http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2008/11/28/sue-world-leaders-1-billion-for-global-warming/
Aaron Gray-Block reports from Reuters today:
Tags: Environment, climate treaty, crimes against humanity, global warming, greenhouse emissions, international criminal court...James Lovelock, James Hansen, Mark Lynas, Fred Pearce, Tim Flannery, Sharon Astyk, James Howard Kunstler
AMSTERDAM -- In a global stunt, a U.S. environmental activist is poised to lodge a $1 billion damages class action lawsuit at the International Criminal Court (ICC) against all world leaders for failing to prevent global warming.
Activist and blogger Dan Bloom says he will sue world leaders for “intent to commit manslaughter against future generations of human beings by allowing murderous amounts of fossil fuels to be harvested, burned and sent into the atmosphere as CO2″.
He intends to lodge the lawsuit in the week starting Sunday, Dec. 6.
The prosecutor’s office at the ICC, the world’s first permanent court (pictured below right) for war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity, says it is allowed to receive information on crimes that may fall within the court’s jurisdiction from any source.
“Such information does not per se trigger a judicial proceeding,” the prosecutor’s office hastened to add.
The question is: will or should the prosecutor take on the case?
One might argue in defence that world leaders are in fact trying to impose climate-saving measures. In Vienna last year, almost all rich nations agreed to consider cuts in greenhouse emissions of 25-40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. Talks on a new climate treaty will be held in Poznan, Poland, from Dec. 1-12.
Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U.N. Climate Panel, says the cuts are needed to limit temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius, an amount seen by the EU, some other nations and many environmentalists as a threshold for “dangerous” climate change.
Granted then that there is growing consensus that climate change poses a real threat, is it not only world leaders who are failing to prevent global warming?
Perhaps the global collective of individuals, governments and industry is to blame and the ICC lawsuit a valid publicity stunt in the constant battle to raise awareness and prompt action?
Because it’s action we need — and now, right?
Friday, November 28, 2008
Friday, November 21, 2008
Putting Climate Laggards on Trial
MITCHELL ANDERSON'S BLOG, [DESMOGBLOG] - November 21, 2008
PUTTING CLIMATE LAGGARDS ON TRIAL
by Mitchell Anderson, [published originally on DeSmogBlog]
------------------------------------------
Ballsy.
That is perhaps best word to describe a class action lawsuit filed this week in the International Criminal Court in The Hague in Holland against national governments refusing to act on reducing carbon emissions.
The suit was filed by climate activist Danny Bloom who is asking for "US$1 billion dollars in damages on behalf of future generations of human beings on Earth - if there are any".
No Joke.
The lawsuit is specifically seeking damages from ""all world leaders for intent to commit manslaughter against future generations of human beings by allowing murderous amounts of fossil fuels to be harvested, burned and sent into the atmosphere as CO2, causing possible apocalyptic harm to the Earth's ecosystem and the very future of the human species."
The point of the suit of course is not to wring money out of carbon emitters, but to embarrass the legions of laggard governments in advance of upcoming international climate negotiations next month in Poland.
According to Bloom, the legal action "is about trying to protect future generations of mankind, humankind, and a positive judgment in this case will help prod more people to take the issues of climate change and global warming more seriously. We fully intend to make all world leaders of today responsible for their actions in the present day and age."
This case is a legal long shot no doubt, but Bloom's team said ""it's up to the court to decide whether this case has any merit. We fully expect the court to agree to at least hear the case and make a responsible and measured decision later."
It would also be the first case of its kind to seek to act on behalf of future generations for the irresponsibility of their ancestors.
The need to put world leaders on the hot seat is very real. International climate talks like the one happening next month in Poland have happening for over a decade yet global emissions just keep climbing. A recent report showed that in spite of international commitments, carbon emissions of 40 industrialized countries rose by 2.3 percent between 2000 and 2006.
That said, those countries that signed Kyoto saw their overall emissions fall by 17% below 1990. The disgraceful outlier among those nations is Canada, whose emissions ballooned by over 20% in spite of having ratifying Kyoto.
Canada's Prime Minister Harper has called Kyoto a "mistake" and he seems openly contemptuous of such international efforts to reduce greenhouse gases. Mr. Harper is of course not alone in the responsibility for Canada' terrible climate change record. The Canadian public recently handed him another mandate in a general election.
Back to Mr. Bloom. His lawsuit seems directly targeted towards such irresponsible nations like Canada that have refused to take this issue seriously.
If he wins, Bloom is planning to donate the $1 billion in damages to the Nobel winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Godspeed Mr. Bloom.
------------------
Source: DeSmogBlog
http://www.desmogblog.com
The DeSmogBlog team is led by Jim Hoggan, founder of one of Canada's leading public relations firms. He is also a board member of the David Suzuki Foundation. The DeSmogBlog team is especially grateful to our benefactor John Lefebvre, a lawyer, internet entrepreneur and past-president of NETeller. Editorial assistance on the blog is provided by renowned author Ross Gelbspan and by Richard Littlemore, an award-winning science and magazine writer. Kevin Grandia oversees the project as a whole.
