would have been 70. The human body will adjust and adapt even if the average temperature globally were to increase by ten degrees. Chances are we would set off a huge oblivious migration to more temperate areas. But that little one-degree change manages to set out of kilter an incredible array of environmental forces.

Permafrost
While that one-degree of heat made you take off a sweater, segments of the Earth known as permafrost began a meltdown. Permafrost is a condition whereby sections of the Earths surface have remained at a temperature below freezing (0 degrees Celsius) for at least two years. Literally, it means permanently frozen soil. In actuality, most permafrost regions have been frozen for thousands of years. A large portion of the Arctic is permafrost. During summer months these areas seem to be thawed as they permit a two to twelve foot layer of soil to grow vegetation. But beneath that summer season lays a still frozen core. These frozen strata of the Earth lock away huge amounts of gaseous content with the highest concentrations of gases held in check by permafrost being Carbon dioxide and Methane gas. That one-degree increase in overall temperature is allowing millions of underground acres of permafrost to defrost and release even more greenhouse gas.

Tundra
In a similar vein frozen areas know as Tundra are also experiencing a subtle warming. Tundra describes the soil above permafrost that is frozen for most of the calendar year but thaws for allowance of small amounts of vegetation growth. Areas of Tundra throughout the world serve as sinks for absorption of massive amounts of Carbon. As these areas begin to exist for more months of the year above freezing they both release their stores of Carbon and cease to function as greenhouse gas depositories. The extremist view is that within another half century global warming will simultaneously melt the arctic tundra releasing billions of tons of harmful greenhouse gases and ignite the worlds rainforests destroying our planets ability to create oxygen. Such a viewpoint is falsely alarming and without basis. The real danger of global warming is sufficient without need to exaggerate.

Polar meltdown
The increase, albeit slight in overall temperature the planet is now in the midst of, is more than sufficient to cause catastrophic effect. Take for example our next link in the chain of events feeding the effect of global warming. That is the warming of our polar caps and oceans. An increase in overall temperature for the troposphere allows that segment of the atmosphere to absorb more water vapor. Much as we set a dew point for condensation of moisture on the earths surface, the atmosphere has an evaporation point allowing a larger volume off gaseous H2O to exist. A simple linear logic would allow that a 1 percent increase in overall water temperature throughout the earths atmosphere might allow a corresponding 1% increase in airborne vapor. In truth there is a non-linear curve to this dialectic, but the general principle follows suit and allows for our explanation. A 1% increase in water vapor is a huge increase to the overall amount of greenhouse emissions. The problem however is not caused by the increase whether it is 1% or 1000th of one percent. The problem is that each release of an unchecked amount of greenhouse gas precipitates a further release. So if we add excess water vapor to our ecosystem it then further heats the atmosphere so as to allow even more water vapor to encroach.

Ocean Temperatures and Positive Feedback


Our oceans digest most of the carbon footprint needing to be absorbed into our ecosystem. But, if we raise the temperature of the oceans by as little as 1/10th of one percent that ability to absorb and neutralize excess CO2 is compromised. Currently greenhouse gas emissions from production of energy and internal combustion engines results in a 36% increase in carbon dioxide over that which the planets normal balance can support. This results in a subtle increase in temperature that just happens to be enough to melt some of the Earths permafrost, which then releases even more CO2. The CO2 then slightly raises the Earths temperature resulting in an endlessly looping progression. This situation and scenario is known as positive feedback and this is the real danger inherent as global warming. We can follow our ever-expanding chain of events further to a point where man is more directly affected.

Environmental causes
Gaseous emissions are the largest issue as a cause for global warming. But simple environmental issues still manage to total together and create a factor that is in no way to be discounted as unimportant. The greenhouse effect has caused our Polar Ice Caps to reduce in size by 20% since 1979. This has resulted in more land and sea area being exposed to absorb heat from the sun and as our continual cycle suggests create more excess heat, which in turn melts more polar ice. Not all of global warming is the result of greenhouse gases and the ensuing greenhouse effect. As the population of the earth has increased mankind has brought civilization to almost every corner of the globe. Civilization includes buildings, highways, land cleared for agriculture, cities built where once stood deserts. Almost everything that we build absorbs more heat than its natural predecessor. For hundreds of years we have sheared the tops off of mountains and burned down millions of acres of forest just to look for precious metals. We clear ten thousand year old growth areas just find hardwoods for lumber. We are still clearing the Brazilian Rain Forests so cattle can be raised on the grassy plains we create. And the semicomical side of this is that we have simultaneously destroyed lush plant life that would have through photosynthesis turned CO2 into oxygen, so as to grow cattle, which are raised in such abundance that their flatulence (Methane) is a measurable greenhouse emission. This is not to suggest that we tear down all of our houses to plant a forest of trees and carve up the superhighways and replace them with lovely green meadows. What we do need is an awareness of our situation. We need to realize that every move we make as a result of industrialization has a corresponding consequence.
http://globalwarming.com/2009/03/global-warming-as-a-chain-ofevents/22.05.2011. = = = = = =.

Primary effects of global warming


The effects of global warming are in some ways less definable than the causes. It seems odd that such huge manifestations of change such as rising sea levels, glacier retreat, and Arctic shrinkage somehow manage to filter down so that when members of western civilization safely tucked away in homes and apartments look at the effects they are so

remote as to become invisible. What we may well bear watching are the effects of the effects of global warming. These secondary results are so non-linear as to be a random harvest of environmental and economic dilemmas that, when fully formed and in place present a definitive short-term danger. Still, let us once again follow a chain of events so as to be able to completely envision the scale and scope of the problem.

Rising sea levels


Rising sea levels are an easily measurable effect of global warming. As Polar ice melts down the water created obviously must go somewhere. Aside from that ice which joins inland fresh water reservoirs, the vast majority of melted ice joins the pool of the oceans. Most people misunderstand the effect of polar meltdown and consider that this addition to our oceans creates the overall rise in sea levels. This is hardly the case. The rise in sea levels due to global warming is primarily caused by thermal expansion. In short when you heat a liquid (such as sea water) it expands. Sea levels are currently on a pace to rise at a rate of approximately 1 inch every ten years. Such a small change seems as if it could never affect quality of life for people living in such distant from the oceans locations as Denver, Colorado. Yet this is precisely the scenario by which we are all affected. Obviously people living in low laying areas such as coastal Florida and Louisiana will most directly be affected. A one hundred year model that allows for the current progression of global warming factors would result in millions of acres of land mass lost in these areas. Still we have set our viewpoint in the Rocky Mountains not Holland or the eastern coast of England, both of which are teetering at or below sea level.

Salt water intrusion


Our Denver citizen might enjoy bottled water from Zephyrhills, Florida or any of the hundreds of fresh water springs gushing forth in the sunshine state. Salt-water intrusion as a result of rising sea levels could easily destroy a huge percentage of the potable water available in this and other coastal states. Agricultural products of low-lying areas around the world will face shortfalls. Production of fruits and vegetables is dependent on a stable set of environmental conditions. Ever hear of the Indian River? Well most of Americas grapefruit is grown there along the Florida coast and should we follow the expected loss of coastline for all of the Southern US which is projected at a possible 2 mile inward loss of coastline over the next 75 years. Both the Indian River and Indian River Grapefruit will no longer exist. 50% of American produce is grown in our low laying areas. A major effect of global warming is that agricultural production will be decreased. Our planet will be unable to grow as much food.

