Weather, Water, Energy 9-06-06

A good day for posts here as well as for the last post. Climate Progress has a nice spot on the sea level increases we're looking at (well, actually those of you unfortunate to be alive in the second half of this century). Be sure to check out comments as well. . . . Corrente directs us to two stories, one on the environmental hellhole known and in the future as China and another on how sporadic snowfall over the last decade is starting to (un)fill the Great Lakes. . . . Susie Madrak spies a tale of pollution, effect on hormones, and fish that end up both genders at the same time, which would probably not be as cool as it sounds if similar effects end up in humans (not that I'm unsympathetic to the fish). . . . Better news comes from a WaPo article on how planting trees remains an effective coolant to urban heat. If I wanted WaPo to get a link from this site, I'd post it. If you want to read the story, though, it's easily found and no one's actually stopping you. . . . Here comes the revolution the Boomers have always predicted. Pot growers terracing public lands, endangering endangered species, poisoning with fertilizers . . . all in the name of a good toke. Lord, talk about mixed emotions in CA. . . . Seems Nebraska is having problems storing spent fuel rods from its well-chosen nuclear reactors and no one wants to haul them off. Not a lot new if you've paid attention, but a nicely done summary if you've forgotten or never known. . . . Science Daily has a good story on how decreases in iron available in oceans bring forth brighter flourescence in plankton, signaling not better but worse health, so seeing lovely colors is not a good thing, despite arguments to the contrary. The story also notes that efforts at "seeding" ocean areas with iron to restore plankton levels have not been as successful as desired or as theory has indicated. . . . Stirling Newberry at The Agonist has an insightful piece on how the "giant" new oil find in the Gulf of Mexico really doesn't look to be that big and how the "giant" story was greenhouse gases have been found to be at their highest level in hundreds of thousands of years, and will get worse when we burn the Gulf oil. . . . And along that line, Scientific American's September issue is devoted to the question of energy in a globally warming world. Most of the issue isn't online but the intro article spells out everything you might want to forward to friends, relatives, enemies, and Limbaugh. It also points to possible action and policy proposals you'll want to keep an eye on. Its conclusion will be ours for now:

Fifty-year time frames are planning horizons for futurists, not pragmatic policymakers. Maybe a miraculous new energy technology will simultaneously solve our energy and climate problems during that time, but another scenario is at least as likely: a perceived failure of Kyoto or international bickering over climate ques-tions could foster the burning of abundant coal for electricity and synthetic fuels for transportation, both without meaningful checks on carbon emissions.

A steady chorus of skeptics continues to cast doubt on the massive peer--reviewed scientific literature that forms the cornerstone for a consensus on global warming. "They call it pollution; we call it life," intones a Competitive Enterprise Institute advertisement on the merits of carbon dioxide. Uncertainties about the extent and pace of warming will undoubtedly persist. But the consequences of inaction could be worse than the feared economic damage that has bred overcaution. If we wait for an ice cap to vanish, it will simply be too late.