Tags: Mitchell Anderson, Environment, George W. Bush, Government Policy, climate change, global warming, U.S. Senate Committee On The Environment And Public Works,
Mitchell Anderson's blog [Login or register at DeSmogBlog to post comments]
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Class action lawsuit against world leaders for allowing global warming being filed at the International Criminal Court in the Hague
Class action lawsuit against world leaders for allowing global warming being filed at the International Criminal Court in the Hague
Class action lawsuit against global warming puts world leaders on notice
Nov 06, 3008
Think Don Quixote had it hard tilting at windmills? Now comes climate activist Danny Bloom with a class action lawsuit against all current world leaders for allowing global warming to proceed apace, and he's asking for US1$billion in damages to be paid to future generations of human beings -- "if there are any", he deadpans.
Let's check that again: Bloom is filing his lawsuit at the International Criminal Court in the Hague, the Netherlands, asking for "US$1 billion dollars in damages on behalf of future generations of human beings on Earth."
Bloom said he is filing the lawsuit with the help of a team of pro bono international lawyers to sue -- according to the proposed lawsuit's language -- "all world leaders for intent to commit manslaughter against future generations of human beings by allowing murderous amounts of fossil fuels to be harvested, burned and sent into the atmosphere as CO2, causing possible apocalyptic harm to the Earth's ecosystem and the very future of the human species."
That's strong language, and while it's likely not one giant step for humankind, Bloom says it's another "public wake-up call about the dangers of climate change and global warming pose for the future of the human species."
The 60-year-old climate activist is not kidding. While asking for damages of US$1 billion, Bloom says he and his team plan to donate any damages granted by the court to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- winner of the Novel Prize for Peace in 2007, along with green campaigner Al Gore -- and other groups fighting climate change -- "before it is too late".
The lawsuit, if is accepted by the court, will be the first of its kind to lobby for the welfare and very existence of future generations of human beings, according Bloom.
"This is not about money," according to a press release issued by Bloom's legal team in Boston. "This is about trying to protect future generations of mankind, humankind, and a positive judgment in this case will help prod more people to take the issues of climate change and global warming more seriously. We fully intend to make all world leaders of today responsible for their actions in the present day and age."
When asked what the likelihood of such a class action lawsuit being heard by the court in the Hague, a representative of the legal team said: "It's up to the court to decide whether this case has any merit. We fully expect the court to agree to at least hear the case and make a responsible and measured decision later."
The ICC currently has 108 member nations and was set up in 1998. It began hearing cases in 2002 and was established as a permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression, although it cannot currently exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.
Don Quixote, move over. A global class action lawsuit against global warmings is now making headlines around the world, and not everyone is laughing. Bloom admits that many people "are laughing", but insists that he is "sincere in trying to issue this wake up call about the dangers of climate change".
A psychiatrist at a teaching hospital in the midwest said, when asked about this lawsuit: "What an ingenious idea. Although I have
no knowledge about whether this could ever have any practical merit,
it certainly has psychological merit. One of the main psychological challenges of climate change is to make it seem more immediate and important to people."
Friday, October 31, 2008
Life in future "climate retreats" for survivors of global warming -- fact or fiction?
Life in future "climate retreats" for survivors of global warming -- fact or fiction?
Locations: USA, Canada, Europe, New Zealand, Australia, Asia, Africa
Photo above of the Princess Elisabeth Station is (c) 2008 International Polar Foundation / René Robert
By Rachel Chan
CNA staff reporter, TAIPEI
Not a conjecture or a theory, climate change is with us. With the future unfolding before our eyes, more humans could end up living in national or UN-funded "climate retreats" as they might be a last resort with tolerable temperatures should there be a mass human die-off due to the impact of global warming.
Although to most people it is no more based on fact than a sci-fi movie synopsis, one Taiwanese artist and an American blogger have teamed up to visualize the idea of a possible future world -- "climate retreat living pods" or " sustainable population retreats (SPRs) " -- in three-dimensional illustrations, to call for the public's attention to the issue.
After two months of pondering over the idea, Deng Cheng-hong, a visual designer living in Taiwan, put climate activist Dan Bloom's imagination into a series of three-dimensional illustrations using computer software.
One 26-year-old in Tahiti blogged on the Web site set up by Bloom, saying that he was so touched by the pictures that he wants to work harder to stop global warming, starting now.
Deng, who is the first person in the world to make these climate retreat living pod images about what the future might look like, said that as global warming is an "inconvenient truth" that humans are forced to face, he hopes his illustrations can serve as an alarm bell.
Deng said: "I hope this will give people a clearer idea of what climate retreats could be and get their attention to do something about global warming."
Working with Deng, Bloom has been blogging about the concept of climate retreats for two years. He said the idea of climate retreats are a possible adaptation strategy for survivors of global warming in the far distant future -- perhaps by the year 2100, according to him.
Bloom said his idea was inspired by acclaimed British scientist and environmentalist James Lovelock, who has done pioneering work on global warming issues.
Writing in the British newspaper The Independent in January 2006, Lovelock argued that as a result of global warming "billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable" by the end of the 21st Century.
Bloom said climate retreats are designed to house humans in the future, in the event that global warming causes some regions near the equator and in some temperate zones of the Earth to become uninhabitable for a long period of time.
"I feel this is a wake up call about the future," he said.
Bloom admitted that his proposal is no more than a "what if" scenario, but said he wanted to make people aware of the issue of global warming.
"I'm not talking about the end of the world and I don't want young people to feel hopeless, " he said. "I'm talking about in case of emergency, people can survive in climate retreats and carry on."