Beach erosion
A major secondary effect of rising sea levels is massive beach erosion. Our Colorado vacationer will find the endless stretches of sandy beaches he enjoys on his winter vacation have withered away to a few hundred yards here and there. But a shortened tourist base is hardly a world catastropheis it? Tourism pumps over 50 Billion dollars a year into Floridas economy. North Carolina and Louisiana earn 15 billion dollars each through tourism. In fact every US state and every nation on Earth with mild climate and a sandy shore depends upon financial gain from tourism to sustain its economy. Lest we dwell only on financial impact consider that loss of coastal acreage will displace thousands of species of animal and plant life.

Extreme weather
Perhaps the most commonly conceived notion as to the effects of global warming is that of cataclysmic weather. In fervor to promote the cause, too often we see graphic depictions of raging floods, category 12 hurricanes and dozens of tornadoes sweeping the landscape. These same depictions seem to serve those who accept the threat of global warming and those who reject the possibility. One agenda hopes to frighten the world into an austere program of self-denial so as to instantly curb global warming causes. The other faction points out that currently there are no typhoons sweeping across Kansas so therefore global warming is a but a myth. As always when dealing with scientific anomalies the truth lies nicely hidden in between. Category 4 and 5 hurricanes have risen in frequency from 20 to 35% over the last 30 years. Since the dawn of the industrial revolution, frequency of hurricanes overall has risen by almost 40% and the those hurricanes now making landfall deposit almost 10% more rainfall than their pre 1970 counterparts. As an effect of global warming hurricanes are stronger, wetter and more numerous. Hurricane Fay from 2007 created massive flooding over a dozen states. This increase in storm activity is directly related to a wider variance between warm and cold ocean waters. Consider that the measurement of temperature rise in ocean waters is based on an overall average. Storms are created by the extremes that create that average. Global warming produces as byproducts, variance in the jet stream, wind sheer, greater quantity of cyclones, and drought. http://globalwarming.com/2009/03/primary-effects-of-global-warming/22.05.2011. =====.

Secondary effects of global warming


All of the above initial effects of global warming set into motion the following more directly adverse effects. Every human being, animal and plant on planet Earth feels these second tier effects.

Decreased crop yields


For a short time it was hoped that a byproduct of global warming would be increased yields of agriculture. The obvious conclusion was that plant life through photosynthesis would make good use of the increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and produce a lush abundance of flora. Certainly areas such as Iceland, which due to an overall warmer climate can now support the growth of crops such as barley, have benefited from global warming. Regions such as Siberia are now able to produce food. But overall the effect of global Warming on agriculture is decidedly negative. Floods and droughts do not make suitable growing fields. In Africa, areas that historically received two rain falls yearly now receive more resulting in increased yields, but areas receiving one rainfall per annum now receive less. This of course results in a non existent growing season and a 33% decrease in harvestable crops. While an increase in rainfall may increase yields for those already able to produce a harvest a decrease in rainfall results in a complete lack of food for others. Flooding of coastal areas results in coastal growing plains being destroyed. For many poorer countries these are the only fertile areas accessible to transportation via waterways. Poor countries like Bangladesh are completely at risk to massive starvation caused by coastal flooding. Many Pacific Island nations will be completely eliminated as sea levels rise. It is already planned to evacuate the peoples of Tuvalu to nearby New Zealand as flood defense in not economically or agriculturally possible.

Species Migration and Extinction

People will not be the only living things on the move due to global warming. As regional ecosystems change many species will be unable to find historical food sources. This will result in mass migrations to climates hoped to support those species as well as mass extinction of those animals unable to migrate an /or adapt. Polar bears, emperor penguins, gyrfalcons and snowy owls are just a few of the species current in peril in the new warmer Arctic and Antarctic regions. Longer warm seasons result in such basic changes as a Polar bears loss of natural camouflage. A white bear on brown earth is easy for a seal to avoid. Birds and butterflies have shifted the range of their migrations almost 200 kilometers in North America and Europe. Plant life is unable to shift regions as quickly and as such will die out unless manually replanted in more conducive settings. When herbivores migrate to find a genetically compatible climate they face the risk of starvation when their traditional foodstuffs have not migrated with them. Many species are simply unable to migrate to better climes and as such will suffer the fate of Australias white possum. Unable to survive in temperatures above 30 degrees Celsius the entire species was destroyed during a surprisingly excessive heat wave during 2005. Their loss is directly attributed to global warming. Severe winters in British Columbia have always managed to keep in balance the voracious effect of the Pine Beetle. Warmer temperatures have now allowed the beetles to profligate and destroy 33 million acres of Canadian pines. Mountain run off of melting snows is expected to result in seasonal flooding followed by seasonal drought in every mountain range in the world. Mountains cover one fourth of the Earths land mass. As upper mountain areas warm it is expected that over heated lower level animals and plants will simply move up to a higher elevation. But what of

life already situated at the upper threshold? Once they reach the top of the mountain where will they move up to?

The Human Condition


Of course we tend to realize the plight of animals as we can easily see their need to migrate to better stomping grounds. But, what are the direct effects of increased temperature on homosapiens? Disease spreads in an overheated environment. Ever notice that there isnt a lot of malaria in Buffalo, New York or Moscow, Russia. Cold kills germs. Global warming will extend the favorable zones for many infectious diseases. Encephalitis, Lyme disease and the aforementioned malaria will join with other bacteria based carriers of illness to spread throughout areas previously thought of as safe zones. Our bodies must work harder to cool off when placed in a higher ambient temperature. Cardiovascular function is directly reduced by even a 1-degree temperature increase. Higher concentrations of greenhouse gases in the air we breathe are also directly damaging to lung tissue and lung capacity.

Increased rainfall
If we increase the temperature of the air it is able to absorb more moisture in the form of water vapor. If we cool the air that vapor becomes liquid and falls to the earth as rain. The greater the amount of water vapor the atmosphere absorbs the greater the amount of rainfall we will receive during the normal process of reaching a dew point or other yard stick of precipitation. This increased rainfall results in drastically increased erosion. Areas such as Colorados Platte River long noted for the devastation following its hundred-year floods can in no way accommodate that same volume of water arriving every decade. Erosion is vulnerable tropical areas such as Africa results in native plant life dying off and a resultant desertification. Evaporation, by definition is a cooling process. So why then is this increased evaporation not countering global warming? Because the water vapor that enters the

atmosphere counters the cooling process while acting as a greenhouse gas. It should be pointed out that change in climate for targeted areas can often result in a plus side modification meaning that adding water to dry areas usually results in those areas being able to support vegetation.

Destabilization of local climates


The overall destabilization of local climates is a major effect of global warming. The Arctic is home to over 4 million people. Canada, Russia, and Alaska are dealing with a tremendous rise in bacterial growth as permafrost regions warm. Glaciers in the northern hemisphere have decreased in size by 50% over the last 100 years. This particular meltdown has resulted in landslides; flash floods and lake overflow through out the Andes, Alps, Pyrenees, Himalayas, and Rocky Mountains. These seasonal meltdowns are followed by seasonal droughts. Global warming creates climate extremes. We may measure the average but we live with the outcome of the extremes. The slow steady melting of the Himalayas results in the steady flow of water of the Ganges River. The Ganges is the lifeblood of over 500 million people. To say this plainly, if we melt all of our fresh water too quickly and send it out to blend with the ocean billions of people, including our friend in Denver, Colorado will go thirsty.

Acidic Oceans
Our Oceans are the Earths largest sink for the absorption of CO2 from our atmosphere. As excess CO2 is dealt with, the oceans in an effort to balance the ecosystem have become saturated with CO2. This has resulted in production of mild carbonic acid and is known as ocean acidification. While this is an extremely slight change in the ph (acid to base) balance of the seas it does result in damage to corals. Coral reefs are home to the vast majority of undersea life. Ocean acidification coincides with Oxygen depletion in our oceans. Heavier CO2 molecules are supplanting oxygen. Less oxygen equals less fish.