Describing Deng as a genius for putting his concepts into visual illustrations, Bloom said he was energized by Deng's work, which has become his tool to communicate around the world.
"I do not want to scare people. They might well call this science fiction, but they can look at the pictures and make up their minds slowly, " he said, adding that climate retreats are an idea of emergency shelter that can be built anywhere in the world -- such as England, Iceland, Greenland or Norway.
"Deng and I and a small team we have assembled are trying to do something to help people in the future work to make a better world, " according to Bloom, who added that this is also a long-term work that takes everyone's effort to push it further.
"I hope to attract a larger team of designers and scientists to continue work on the idea for generations, " Bloom said, urging anyone interested in the concept to visit http://pcillu101.blogspot.com, a Web site he created to showcase images and ideas about climate retreats.
Deng said that "many people know that global warming is true and I think my illustrations of climate retreat living pods can help to them to do something."
Climate Retreat Living Pods for "Climate Refugees" in Temperate Zones and Polar Regions in Year 2500 AD
Climate Retreat Living Pods designed by Deng Cheng-hong in Taiwan.
(c) 2008-3008-4008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Interview with Dot Earth blogger and New York Times reporter Andrew C. Revkin
Mother Jones magazine recently interviewed Andrew C. Revkin about reporting on the environment. Read text below:
INTERVIEW: New York Times environmental writer Andrew C. Revkin on Dot
Earth, intellectual silos, and why "incremental" stories die in the
Times newsroom.
Interview by: Kiera Butler
Kiera Butler is an associate editor at Mother Jones.
November/December 2008 Issue
Mother Jones: How does "whiplash coverage" of global warming damage
people's understanding of the science?
Andrew C. Revkin: It's one of the many reasons this issue hasn't
grabbed hold of people in a concrete way. The aspects of global
warming that matter most to people—how rapidly will the seas rise? Are
hurricanes already getting stronger? How strong will they get as a
result of warming?—those are still immersed in complexity. So in those
realms that catch people's attention most, or that get used as symbols
by environmental campaigners, those facets really do come with
significant back-and-forthing. Early stage science always has these
disputes, and they're normal. You've heard a lot about the deniers and
the professional campaign to muddy the waters and highlight
uncertainty—that's another factor, but this is perhaps even more
profound because it's deeper and not a function of some campaign. It's
just reality. For the average person who's not attuned to the rhythms
of science it just looks like one thing: "Oh, they're questioning
aspects of global warming. I don't have to worry."
MJ: So what's the alternative?
ACR: The responsibility of the scientist or journalist is to convey
the context. If you're talking about the Arctic Sea ice, you have to
embrace the reality that there's a huge number of other things that
influence that on a year-to-year basis. So, when I wrote a long story
about the retreat of sea ice last year, I made clear it could go the
other way for a while, and that doesn't mean we don't know that a
warmer world will have less sea ice. It just means there's a lot of
variability and people can pay too much attention to the big swings in
one direction or the other.
MJ: There was this Project for Excellence in Journalism finding that
said the Wall Street Journal and New York Times have basically buried
most environmental stories—climate change or otherwise.
ACR: I can tell you many reasons why environmental stories don't get
adequate attention in conventional media. That's one reason I started
Dot Earth. Basically, environmental risks don't fit the norms of
journalism. They're incremental. We hate incremental. That word is
death for a story at the New York Times. "Oh, isn't that story
incremental?" In the newsroom discussion, that really is a guarantee
your story is going to get buried or cut.
MJ: What exactly do you mean by incremental?
ACR: Well, "Didn't we already know the sea ice was retreating? Oh it's
retreating more. Didn't we already cover global warming? Or
population? So you say another African monkey is vanishing?" That
aspect of it is very clear, and we demand a peg: Why now? Why are we
writing about this now? And it's always things that happen today. I've
written two book chapters on the media and the environment, both of
which go into this. The things that happen today are an earthquake,
another bomb in Iraq, some big jolt on Wall Street in oil prices, and
then you have some new study on drought patterns from climate change.
Or another little incremental improvement in photovoltaics. Where do
those fit in to the daily stream? They don't. The same goes for other
creeping issues. The daily loss of thousands of people from completely
avoidable illness from drinking polluted or tainted water and
breathing sooty air. These other things just don't fit in to our
template of news. That's another reason I started Dot Earth.
MJ: What's the response been like?
ACR: When it started, it was nothing. Now it's getting viewed about a
half million times a month. It's not like our health and wellness
blogs, but definitely a significant audience. So, build it and they
will come. And it really seems to work. There are some great websites
out there that are really great, but they're more [about lifestyle].
I'm not trying to plow that terrain—what's the coolest new gadget for
your electric lawnmower. I could have a bigger audience, I think, if I
focused on lifestyle stuff, but I really am trying to stay rigorously
to the fairly wonky question, but the one key question of our time,
which is how we head toward 9 billion people with the fewest regrets.
That automatically is framed around energy, climate, biodiversity,
equity.
MJ: You've been focusing on those issues for more than 20 years. With
respect to the global warming stuff, how have people's reactions to
your stories changed over the years?
ACR: The stories that have gotten the most action and the most play
are on the politics, which frustrates me, but they're kind of
necessary. When I exposed what the former oil lobbyist was doing in
the White House, when I broke the story of what was going on with Jim
Hansen and other scientists at NASA, those far and away were the most
consequential if you measure influence by people leaving jobs and
policies changing. It's almost unfortunate, because they're in the
realm of politics that tends to be the most polarized aspect of this.