Drought
As temperature swings increase we are left with flooding in some areas and drought in others the drought creates correct conditions for forest fires. These fires, like our hurricanes, are suddenly emerging on a much grander scale. The 2009 fires raging through Australia and the 2002 fires in Florida serve as excellent examples. Massive fires release much more carbon as both particle and molecule than can readily be absorbed. Once again prevalent anti global warming as reality belief is that these fires can only be considered a natural effect of the ecosystem and as the forests are a naturally renewing resource should be discounted as an effect of global warming. However with global warming defined as a premise of additional stress on our environment we come to realize that it is not the existence of a naturally made fire but the scale of that event that matters. http://globalwarming.com/2009/03/primary-effects-of-global-warming/22.05.2011. = == == = = .

Secondary effects of global warming


All of the above initial effects of global warming set into motion the following more directly adverse effects. Every human being, animal and plant on planet Earth feels these second tier effects.

Decreased crop yields


For a short time it was hoped that a byproduct of global warming would be increased yields of agriculture. The obvious conclusion was that plant life through photosynthesis would make good use of the increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and produce a lush abundance of flora. Certainly areas such as Iceland, which due to an overall warmer climate can now support the growth of crops such as barley, have benefited from global warming. Regions such as Siberia are now able to produce food. But overall the effect of global Warming on agriculture is decidedly negative. Floods and droughts do not make suitable growing fields. In Africa, areas that historically received two rain falls yearly now receive more resulting in increased yields, but areas receiving one rainfall per annum now receive less. This of course results in a non existent growing season and a 33% decrease in harvestable crops. While an increase in rainfall may increase yields for those already able to produce a harvest a decrease in rainfall results in a complete lack of food for others. Flooding of coastal areas results in coastal growing plains being destroyed. For many poorer countries these are the only fertile areas accessible to transportation via waterways. Poor countries like Bangladesh are completely at risk to massive starvation caused by coastal flooding. Many Pacific Island nations will be completely eliminated as sea levels rise. It is already planned to evacuate the peoples of Tuvalu to nearby New Zealand as flood defense in not economically or agriculturally possible.

Species Migration and Extinction

People will not be the only living things on the move due to global warming. As regional ecosystems change many species will be unable to find historical food sources. This will result in mass migrations to climates hoped to support those species as well as mass extinction of those animals unable to migrate an /or adapt. Polar bears, emperor penguins, gyrfalcons and snowy owls are just a few of the species current in peril in the new warmer Arctic and Antarctic regions. Longer warm seasons result in such basic changes as a Polar bears loss of natural camouflage. A white bear on brown earth is easy for a seal to avoid. Birds and butterflies have shifted the range of their migrations almost 200 kilometers in North America and Europe. Plant life is unable to shift regions as quickly and as such will die out unless manually replanted in more conducive settings. When herbivores migrate to find a genetically compatible climate they face the risk of starvation when their traditional foodstuffs have not migrated with them. Many species are simply unable to migrate to better climes and as such will suffer the fate of Australias white possum. Unable to survive in temperatures above 30 degrees Celsius the entire species was destroyed during a surprisingly excessive heat wave during 2005. Their loss is directly attributed to global warming. Severe winters in British Columbia have always managed to keep in balance the voracious effect of the Pine Beetle. Warmer temperatures have now allowed the beetles to profligate and destroy 33 million acres of Canadian pines. Mountain run off of melting snows is expected to result in seasonal flooding followed by seasonal drought in every mountain range in the world. Mountains cover one fourth of the Earths land mass. As upper mountain areas warm it is expected that over heated lower level animals and plants will simply move up to a higher elevation. But what of

life already situated at the upper threshold? Once they reach the top of the mountain where will they move up to?

The Human Condition


Of course we tend to realize the plight of animals as we can easily see their need to migrate to better stomping grounds. But, what are the direct effects of increased temperature on homosapiens? Disease spreads in an overheated environment. Ever notice that there isnt a lot of malaria in Buffalo, New York or Moscow, Russia. Cold kills germs. Global warming will extend the favorable zones for many infectious diseases. Encephalitis, Lyme disease and the aforementioned malaria will join with other bacteria based carriers of illness to spread throughout areas previously thought of as safe zones. Our bodies must work harder to cool off when placed in a higher ambient temperature. Cardiovascular function is directly reduced by even a 1-degree temperature increase. Higher concentrations of greenhouse gases in the air we breathe are also directly damaging to lung tissue and lung capacity. http://globalwarming.com/2009/03/secondary-effects-of-global-warming/22.05.2011. ======.

Summation of effects
The effects of global warming are beginning to manifest themselves. While the greatest threat still lies at a point perhaps some fifty years forward, the current problems and predicaments are more than a harbinger. Global warming has already diminished the quality of life for the worlds poorest peoples. Hunger and starvation on the African continent is its greatest reality. If global warming is ignored and, shall we say, allowed to prosper, we the fortunate percentage of the Earths populace living in first tier nations may very well join the fray of increased human suffering.

In the long term


Now, the most obvious thought anyone who did not believe in global warming would think is that all of these factors have existed for millions of years and the fluctuations in them, such as amounts of greenhouse gases and changes in the surface of the Earth are too small to drastically effect climate. In the long term, that is, say a length of 100,000 years that is probably true. The Earth as a master clockwork will probably naturally adjust to all of mans device. But mankind may not be around to appreciate the changes as those same changes may exclude mankind from existence. http://globalwarming.com/2009/03/summation-of-effects/22.05.2011. = = = = == =. SOLUTIONS:

Global Warming Solutions


Obviously there is no one magic solution to the problem of global warming. There are instead hundreds of questions that need to be asked and addressed so as to create an overall Earth plan that will develop our planet wisely. The changes we can make, both large and small when combined will curtail global warming for the better. In this section

we discuss the latest green designs, products and ideas as yet undeveloped that will reduce environmental damage overall.

We plan to offer honest value comparisons of products such as hybrid cars. If the carbon footprint made from producing a hybrid is ten times larger than that it erases it is news that should be shared. Compact florescent lights are great energy savers but are all of these exactly what they claim to be? And furthermore will light emitting diodes render CFLs obsolete before they are universally adapted. As always the future holds a newer and possibly better design. We will be bringing you articles examining what will come and those products that are already available but await widespread acceptance. Developments in mass renewable energy production in such areas as solar and wind power are of interest to all. We will also be looking back at past successful use of these energy choices. Zenith sold tiny windmills in the late 1930s that would charge a car battery that in turn would run a radio for days. Has the technological upgrade been utilized? We will find solutions to the problem of global warming by asking countless questions about the processes we rely upon to live. We answer these questions on a personal level by changing the habits, which build each of our carbon footprints and on a global level by insisting that social and governmental structure acknowledge the need for environmental protection. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/global-warming-solutions/22.05.2011 = = == ==.

Green Building Solutions

Which is cheaper to build a house with, a spruce timber 2 by 4 or a steel stud? It might cost less to build a house using lumber, but is it cheaper in the long run? Especially when one considers the cost of greenhouse emissions and how they are affected by loss of trees. But steel must be refined and molded using plenty of energy. Which of these uses more power and consequently causes a larger carbon footprint? It is difficult to say, but choice of build materials is a definite part of how we can change the way we build homes and other buildings so as to save money and energy. Choice of building materials is just one part of what is known as green building. Green building can best be described as the birth to grave process of building. From choosing a site through architectural design, choice of materials, construction, occupancy and eventual demolish, every aspect of a buildings effect on the environment is considered. Paramount among these is energy efficiency as part of the dwelling use.