Every time someone reads a story about the politics poisoning the
global warming stuff it makes it feel like a political story, meaning
it's Us and Them, instead of what it is: this profound challenge we
face given our energy norms right now, the fuels of convenience toward
something new. No matter what the politics are, it's still an enormous
transformation that has to take place. So I'm a little frustrated with
my own coverage sometimes.
MJ: The debate over whether climate change exists—is it really finally dead?
ACR: There are still people in this country and others who essentially
live in intellectual silos and either read Mother Jones or watch Fox
News, based on their worldview. And they pick information out that
reinforces it rather than keeping an open mind. So, that's another
reason I frame Dot Earth differently from most blogs. I'm trying
mostly to ask questions. And not just trying to stake out a position
on something, but also trying to define the stuff we agree on. I'm
having battles with comment posters trying to insert a little sense of
order so it's not just a long pissing match between the edges, which
is, again, what I think a lot of the blogosphere is tending to do.
MJ: Wired's green issue said keep driving your SUV, use plastic bags,
do whatever you need to do; what we need to stop global warming is
large-scale policy change. So they set up a debate between the policy
people and the conservation people. Is that something you see in the
media a lot?
ACR: I think some of my coverage has reflected that conservation is
only the first step. Energy efficiency can slow growth in emissions,
but as you look at the global picture you're left with fewer options.
We're left with rising carbon dioxide concentrations from here to
eternity. It's one of the most inconvenient realities in this whole
thing. There are others who would say this is still very much about
personal lifestyle stuff, but it's pretty clear that just changing
cars—if you think that gets you off the hook for also supporting an
incredibly ambitious energy research initiative, then you're just
fantasizing.
MJ: But it's not one or the other, is it?
ACR: Of course not. In fact, the positions that make the most sense
are those who say, "Look, you need an accelerated shift away from the
fuels of the last 200 years, basically everything we've built our
modern economy on." It will not happen through incremental change. It
requires the kind of initiatives, both socially, politically, and
ecologically, we're not familiar with. The Manhattan Project model
needs to be applied socially. You need to redo the tax code, the way
Gore and some of the others have proposed to really propel things
economically in a way that would be viable politically and effective.
You also need, for sure, an energy quest from the socket in your
house, to the laboratory, to the boardroom. Multigenerational,
sustained, evolving relationship with energy. You do need both, in the
end. And then when you bring in the developing-country side of things,
you realize that's where the new technology options must come in. You
simply will not have time for China to grow through the old
20th-century-style pollution bulge and come out more prosperous and
able to deal with greenhouse gases. You can't have both sides, can't
have that curve happen fast enough just through the normal,
traditional process. And that means someone, probably today's rich
countries, according to a heap of people I talk to on this, who have
to then essentially find a way to help pay for the incremental costs.
MJ: Is there a green bubble right now?
ACR: You never know you're in a bubble until it pops. But Columbia
Journalism Review recently did a piece examining how many green
magazines and green special sections in newspapers have proliferated,
including here at the New York Times. It sure looks, smells, and
tastes like bubble. There, again, public attitudes will largely
determine what happens. There is the question of, "Are words worthless
in the climate fight?," which was the title of one of my blog posts
early on. For the moment I'd say the answer is yes. Words may very
well be worthless. I quoted Paul Hawken, who may very well be the
ultimate green communicator, and said until there's some huge eruption
from nature saying "You've really screwed up humanity, better really
get busy," he doesn't even really think people will act meaningfully.
MJ: So what would it take? What kind of scale are we talking here?
ACR: Well, who knows. I wrote about the earthquakes in China. Oregon
has 1,300 schools, with a quarter million students who are at equal
risk of death and destruction that was seen in Sichuan Province, and
this is one of the richest states, or at least parts of it. Because
they haven't actually experienced the earthquake yet, they're still in
slow mo when it comes to reinforcing schools that they know will fall
down in the next earthquake. And they know the earthquake is coming.
So what does it take? That's why I don't just focus on climate. I
focus on this issue: why, even in a world with greatly advanced
science and technology giving us ever-clearer senses of risks, we
still don't act meaningfully to mitigate them. And climate is just the
ultimate example of that. It's just the slowest time scale.
MJ: Have we passed the point of no return?
ACR: The IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] says that
even if we had a freeze in emissions at 2000 levels, the climate will
keep warming. Even if the entire developed world turned off every
machine right now the growth in emissions from the developed world
will keep emissions rising and concentrations rising for decades.
There's already enough warming in the system and ocean heat content
that they already expect another degree or so of warming. Even if we
had complete global economic meltdown. So, we're in for a lot more
warming. The question is: Is the world serious about limiting the pace
and extent of that?
MJ: If we've passed the point of no return, what's the point of even trying?
ACR: There is that nihilistic approach, sure. The answer that's most
convincing is that what we're talking about here is an energy
revolution, not a climate revolution. The world needs, will need, at
least double or maybe more than the current amount we get from fossil
fuels in the next several decades if today's poor people and the 2
billion who are coming are to have a remote chance of a decent life.
And because energy is everything. Energy is food, whether it's a
tractor or growing something efficiently. Energy is water, because of
desalinization or filtering. Energy is everything. A lot of people
have been making this point for a long time and haven't really been
heard adequately. I'm not talking about the green-jobs argument. I'm
talking about the transition to leave a sustainable world with people
living decent lives with populations stabilized, which will happen by
one means or another, you have to have energy to have that happen. And
once that happens—I talk to young people who ask what they can do. I
just say, "Geez, jump in." Whether you're a sociologist or an artist,
an innovator, an engineer or a tinkerer, a communicator, if you can
just shape your entire life around some facet of this transformation.
And that to me is a really good story. That is the good news story.
We're an amazingly adaptive and resilient species. Once we put our
mind to that, I have no doubt we'll figure a way through here that
won't lead to utter calamity.
This Web exclusive was a supplement to the November/December 2008 print
issue of Mother Jones.
Kiera Butler is an associate editor at Mother Jones.
INTERVIEW: New York Times environmental writer Andrew C. Revkin on Dot
Earth, intellectual silos, and why "incremental" stories die in the
Times newsroom.
Interview by: Kiera Butler
Kiera Butler is an associate editor at Mother Jones.
November/December 2008 Issue
Mother Jones: How does "whiplash coverage" of global warming damage
people's understanding of the science?
Andrew C. Revkin: It's one of the many reasons this issue hasn't
grabbed hold of people in a concrete way. The aspects of global
warming that matter most to people—how rapidly will the seas rise? Are
hurricanes already getting stronger? How strong will they get as a
result of warming?—those are still immersed in complexity. So in those
realms that catch people's attention most, or that get used as symbols
by environmental campaigners, those facets really do come with
significant back-and-forthing. Early stage science always has these
disputes, and they're normal. You've heard a lot about the deniers and
the professional campaign to muddy the waters and highlight
uncertainty—that's another factor, but this is perhaps even more
profound because it's deeper and not a function of some campaign. It's
just reality. For the average person who's not attuned to the rhythms
of science it just looks like one thing: "Oh, they're questioning
aspects of global warming. I don't have to worry."
MJ: So what's the alternative?
ACR: The responsibility of the scientist or journalist is to convey
the context. If you're talking about the Arctic Sea ice, you have to
embrace the reality that there's a huge number of other things that
influence that on a year-to-year basis. So, when I wrote a long story
about the retreat of sea ice last year, I made clear it could go the
other way for a while, and that doesn't mean we don't know that a
warmer world will have less sea ice. It just means there's a lot of
variability and people can pay too much attention to the big swings in
one direction or the other.
MJ: There was this Project for Excellence in Journalism finding that
said the Wall Street Journal and New York Times have basically buried
most environmental stories—climate change or otherwise.
ACR: I can tell you many reasons why environmental stories don't get
adequate attention in conventional media. That's one reason I started
Dot Earth. Basically, environmental risks don't fit the norms of
journalism. They're incremental. We hate incremental. That word is
death for a story at the New York Times. "Oh, isn't that story
incremental?" In the newsroom discussion, that really is a guarantee
your story is going to get buried or cut.
MJ: What exactly do you mean by incremental?
ACR: Well, "Didn't we already know the sea ice was retreating? Oh it's
retreating more. Didn't we already cover global warming? Or
population? So you say another African monkey is vanishing?" That
aspect of it is very clear, and we demand a peg: Why now? Why are we
writing about this now? And it's always things that happen today. I've
written two book chapters on the media and the environment, both of
which go into this. The things that happen today are an earthquake,
another bomb in Iraq, some big jolt on Wall Street in oil prices, and
then you have some new study on drought patterns from climate change.
Or another little incremental improvement in photovoltaics. Where do
those fit in to the daily stream? They don't. The same goes for other
creeping issues. The daily loss of thousands of people from completely
avoidable illness from drinking polluted or tainted water and
breathing sooty air. These other things just don't fit in to our
template of news. That's another reason I started Dot Earth.
MJ: What's the response been like?
ACR: When it started, it was nothing. Now it's getting viewed about a
half million times a month. It's not like our health and wellness
blogs, but definitely a significant audience. So, build it and they
will come. And it really seems to work. There are some great websites
out there that are really great, but they're more [about lifestyle].
I'm not trying to plow that terrain—what's the coolest new gadget for
your electric lawnmower. I could have a bigger audience, I think, if I
focused on lifestyle stuff, but I really am trying to stay rigorously
to the fairly wonky question, but the one key question of our time,
which is how we head toward 9 billion people with the fewest regrets.
That automatically is framed around energy, climate, biodiversity,
equity.
MJ: You've been focusing on those issues for more than 20 years. With
respect to the global warming stuff, how have people's reactions to
your stories changed over the years?
ACR: The stories that have gotten the most action and the most play
are on the politics, which frustrates me, but they're kind of
necessary. When I exposed what the former oil lobbyist was doing in
the White House, when I broke the story of what was going on with Jim
Hansen and other scientists at NASA, those far and away were the most
consequential if you measure influence by people leaving jobs and
policies changing. It's almost unfortunate, because they're in the
realm of politics that tends to be the most polarized aspect of this.
Every time someone reads a story about the politics poisoning the
global warming stuff it makes it feel like a political story, meaning
it's Us and Them, instead of what it is: this profound challenge we
face given our energy norms right now, the fuels of convenience toward
something new. No matter what the politics are, it's still an enormous
transformation that has to take place. So I'm a little frustrated with
my own coverage sometimes.
MJ: The debate over whether climate change exists—is it really finally dead?