Green building can be taken to as simple or as extreme a degree as one desires. For example simply choosing darker shingles in a colder climate is passive energy conservation. Placing solar photovoltaic cells on that same roof will actually produce more power than is used within the building at times. Lets break down the various components of green building for examination beginning with siting and design. These two are closely tied together. Siting considers factors such as exposure to sun and wind. Placing a home so that it faces west during the afternoon sun has been a form or energy conservation practiced for years. Likewise we reverse the placement of our building in warmer areas. Consider now that we incorporate design elements to further our efficiency. We might use large double paned windows in the northern climate to allow a useful warming greenhouse effect in one location or smaller tinted glass in the hotter locales. Choosing where we place our building and then

incorporating design elements that save on heating and cooling are fundamentals of green building.

Energy efficiency can be taken much further of course. Taking a quick look at energy use in the home leads us to the conclusion that the majority of our power costs are placed in heating and air conditioning, hot water, lighting and cooking. Green building techniques for inside climate control include air pipe ventilation, rooftop solar panels and geothermal heat exchangers. These can cool your home, make hot water and power your lights. Most importantly they drastically reduce your dependency on electricity as furnished by your power company and in this way they save you a great deal of money over the lifespan of your home. Water conservation is a major aspect of green building. Simply by diverting gray water from your sewer to your lawn you achieve two goals. You protect diminishment of fresh water supplies while watering your lawn. Point of use water treatment saves money right from its inclusion in construction. Of course, what you choose to build your house out of is as large a factor today as it was 1000 years ago when native peoples were digging caves into cliff walls. Obviously this was a wonderful example of materials efficiency. But one doesnt need to live in a cave to be materials energy efficient. Building materials made from compacted earth and natural stone accomplish much the same effect. Using recycled materials such as our steel 2 by 4 reduce our home cost in terms of carbon, as do polyurethane blocks, planks and siding made from recycled plastic and demolition debris. There is no reason that any home has to be built at the cost of a hundred acres of trees. Simple systems such as passive lighting (skylights) and air pipe ventilation can drastically improve the quality of life for occupants. Use of natural building materials almost guarantees fewer volatile particles and a higher indoor air quality. Most manmade materials release minute amounts of health damaging toxic gases. There is a reason why we call it Fresh Air. Green building costs on average just 5% more than current standardized construction practices. That number would drop to the point of a direct savings if green building were to become the standard. As with almost every energy-saving vehicle, we can drastically reduce costs if we increase volume. Green building returns a savings of 50 to 70 percent on energy costs over the life time of a building. Yes, addition of items like solar panels and geothermal underground pipes is a supplemental cost. But the initial cost of these electricity bill lowering features has been proven to quickly pay for itself.

One doesnt have to build a two hundred foot tall wind turbine in their front yard to save on energy costs. Simple procedures like proper site planning and choice of construction materials can cut a new homes energy bill by 25% instantly. And while monetary savings are important, the true savings from green building is not measured in dollars. Rather it should be counted in overall improved quality of life in the home and office and overall improved health of the planet Earth. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/green-building-solutions/22.05.2011. = = = = == .

Utilizing Geothermal Energy for Power, Heating and Cooling


For years geothermal energy and power has been limited in context to utilization of naturally occurring steam that has been used to turn turbines and consequently create electric power. These natural occurrences are tapped into with what are known as geothermal wells. Due to these occurrences being limited in location to areas along tectonic plate faults (cracks in the Earths shell) there generally has not been too much effective use of geothermal resources. In fact geothermal power amounts to just .3% of our worldwide energy production. In much the same way as we drilled the Earth for oil over the last hundred years, we can drill for acceptable geothermal outlets. As with the search for fossil fuels, we simply attempt to find places that are hot enough and close enough to the Earths core so as to allow for injection of water which will then be turned to steam so as to drive an electricity producing turbine. Just as when drilling for oil, drilling for geothermal access costs millions of dollars. Of course, the majority of geothermal power stations rely upon the natural occurrence of steam as a result of water intrusion into the inner reaches of the Earth where nearby magma has heated the surrounding rock. In many ways this natural creation of blazing hot steam is rare but the sheer size of the earth makes so many opportunities for the occurrence and the ease of discovery has resulted in quite a few large geothermal fields being placed into use.

The largest geothermal power station in the world is known as The Geysers. It is located around 72 miles north of San Francisco. Technically not geysers, the entire area is a geothermal hotbed with 22 power plants combining to create over 1300 megawatts of power. Power from The Geysers provides 60% of all the electricity used in the area of California from the Golden Gate Bridge to the Oregon border.

Unlike our general concept of steam from a tea kettle or used in an antique locomotive, the geothermal fields of The Geysers produce super heated dry steam. The ultra hot non vaporous steam can more efficiently drive turbines. Unfortunately, the natural flow of water into The Geysers area has steadily diminished over the years and the overall power output has fallen. Basically the area supplying water to the hot rock beneath the Earths surface has begun to dry up. Less water equals less steam which equals less power. Plans are underway to possibly convert the power stations to inject Brown Water from the area so as to create a truly regenerative and sustainable power source. Unlike wind or solar power, geothermal energy is not always endless in supply. But there are far more effective ways to tap into the variances and differentials in the Earths temperatures. One doesnt need to dig a well to a fissure point of water and molten lava to take advantage of geothermal resources. Indeed, a more passive approach to energy production is proving to be more efficient. Geothermal energy can be tapped into on many different levels. The individual homeowner can use geothermal energy to both heat and cool his or her home at a tremendous savings. Anyone can take advantage of geothermal energy in their home.

Basically home geothermal is used for home heating and air conditioning. A home geothermal heating and air conditioning system centers around piping filled with fluid buried deep in the ground of your property. These pipes can be coils of plastic tubing laid horizontally just 10 20 feet below the surface of the earth or they may be vertically placed hundreds of feet deep. The purpose of these pipes is to take advantage of the relatively stable temperatures of the Earth once one digs down a bit. Even in the coldest climates, the Earths temperature is at least 55 degrees at a depth of 20 feet. As one digs deeper into the Earth, the stored energy of the sun is replaced by the heat of the Earths core. The core of the Earth is molten rock with a temperature of around 8000 degrees. Home geothermal systems take advantage of this differential directly. Obviously during the summer one can easily run water cooled under the earth through radiators and send that endless supply of 55 degree cooling into a homes 90 degree air. This is so effective that many eco-conscious homes are cooled by air pipes hundreds of feet long. In this most passive example of geothermal energy use, air is blown through huge hollow pipes which run underground. The heat is drawn by conduction from this air as it passes

through the length of cool underground. It is then returned directly through the ductwork of the home. Basically this is air conditioning with no need for compressors, coolant or mechanical heat exchange. Consequently the cost to run an air pipe cooling system is incredibly low. By comparison, heating systems relying upon geothermal exchange must use heat pumps that mechanically trade on the temperature differential so as to build a greater amount of heat. While this is more efficient than other forms of creating heat such as electrical friction it does still have a cost. A heat pump based from a geothermal piping system is still two to four times as initially expensive as conventional heating. Passive Geothermal heating and air conditioning is just one aspect of what falls under the heading of Green Building which shows we can design and build our homes and commercial buildings from the outset to use less energy.
http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/utilizing-geothermal-energy-for-powerheating-and-cooling/22.05.2011. =====.

Advancement in Solar Energy Technology


The atmosphere, oceans and land mass of the Earth absorbs enough energy from the sun in one hour to power the entire planet for one year. Surely we are clever enough to capture some of this magnificent force and use it to fuel our environment. Solar energy and its use can be divided into two areas. Those are static or passive solar energy collection and dynamic, or perhaps better termed, kinetic solar energy collection and use. An example of passive solar energy collection would be building a house so that the windows face the morning sun in colder climates. An even more rudimentary example would be that of an alligator sunning himself on the edge of the water. In both cases the suns energy is simply absorbed for warmth. And the simplest use of solar energy is as the very daylight we walk about in. Our Earth automatically uses the power of the sun in millions of ways. Not the least of which is photosynthesis by plants for production of oxygen for our atmosphere. Ours is an inherently rechargeable renewable world, provided we use our resources such as solar energy wisely. To that end, we must examine dynamic solar energy collection for the production of warmth and light. When you walk though almost any shopping mall built in the last twenty years you will probably notice a flood of bright natural light all around you. Most large malls and department stores are built with double paned insulated windows that allow light to enter yet keep heating or cooling locked inside. But what happens when the sun follows its arc away from those windows? Active solar lighting can use mirrors that track with the suns movement and then reflect light into fiber optic cable that can carry that light into any part of our same department store. We can create transfer warmth through various forms of solar thermal energy. Since the 1950s it has not been uncommon to see simple glass paned boxes filled with copper pipes used to help heat water for swimming pools and boilers. These low temperature collectors are fine for space heating but there are far more effective ways to heat water with the suns rays and put that water to work.

High temperature parabolic shaped mirrors can heat water to far greater temperatures than made possible by our simple rooftop hot boxes. In fact bowl and trough type mirrors can boil water to steam which in turn uses a turbine to generate electricity for heating, air conditioning and general power supply. When properly applied, this concentrated solar power can supply 50% of the power needs for a modern factory. Concentrated Solar Power is one half of our method for creating electricity from the suns radiant energy.

The most commonly thought of use and form of solar energy conversion is that of relying upon solar voltaic cells. These solar cells are also called photovoltaic. First developed in the 1880s, photovoltaic cells rely upon the electronic reaction of certain key elements to the Suns rays so as to produce a tapable flow of electrons that are in turned used to create current flow. In short photovoltaic cells turn sunlight into energy. And lest we think we are so clever for figuring out how to do this, consider that plants have been turning sunlight into energy for millions of years. Advances in the development of photovoltaic cells have increased drastically since the oil shortages of the 1970s. This is primarily due to development of silicon technologies. Crystalline silicon cells when working in conjunction with CSP (concentrated solar power) as supplied by parabolic mirrors have improved output from Photovoltaic cells by a factor of 50 since their more basic development in 1954. Increases in demand and subsequent increases in production have lowered the price of solar cells to the point that they are now almost competitive with wind power technology and like their low emissions wind counterparts are far less costly than nuclear power.

Development, deployment and economics


Solar Electric power as supplied by huge banks of photovoltaic cells is providing billions of watts of power throughout the world. Where? How Much? Horse Hollow equivalent?

While not producing power on near the scale of wind driven turbines, solar panels are definitely a viable source of clean power. The state of Hawaii currently produces 6.5% of its power through sustainable energy practices with tremendous emphasis on solar panel power. That is only half the clean energy production of California. The objective of Hawaii to produce 70% of all their energy needs by 2030 is in some ways more attainable than the 33% goal of California. Basically, the captive and controlled environment of Hawaii is a perfect testing ground for renewable energy. When one lives on an island, or in this case a chain of islands, a certain self sufficiency is always part of the lifestyle. Enter into the equation the state of Hawaiis willingness to support private industry in development of green energy projects and you have solar plants such as the one built at Kona, Hawaii by Sopogy. Sopogy stands for Solar Power Technology. It is an extremely passive method of converting the suns rays to usable energy. Considering that only one third of our energy needs are directly related to electrical power and you will understand how in some ways simply energy production such as using Sopogys parabolic solar mirrors to heat water that can either directly heat and cool or indirectly be used to spin electricity creating turbines is almost five times as effective as a photovoltaic cell.

But lets not discount solar cell technology quite yet. On 247 acres in Jumilla, Spain the worlds largest solar power from photovoltaic cell production facility is now in operation. While the facility produces nothing near the power as does a huge wind farm such as those in place in Southern Australia, the amount of power generated per acre is not to be dismissed. The solar plant in Jumilla creates enough power to light, heat and cool 20,000 homes. On a comparable basis the 47,000 acres used for the Horse Hollow wind farm could yield 3800 megawatts of power. That is five times as much as the wind farm. Granted the farm land can be used for other purposes simultaneously and the cost of solar does not

yet permit such a huge creation. But there are hundreds of thousands of places around the globe where a spare 250 acres can be found. Each of those little plots of sunny land can contribute to the overall sustainability of the Earth. Yes it is true that conditions in Southern Spain are perfect for such an operation with sunlight available at least 300 days a year, but almost every spot on the globe has its own special opportunities for green energy production. Think of it this way, in places that are gray and cloudy there is usually wind, in places where there is no wind the sun is usually bright. Solar Power Arithmetic The cost of solar cells Part of the allure of solar power produced by photovoltaic cells is the potential profitability. Consider the cost to revenue structure of the Jumilla, Spain solar farm. At the present time, high yield (15% efficiency) photovoltaic solar installations cost around 6 dollars per watt. The worlds largest solar farm sits on just 247 acres and cost about 200 million dollars to build. Gross revenues from the electricity generated at the plant will exceed 20 million dollars annually. This means a return of investment in under 15 years, allowing for maintenance and labor. The solar farm also generates over a million dollars a year in carbon credits. Obviously a solar plant does not need a constant infusion of coal, or other fossil fuels to create energy. Some might think a 15 year wait for return on investment is far too long. Indeed solar and wind power speculate on the overall rise in hydrocarbon fuel costs. A coal fired power plant costs one fifth as much to build as does a solar wind farm on a per watt basis. And even factoring the cost of fuel to burn, fossil fuel power is cheaper, but for how long and at what ultimate cost. Mass production and massive investment in photovoltaic cell research will quickly move the cost per watt for solar power into the 3 dollar range. One little blip in the worlds political stability can drive the cost of fossil fuels to double. If and when that happens solar power will be a bargain. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/advancement-in-solar-energytechnology/22.05.2011. = = = = =.

Energy generation using wind turbines


The key to understanding Wind farming technology is to break values of the power produced down using simple arithmetic. Indeed, all energy production is a numbers game with each source of power having its appropriate initial and ongoing cost. Factored with these costs must be the price we all pay in terms of CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions. Just as we universally share in the cost of health care due to cigarette smoking we similarly all pay for any damage done to the health of our planet. At the present time, wind farms in the United States produce electricity at a rate of over 20 billion Kilowatts of power. This is enough to provide electricity for 4.9 million households. Not too bad is it? But this same total of power can be produced by just two nuclear plants or if you prefer 40 coal fired power plants.