ACR: There are still people in this country and others who essentially
live in intellectual silos and either read Mother Jones or watch Fox
News, based on their worldview. And they pick information out that
reinforces it rather than keeping an open mind. So, that's another
reason I frame Dot Earth differently from most blogs. I'm trying
mostly to ask questions. And not just trying to stake out a position
on something, but also trying to define the stuff we agree on. I'm
having battles with comment posters trying to insert a little sense of
order so it's not just a long pissing match between the edges, which
is, again, what I think a lot of the blogosphere is tending to do.
MJ: Wired's green issue said keep driving your SUV, use plastic bags,
do whatever you need to do; what we need to stop global warming is
large-scale policy change. So they set up a debate between the policy
people and the conservation people. Is that something you see in the
media a lot?
ACR: I think some of my coverage has reflected that conservation is
only the first step. Energy efficiency can slow growth in emissions,
but as you look at the global picture you're left with fewer options.
We're left with rising carbon dioxide concentrations from here to
eternity. It's one of the most inconvenient realities in this whole
thing. There are others who would say this is still very much about
personal lifestyle stuff, but it's pretty clear that just changing
cars—if you think that gets you off the hook for also supporting an
incredibly ambitious energy research initiative, then you're just
fantasizing.
MJ: But it's not one or the other, is it?
ACR: Of course not. In fact, the positions that make the most sense
are those who say, "Look, you need an accelerated shift away from the
fuels of the last 200 years, basically everything we've built our
modern economy on." It will not happen through incremental change. It
requires the kind of initiatives, both socially, politically, and
ecologically, we're not familiar with. The Manhattan Project model
needs to be applied socially. You need to redo the tax code, the way
Gore and some of the others have proposed to really propel things
economically in a way that would be viable politically and effective.
You also need, for sure, an energy quest from the socket in your
house, to the laboratory, to the boardroom. Multigenerational,
sustained, evolving relationship with energy. You do need both, in the
end. And then when you bring in the developing-country side of things,
you realize that's where the new technology options must come in. You
simply will not have time for China to grow through the old
20th-century-style pollution bulge and come out more prosperous and
able to deal with greenhouse gases. You can't have both sides, can't
have that curve happen fast enough just through the normal,
traditional process. And that means someone, probably today's rich
countries, according to a heap of people I talk to on this, who have
to then essentially find a way to help pay for the incremental costs.
MJ: Is there a green bubble right now?
ACR: You never know you're in a bubble until it pops. But Columbia
Journalism Review recently did a piece examining how many green
magazines and green special sections in newspapers have proliferated,
including here at the New York Times. It sure looks, smells, and
tastes like bubble. There, again, public attitudes will largely
determine what happens. There is the question of, "Are words worthless
in the climate fight?," which was the title of one of my blog posts
early on. For the moment I'd say the answer is yes. Words may very
well be worthless. I quoted Paul Hawken, who may very well be the
ultimate green communicator, and said until there's some huge eruption
from nature saying "You've really screwed up humanity, better really
get busy," he doesn't even really think people will act meaningfully.
MJ: So what would it take? What kind of scale are we talking here?
ACR: Well, who knows. I wrote about the earthquakes in China. Oregon
has 1,300 schools, with a quarter million students who are at equal
risk of death and destruction that was seen in Sichuan Province, and
this is one of the richest states, or at least parts of it. Because
they haven't actually experienced the earthquake yet, they're still in
slow mo when it comes to reinforcing schools that they know will fall
down in the next earthquake. And they know the earthquake is coming.
So what does it take? That's why I don't just focus on climate. I
focus on this issue: why, even in a world with greatly advanced
science and technology giving us ever-clearer senses of risks, we
still don't act meaningfully to mitigate them. And climate is just the
ultimate example of that. It's just the slowest time scale.
MJ: Have we passed the point of no return?
ACR: The IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] says that
even if we had a freeze in emissions at 2000 levels, the climate will
keep warming. Even if the entire developed world turned off every
machine right now the growth in emissions from the developed world
will keep emissions rising and concentrations rising for decades.
There's already enough warming in the system and ocean heat content
that they already expect another degree or so of warming. Even if we
had complete global economic meltdown. So, we're in for a lot more
warming. The question is: Is the world serious about limiting the pace
and extent of that?
MJ: If we've passed the point of no return, what's the point of even trying?
ACR: There is that nihilistic approach, sure. The answer that's most
convincing is that what we're talking about here is an energy
revolution, not a climate revolution. The world needs, will need, at
least double or maybe more than the current amount we get from fossil
fuels in the next several decades if today's poor people and the 2
billion who are coming are to have a remote chance of a decent life.
And because energy is everything. Energy is food, whether it's a
tractor or growing something efficiently. Energy is water, because of
desalinization or filtering. Energy is everything. A lot of people
have been making this point for a long time and haven't really been
heard adequately. I'm not talking about the green-jobs argument. I'm
talking about the transition to leave a sustainable world with people
living decent lives with populations stabilized, which will happen by
one means or another, you have to have energy to have that happen. And
once that happens—I talk to young people who ask what they can do. I
just say, "Geez, jump in." Whether you're a sociologist or an artist,
an innovator, an engineer or a tinkerer, a communicator, if you can
just shape your entire life around some facet of this transformation.
And that to me is a really good story. That is the good news story.
We're an amazingly adaptive and resilient species. Once we put our
mind to that, I have no doubt we'll figure a way through here that
won't lead to utter calamity.