In terms of hydroelectric power, the Hoover Dam produces just under 3 billion watts of power. 7 Hoover dams equals all the combined US wind power. So why not just build more giant hydroelectric dams or spread nuclear plants all around the earth? Debate over safety from nuclear power plants is ongoing and intense. And the amount of greenhouse gas emissions from each of those 40 coal fired plants equals around 3 million tons a year. There are many conclusions we can draw from all of our wind farming arithmetic. The first is that even though we have barely tapped into the viability of using wind power to heat, cool and light our homes, the progress thus far shows that the feasibility is proven. We have the land and we have the wind. If we had ten times as much wind power generation we could provide power to 50 million homes or if you prefer 150 million people. No, this doesnt mean that our overall energy needs could be so easily met. Industry uses far more energy than housing. Cars, buses, trains, planes and those coal fired power plants themselves massively chew up power and spit out pollutants. Nuclear power releases one fiftieth as much greenhouse gas into the atmosphere than does a coal fired plant. A hydroelectric dam just 10% of that and a wind farm half of the CO2 emissions of the dam. By comparison, greenhouse gas emissions from wind farming is minuscule. But as long as we are doing some math, the accountants will have us calculating the cost of building our wind farm. This is pretty simple. It costs around 5 million dollars to make a one million watt producing wind turbine. This is a cost of five dollars per watt. Coal fired plants have initial costs of around $1.50 per watt. Solar power bounces between 3 and 7 dollars per watt and nuclear power comes in at a cost of a whopping 11 dollars per watt. Now what makes wind turbine technology the most feasible of all of these is two things. The first is the already mentioned clean emissions standards from wind power. The second reason that wind farming is the future for power production worldwide is that once you produce a large enough wind farm the price per watt will plummet drastically. A 100 megawatt wind farm can be built for 100 million dollars, or a dollar a watt. Want to see proof of how strong an energy source wind power can be? Lets take a look at the largest wind farm in the world. You wont find it offshore in the ocean. Although there is a pretty nice wind farm off the coast of Copenhagen. And this working wind farm is not lost in the Australian Outback, even though there are several 200 megawatt wind farms in southern Australia.

Using those Wide Open Spaces


The worlds biggest wind farm is in the United States and in Texas. It is the Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center in Taylor County, Texas. It is owned by NextEra Energy. NextEra is a subsidiary of energy production and management giant FPL (Florida Power and Light). NextEra produces over 18,000 megawatts of power with over 90 percent of that coming from clean or renewable fuels. 42% of Next Eras power production comes from wind power! 735 megawatts of that power are produced at Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center.

The energy created from wind power at Horse Hollow comes from 421 tall powerful wind turbines. Each of these is mounted 260 feet above the ground so as to guarantee a steady flow of higher than average velocity winds. The 116 foot blades are connected to a tour bus sized container for the power generation components that weighs 56 tons. This operations area is call the Nacelle. Each of these massive wind driven turbines produces between 1.5 and 2.3 megawatts of power. As with all wind power designs, there are virtually zero emissions and as one might expect there is no fuel to buy and burn. The moment a wind turbine is turned on it starts paying for itself directly. Access to the turbines components is made by climbing up the inside of the tower and entering the Nacelle or if you would prefer to think of it as so, the engine room. Here the four basic turbine components the rotor, yaw system, the transmission and the generator are housed and give protected access. Huge three bladed propellers that automatically turn to face the wind turn at a relatively slow rate of 16 revolutions per minute. One might wonder how this slow rate of speed translates to power? The huge blades of a wind farm turbine are set at a specific pitch so as to maintain a relatively steady rate of revolutions. Those 16 RPMs are channeled into a gear box or transmission if you will. This allows for a progressively faster build up of shaft speeds until a final drive speed of 1800 RPM into a permanent magnet generator. This generator produces a processed steady current at 34,500 volts! That power is sent by underground cable to substations where it is transformed in to smaller voltages several times until it reaches your home in a 120 or 240 volt form.

Horse Hollow Energy Center sits on 47,000 acres of owned and leased land in Texas. Those stories about Texas being the land of wide open spaces are certainly true, as the turbines are spread apart giving each a clear blast of wind. Unlike nuclear and fossil fuel power production facilities, a wind farm does not require near proximity to water. This explains why Australia has vested so heavily in the technology. Huge expanses of land are indeed needed for wind farming and obviously geographically smaller nations are a poor wind farming fit. But wind farms can be built offshore where there is virtually endless room for turbines. In the case of Horse Hollow, the 47,000 acres used for the energy center share space with livestock and agricultural production. Each wind turbine requires from 10 to 100 acres of surrounding land. For the most part, wind turbines are fairly quiet. Most of the noise from the turbines at Horse Hollow comes from the whirring of the gears and bearings within the turbine itself. A certain degree of this noise filters down to people and animals on the ground. The turbines by necessity are spread far apart and this limits the overall noise heard to just that produced by one or two turbines. How loud is the sound from a Horse Hollow wind farm turbine? It is quieter than the sound of a vacuum cleaner coming from the next room. And at Horse Hollow the cows grazing have yet to issue a single complaint. Zenith Wind Charger

In the 1930s most farms across the United States either used 32 volt DC systems or were without electric power. Those without juice managed to get along by curing meats in a smokehouse and canning fruits and vegetables. But what about entertainment? The thirties were the golden age of radio. Surely the farm community didnt have to miss out on Fibber McGee and Molly or the Lone Ranger? Americas rural areas stayed in touch with the world by means of DC powered radios. Those on farms with direct current wired in did just fine and those without any power at all used large tube type battery powered radios. Check out an episode of The Waltons and you will see exactly this type. These radios brought in signals from all across America and via short wave all across the world. But like all battery operated devices are apt to have happen, the batteries ran down. And when that happened what was our depression era farmer to do? He hooked up the battery to a Zenith Wind Charger. A small generator connected directly to the shaft of a spinning pinwheel of a turbine rotated and turned cranking out both RPMs and current. In a few hours the

battery was charged for that nights radio shows and the meaning of the term Wind Farm was truly understood. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/energy-generation-using-wind-turbines/22.05.2011. = = = = =. CLIMATE CHANGE HISTORY:

Climate Change Headlines from 2000 to 2009


The years 2000 through 2009 are marked as the warmest ever in the history of the Earth based on data supplied by National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) scientists. 2009 was also the second warmest temperature recorded since such records were kept beginning in 1880. 2005 was actually warmest year ever recorded. Although 2008 was the coolest year recorded during the last decade and climate related results from this year tend to fly in the face of general global warming predictions and philosophies, the consensus remains that the effects of global warming are now manifest. The general upward trend continues of temperatures rising at a rate of over 1/3 degree Fahrenheit per decade. A little basic arithmetic creates and relates a 10 rise by centuries end. By almost every standard measurement such an increase in overall global temperature would be catastrophic. It is important to note that climate change and global warming have been topics for discussion long before the year 2000, but the start of the new millennium seems to be a crucial point in environmental awareness and as such we have created this focused timeline for the decade. 2000 The media begins to buzz on the topic of Earths temperature

2000 The media begins to buzz on the topic of Earths temperature

Concern rises over the release of methane During the year 2000 discussion shifted from CO2 releases from power plants to Methane and other gases as being more or equally responsible for greenhouse effect warming of the Earths surface. Science recognizes in 2000 that methane while released in far less volume than CO2 poses its own special environmental impact due to its

heavier molecular structure. Basically it is at this point that the scientific community recognizes that global warming is based on hundreds of combined factors. Global warming has yet to become a major political arguing point The United States Council for National Research concluded and released a statement that the Earths surface temperature was rising as a result of global warming. They stated that atmosphere temperatures were not yet affected. For the year 2000 the political aspects of climate change and global warming were extremely limited and as yet undefined.

CNN takes a position as to global warming trends CNN announces that Global Warming warnings are more than hot air. Venerable and generally reliable news source CNN publicly takes the position and stand that global warming is on the overall upward, climate change can no longer be ignored and supports a position that regardless of the year to year inconsistencies there is a general upward trend in temperature. Still for the year 2000 CNN does not opt to fall into the opinion that this definitive temperature rise is based on industrial interaction. CNN proposes and broadcasts their opinion that the natural factors such as volcanic eruptions may be just as responsible for climate change as greenhouse gas emissions. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/2000-the-media-begins-to-buzz-on-the-topic-ofearths-temperature/22.05.2011. = == = ==.

2001 The U.S. withdraws from the Kyoto Protocol citing economic reasons
A decade of computer modeled research suggests a likelihood of climate changes Scientific observations taken over the previous 10 years of global warming, as observed in ocean basins coincide and match with computer models which had predicted such effect on the oceans. Release of this information results in a general scientific shift whereby almost all international scientific bodies agree that an abrupt climate change is currently taking place.

President Bush removes the U.S. from involvement in the Kyoto Protocol

The United States is widely recognized as the single largest greenhouse gas creator worldwide. Under action from then President George W. Bush, the United States abandons the Kyoto Protocol for environmental practices. President Bush determines that scientific opinion on global warming is mixed and undefined. He also states that the Kyoto treaty is too expensive for the United States economy and places far too much of the fiscal burden for environmental control on the U.S. All of the major Kyoto signers with the exception of the notably absent United States agree on the treatys rules, laying the groundwork for the Kyoto Protocols ratification and implementation. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded and released as a statement that human AKA induction activity is the likely cause of global warming. The IPCC goes further to state that evidence of climate change by a manmade global warming is incontrovertible. They do note however that effects of global warming on climate are probably impossible to define when weighed against hundred year cycles of temperature adjustment. New Zealand reaches out to smaller island nations In 2001 the country of New Zealand established an immigration and residency policy for the Pacific Island nations of Tuvalu, Tonga, Samoa and Kiribati. Rising sea levels have reached a point where these nations are at risk of simple nonexistence. Neighboring New Zealand is essentially prepared to take in the peoples from these countries as a humanitarian solution to possibility of their nations being made extinct as direct result of rising seas attributed to Global Warming. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/2001-the-u-s-withdraws-from-the-kyoto-protocolciting-economic-reasons/22.05.2011. = = = = =.

2002 Global warming is compared against global dimming as climate shifts are still noted

Icy regions show shrinkage as some deserts continue to expand The largest floating iceberg known to exist disconnects from the Antarctic Peninsula where it had been attached for thousands of years. It then collapses and breaks into hundreds of pieces which float away. In the same month on the other end of the globe recorded measurements of the worlds largest icecap Vatnajokull in Iceland result in report that this huge glacier could completely disappear by the end of the century if global warming continues to develop exponentially. By summer China acknowledges that its northern deserts are growing at such a rate that

they are now seven times the size of the entire United Kingdom. In Northern Africa desertification has reached a point where the entire Sahelian region is expected to be overcome and become devoid of inhabitants over the next 20 years if the expansion of new desert areas is not halted. These four examples mark the beginning of definitive signs of global warming effects. Critics of global warming theories attempt to dispel its possibilty The global warming hoax committee begins to develop as the term global dimming is used to invalidate global warming as a legitimate cause of climate change. Global dimming effectively shades the Earth by means of pollutant particles released into the atmosphere. Political representatives of the unregulated industry sectors cite temporal atmospheric cooling as a negation of surface Earth temperature increases. At the same time environmental activists predict that the eventual cleanup of these pollutants will result in an abrupt global warming event.

Discussion of forced species relocation takes place in Johannesburg In Johannesburg, South Africa a conference known as Earth Summit 2002 was held. The conference, admittedly a forum for staunch green Earth advocates, differs from earlier Earth summit talks in that emphasis is now place on sustainable development. To that end, the assemblage includes representatives from the industrial corporate sector, farming, and indigenous peoples directly affected by global warming. Emphasis at the summit was based on forced migrations of both animal species and humankind. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/2002-global-warming-is-compared-against-globaldimming-as-climate-shifts-are-still-noted/22.05.2011. ====.

2003 Climate cycles are weighed against global warming existence


Climate studies consider the possibility of a normal 100 year cycle in effect The scientific committee is once again the focal point of global warming debate as a compilation of 240 different climate studies seems to prove that increasing global temperatures during the 20th century are merely the result of a typical 100 year climate change cycle. U.S. scientists specifically refute the idea that the major cause of climate change is solar fluctuation. Temperature changes resulting in lesser rainfall reinforce scientific data showing that 90% of the worlds glaciers are in retreat and many are

disappearing completely. Areas of the globe dependent on yearly meltdowns for irrigation begin to take notice.

Decreased emissions from Canada come into question Slower economic growth results in Canada reporting decreases in its emissions of greenhouse gases for the prior year for the first time since the late 1980s. Argument occurs that this decrease in greenhouse gas emissions is purely based on poor economic factors. The Canadian standpoint is reinforced however when looking at these reports showing a 5% decrease in environmental pollution occurring between the years 1995 and 2002.

A European heat wave sparks global warming existence debate A massive heat wave swept through the European continent resulting in the death of over 30,000 people. Their deaths are attributed as the result of global warming. This once again sets off the fever debate of whether not global warming even exists. At this time, United States Senator James Inhofe publicly proclaims Global Warming to be a complete hoax. Exxon Mobil Corp. takes the position that a 50% increase in CO2 emissions will be created by the year 2020 as a result of unregulated greenhouse gas emissions from developing countries such as China. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/2003-climate-cycles-are-weighed-against-globalwarming-existence/22.05.2011. = = == = =.

2004 Conservative and Liberal climate opinions come to the forefront of media
Studies indicating concern over commercial jet emissions are released Researchers state that pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions from commercial jets that are directly released into the upper atmosphere will potentially become the largest

man made cause of changes in climate. This takes into account both particle disbursement into the troposphere and greenhouse gas emissions from jet fuel exhaust. In a similar tone it is shown that aerosols long considered the primary threat to the Earths ozone layer are now acting to cool the Earth through global dimming. Once again scientists warn that as use of aerosol diminishes in future years the greater threat of global warming will be unmasked.

Bush administration shows skepticism towards global warming President George W. Bush of the United States and his administration steadfastly claim the entire prospect of global warming to be a hoax. China is acknowledged by the International Energy Agency worldwide as the second largest carbon emitter based on their tremendously expanded use of fossil fuels with little or no emissions regulation.

Entertainment media pushes climate change scenarios to extremes 2004 sees the first release of books, movies and documentaries featuring in discussing global warming. Overstatements of massive climate swings are depicted in movies such as The Day after Tomorrow and Michael Crichtons book State of Fear. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/2004-conservative-and-liberal-climate-opinionscome-to-the-forefront-of-media/22.05.2011. = = = =.

2005 Positive political change for greenhouse emissions reduction

Harsh predictions for Earths future climate if changes are not made News agency Workers International reports that humans are destroying the Earth at an alarming rate and therefore predicts failures of natures check and balancing system that may result in huge desertification on land masses as well as almost endless dead zones in the oceans. In corroboration of this statement the Atlantic conveyor current seems to shut down and warm Northern European borders to such a degree that fishing stocks in the region are noticeably diminished.

The signing of the Kyoto Protocols Agreement 2005 is marked by what is perhaps the single most important political act relative to climate change and global warming to take place in history. This is the Kyoto treaty taking effect. The set of protocols binding developed and developing nations throughout the world to both standards and goals for greenhouse emissions is officially launched. The Kyoto Protocols as they are soon to be known as had been ratified by all major and actual nations with the exception of the United States due to political opposition has brought forth by President George W. Bush. At the world political summit in Gleneagle, Scotland, a general consensus of world leaders acknowledges that climate change as caused by industrial interaction represents a serious and long-term challenge.