This Web exclusive was a supplement to the November/December 2008 print
issue of Mother Jones.
Kiera Butler is an associate editor at Mother Jones.
Global warming 'could see "Lifeboat NZ" swamped by refugees'
Gareth Renowden: Global warming 'could see Lifeboat New Zealand swamped by refugees'
August 1, 3007
By Angela Gregory
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/climate-change/news/article.cfm?c_id=26&objectid=10454999
New Zealand could become a climate change lifeboat, swamped with returning expats, Australians and thousands of refugees from the Pacific as the weather plays havoc around the globe.
A book launched in Auckland tonight, with Climate Change Issues Minister David Parker as a guest speaker, focuses on the impact of global warming on New Zealand.
Hot Topic author Gareth Renowden explores the latest evidence from the fourth assessment report of the inter-governmental Panel On Climate Change in a New Zealand context.
Renowden, a science writer from North Canterbury, said New Zealand would not feel the rate of change as much as most countries as it was surrounded by the vast Southern Ocean which would warm relatively slowly.
That meant New Zealand would be perceived as a good place to live and its agriculture would even get a boost from the extra warmth.
"What happens if climate refugees from the Pacific or Asia knock on the door, or our half-million expat Kiwis all decide to come home to ride out the rigours of climate change?"
"They want to know which signs they should look for showing that climate change is happening. My answer is to look at the Arctic and when large chunks of Greenland turn into ice cubes ... What's happening there is already dramatic. If it gets worse, get worried."
Renowden said it was possible that Australians, who could live in New Zealand as of right, might want to shift here as the heat there turned up, with more droughts, a greater risk of bush fires and increased stresses on water and agriculture.
Pacific nations faced more intense tropical cyclones and rising sea levels which penetrated groundwater and increased the risk of storm surges.
"If we are seen to be a good place to escape the worst of climate change, lifeboat New Zealand could quickly become overcrowded. Managing immigration will be even more of a political hot potato if thousands of people are knocking at the door."
Land values and house prices would inevitably increase, he said.
Despite New Zealand coming off quite well, it was not totally off the hook.. Isolation would again present challenges because of the volumes of food miles incurred in exporting.
An increased focus on carbon footprints and more carbon labelling would become an important challenge.
"It is already big in Britain and beginning to be in Europe and spreading around the world ... It's important that businesses be proactive and creative in addressing such issues."
Renowden said low-carbon shipping would be sensible.
Already considerable work had been done overseas to provide wind power for cargo ships with computer-controlled aerofoils or large kites .
Such systems not only cut fuel costs, and therefore carbon emissions, but fitted nicely with New Zealand's image as a sailing nation, he said.
"I'm looking forward to seeing the first New Zealand-built wine clipper arriving in the port of London - clean, green, carbon neutral and a fantastic bit of national PR."
Renowden said governments should consider how the economy might respond if air travel was limited.
Air New Zealand could consider strategies like funding large scale possum control so regenerated native forest could offset long-haul emissions. The airline and tourism industry would enjoy a strong selling point.
Electricity and carbon-based fuels were also pivotal issues, he said.
"Building a low carbon energy infrastructure might mean wind farms in iconic landscapes or more hydro power in fragile river systems. Weaning our transport system off fossil fuels could transform agriculture and the landscape as crops are grown for biofuels."
August 1, 3007
By Angela Gregory
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/climate-change/news/article.cfm?c_id=26&objectid=10454999
New Zealand could become a climate change lifeboat, swamped with returning expats, Australians and thousands of refugees from the Pacific as the weather plays havoc around the globe.
A book launched in Auckland tonight, with Climate Change Issues Minister David Parker as a guest speaker, focuses on the impact of global warming on New Zealand.
Hot Topic author Gareth Renowden explores the latest evidence from the fourth assessment report of the inter-governmental Panel On Climate Change in a New Zealand context.
Renowden, a science writer from North Canterbury, said New Zealand would not feel the rate of change as much as most countries as it was surrounded by the vast Southern Ocean which would warm relatively slowly.
That meant New Zealand would be perceived as a good place to live and its agriculture would even get a boost from the extra warmth.
"What happens if climate refugees from the Pacific or Asia knock on the door, or our half-million expat Kiwis all decide to come home to ride out the rigours of climate change?"
"They want to know which signs they should look for showing that climate change is happening. My answer is to look at the Arctic and when large chunks of Greenland turn into ice cubes ... What's happening there is already dramatic. If it gets worse, get worried."
Renowden said it was possible that Australians, who could live in New Zealand as of right, might want to shift here as the heat there turned up, with more droughts, a greater risk of bush fires and increased stresses on water and agriculture.
Pacific nations faced more intense tropical cyclones and rising sea levels which penetrated groundwater and increased the risk of storm surges.
"If we are seen to be a good place to escape the worst of climate change, lifeboat New Zealand could quickly become overcrowded. Managing immigration will be even more of a political hot potato if thousands of people are knocking at the door."
Land values and house prices would inevitably increase, he said.
Despite New Zealand coming off quite well, it was not totally off the hook.. Isolation would again present challenges because of the volumes of food miles incurred in exporting.
An increased focus on carbon footprints and more carbon labelling would become an important challenge.
"It is already big in Britain and beginning to be in Europe and spreading around the world ... It's important that businesses be proactive and creative in addressing such issues."