A series of powerful hurricanes raise concerns over a possible relation to climate change Hurricanes in unprecedented number punctuated by hurricane Katrina ripped through the southern United States and Caribbean creating tremendous awareness and concern relative to global warming and climate change.

By years end over 100,000 people around the globe hold organized marches for the first worldwide demonstration against global warming. Protesters called for binding international treaty legislation to control pollution overall and greenhouse emissions in particular. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/2005-positive-political-change-for-greenhouseemissions-reduction/22.05.2011. = = = =.

2006 Nature, Economics and human well being become more entwined in climate issues

The vulnerability of regions in the southern hemisphere is studied closely Most of the European continent and specifically Spain is once again seeing record breaking temperatures for summer. The traditional holiday in Spain is circumvented by 113 F weather as predictions are made for an overall rise of another 7 during this century. Information is released that Spains greenhouse emissions rose by 50% between the years of 1990 and 2004. Studies show that tropical areas in both the Andes and South Africa are open to massive extinction of plant and animal life as normal evolutionary migration is unable to keep pace with tropical change. Marine life in the Pacific Ocean is directly impacted by higher levels of acidity created during the oceans absorption of carbon dioxide.

Serious financial implications of climate change are brought to the forefront The state of California releases its own plans for roll back of greenhouse emissions levels to 1990s levels. World Bank economist Sir Nicholas Stern predicts global warming could cost as much as 20% of the gross domestic product of the entire world if left unchecked.

An Inconvenient Truth brings climate issues to mainstream movie goers Former United States Vice President Al Gore raises global warming awareness to unprecedented levels with release of his documentary film An Inconvenient Truth. The film which does surprisingly well in theaters in America and worldwide graphically displays both causes and effects of global warming leading to climate change. Al Gore seizes upon the films popularity to create from the global warming cause a huge political agenda. While the film effectively attempts to reflect all sides of the global warming issue with facts, figures and photojournalism, it more effectively draws attention to Gore. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/2006-nature-economics-and-human-well-beingbecome-more-entwined-in-climate-issues/22.05.2011. = = = = = =.

2007 IPCC scientists draw greater attention to the possibilities of climate change

Symptoms of a warming trend show up in the arctic and portions of Europe The arctic ice cap has melted to such a degree that the fabled northwest passage, a direct shipping route from Europe to Asia by means of the Arctic Circle opens for the first time in history. The United Kingdom deals with its worst drought conditions and in over 100 years prompting rationing of water. The Mediterranean holiday island of Cyprus faces such dry conditions that a severe sandstorm erupts.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change makes its most concerned climate report to date The IPCC issues an assessment stating that glacial shrinkage, ice loss and permafrost meltdown are definitive signs showing climate change as now actively in motion. The United Nations begins meetings in New York with plans for continuation and expansion of the Kyoto protocols set to expire in 2012. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change regards global warming as unequivocal fact citing human industrial development as its cause.

Predictions of intense climate change at distant dates create mixed levels of concern Global warming is cited as a major cause of endangerment to the Earth when the bulletin of atomic scientists officially sets the minute hand of the doomsday clock forward 2 minutes in deference to increased environmental danger to the Earth. Predictions for massive floods, droughts and other climactic devastation are put forth in higher numbers by almost all members of the scientific community. The standard for future judgment of environmental effect continues to be placed at the year 2100 which in itself leaves most of the Earths population unconcerned. Former United States Vice President Al Gore and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change share the Nobel Peace Prize. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/2007-ipcc-scientists-draw-greater-attention-to-thepossibilities-of-climate-change/22.05.2011. = = = =.

2008 Global environmental changes spark U.S. election year debate


Unusual weather patterns and ocean life changes are made better known Core samples and carbon dating (no pun intended) reveal that methane gas released 635 million years ago created a global warming catastrophe. Scientists set up models for present day comparison.

Once again United Kingdom rainfall levels are at record lows for the winter months. Global warming studies point to extreme northern and extreme southern latitude weather patterns as indicative of true

global warming effects. 2008 marks the acknowledgment of definitive ocean dead zones now called oxygen deprived hypoxic zones due to their inability to support fish and other marine life. Siberia announces huge releases of methane from thawed tundra similar to several million year old global events.

Environmental issues become an intense U.S. election year topic Global warming becomes an immense political football as U.S. Vice Presidential Candidate, Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska, emphasizes her constituencys direct involvement in climate change effects. Investors begin rampant speculation in world financial markets on possibilities of environmentally based lawsuits affecting corporate bottom lines. A company that is a good candidate for liability is an even better company for a short investment. The rapid relocation of Alaskan native populations In the last 50 years temperatures have risen in Alaska more so than any other spot on the Earth. As a definite global warming result entire villages of coastal Alaska are disappearing into the sea prompting the relocation of native Eskimo populations. Almost 200 native Eskimo Villages are facing critical flooding and forced evacuation. The concept of incapable migration as demonstrated by flora, fauna and wildlife finally juxtaposes with human life. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/2008-global-environmental-changes-spark-u-selection-year-debate/22.05.2011. = = = =.

2009 An increase in scientific and political division


Conflicting arguments from climate change scientists The concept of tipping points, those being if indicators of a nonlinear growth curve so substantial that many scientists believe planetary damage from global warming can no longer be reversed has split the scientific community in two. Whereas 10 years before consensus was divided between camps believing in the existence of global warming as a threat versus a normal cyclical climate change, the issue now becomes whether or not warming is so pervasive as to be unstoppable and irrevocable. Results are release stating that approximately 100,000 years ago a global warming event

caused sea levels to rise by more than 20 feet. Once again mankinds relative participation in climate change is questioned when scientific data is used as a means of discounting industrial global warming cause and effect. The level of CO2 molecules in the atmosphere has now reached 385 parts per 1,000,000. The average five year temperature of the Earth is now 14.5 C. Both the warmest recorded and warmest calculable temperature in approximately 10,000 years. Environmental changes as a direct result of global warming are now spreading at a rate of kilometer per year from the location of the equator northward and south. This rate of expansion makes it physically impossible for plant life to migrate thus placing thousands of species at risk for extinction. Scientists at Stanford University release an analysis showing that the emissions from commercial industries are now responsible for 15 to 20% of all global warming.

The Copenhagen Climate Conference yields no significant agreements The International Energy Agency in cooperation with the government of China announces that CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions from Chinese industry are expected to double over the next decade. China, still considered to be a developing nation, continues to avoid legitimate participation in global warming emissions reduction. The long awaited climate change conference at Copenhagen fails to result in extension of the expiring Kyoto protocols for emissions controls. Even nonbinding regulations are shunned by the vast majority of United Nations conference participants. China, now the worlds largest producer of greenhouse gases announces at the Copenhagen conference plans to reduce its carbon footprint by 40% by the year 2020. This marks the first time that China has agreed to reduce the acceleration of its emissions.

Economic slowdowns still yield increased emissions Despite the existence of a massively recessed economy, global greenhouse gas emissions increased for the year 2009. During a visit to Australia, religious leader, the Dalai lama suggests that global warming is so much so no longer a scientific agenda and now so human an agenda that mankind consider climate change as result of industrial pollution to be the number one priority for global legislative cooperation. A Senate panel in the United States Congress proposes that the U.S. take responsibility for financial assistance to developing aka poor nations in decreasing greenhouse emissions produced as a direct result of US imports. http://globalwarming.com/2010/03/2009-an-increase-in-scientific-and-politicaldivision/22.05.2011. = = = =.