Renowden said low-carbon shipping would be sensible.
Already considerable work had been done overseas to provide wind power for cargo ships with computer-controlled aerofoils or large kites .
Such systems not only cut fuel costs, and therefore carbon emissions, but fitted nicely with New Zealand's image as a sailing nation, he said.
"I'm looking forward to seeing the first New Zealand-built wine clipper arriving in the port of London - clean, green, carbon neutral and a fantastic bit of national PR."
Renowden said governments should consider how the economy might respond if air travel was limited.
Air New Zealand could consider strategies like funding large scale possum control so regenerated native forest could offset long-haul emissions. The airline and tourism industry would enjoy a strong selling point.
Electricity and carbon-based fuels were also pivotal issues, he said.
"Building a low carbon energy infrastructure might mean wind farms in iconic landscapes or more hydro power in fragile river systems. Weaning our transport system off fossil fuels could transform agriculture and the landscape as crops are grown for biofuels."
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
"Failsafe" asks vital questions about world's future and climate change
Chilling but hopeful book about future asks important questions
The book is titled "Failsafe", and it's written
by Canadian professor Ian Prattis. He says that humankind is slowly
but surely hurtling towards a series of cataclysmic economic, social
and ecological events that will take future generations to the brink
of destruction. But Prattis remains optimistic in the long run, saying
that "our hardwired instinct for self-preservation can save us -- but
only if it triggers new ways of thinking, being and interacting".
Published recently by Manor House Publishing in Canada, the book,
which retails for CD$24.95, comes just as a time when global
economies are flirting with possible collapse. The book is now
available in Chapters/Indigo stores across Canada as well as on their
website and on Amazon's order site.
The book comes with a forward by Canadian environmentalist David
Suzuki, and one observer sees "Failsafe" as "a critical response to
James Lovelock's "The Revenge of Gaia", which painted a darker picture
for the future of humanity than Prattis does.
In fact, while Prattis believes that the current situation is dire --
and will likely get worse -- human beings are programmed literally
with what he calls a "failsafe", which will ultimately kick in,
unleashed by humans' will to survive. The book provides an in-depth
understanding of global eco-crises and issues a call to change the
existing world order by arriving at a deep spiritual understanding of
what needs to be done. Step by step methods are laid out on how to
usher in a new era of planetary care, social justice and peace. The
perfect book for these troubling times.
Prattis asks a vital question in his book: "Can we fix the planet?"
His answer is that that question is wrong author question.
"Our present values and patterns of consumption are the architects of
the present global emergency<" he insists. "The right question is can
we fix ourselves?"
"Failsafe" describes how human ignorance will rule until the global
situation deteriorates to a breaking point. This breaking point will
then act as a catalyst, activating consciousness so it is propelled
into expansion, deliberation and change.
Suzuki says in his introduction: "With this book, Ian Prattis offers a
way to a perceptual transformation that is absolutely critical if we
are to find a truly sustainable future."
The book shows that we have the capacity to make positive changes:
That there is hope for future generations to occupy a healthy planet
and faith in the human consciousness to save the planet. And yes,
"Failsafe" provides good examples and guidance for transformation and
change.
Currently a Professor Emeritus at Carleton University in Ottawa,
Prattis is also the founder of Friends for Peace -- a coalition of
environmental groups that works for peace and planetary care. Read his
book with planetary care.
The book is titled "Failsafe", and it's written
by Canadian professor Ian Prattis. He says that humankind is slowly
but surely hurtling towards a series of cataclysmic economic, social
and ecological events that will take future generations to the brink
of destruction. But Prattis remains optimistic in the long run, saying
that "our hardwired instinct for self-preservation can save us -- but
only if it triggers new ways of thinking, being and interacting".
Published recently by Manor House Publishing in Canada, the book,
which retails for CD$24.95, comes just as a time when global
economies are flirting with possible collapse. The book is now
available in Chapters/Indigo stores across Canada as well as on their
website and on Amazon's order site.
The book comes with a forward by Canadian environmentalist David
Suzuki, and one observer sees "Failsafe" as "a critical response to
James Lovelock's "The Revenge of Gaia", which painted a darker picture
for the future of humanity than Prattis does.
In fact, while Prattis believes that the current situation is dire --
and will likely get worse -- human beings are programmed literally
with what he calls a "failsafe", which will ultimately kick in,
unleashed by humans' will to survive. The book provides an in-depth
understanding of global eco-crises and issues a call to change the
existing world order by arriving at a deep spiritual understanding of
what needs to be done. Step by step methods are laid out on how to
usher in a new era of planetary care, social justice and peace. The
perfect book for these troubling times.
Prattis asks a vital question in his book: "Can we fix the planet?"
His answer is that that question is wrong author question.
"Our present values and patterns of consumption are the architects of
the present global emergency<" he insists. "The right question is can
we fix ourselves?"
"Failsafe" describes how human ignorance will rule until the global
situation deteriorates to a breaking point. This breaking point will
then act as a catalyst, activating consciousness so it is propelled
into expansion, deliberation and change.
Suzuki says in his introduction: "With this book, Ian Prattis offers a
way to a perceptual transformation that is absolutely critical if we
are to find a truly sustainable future."
The book shows that we have the capacity to make positive changes:
That there is hope for future generations to occupy a healthy planet
and faith in the human consciousness to save the planet. And yes,
"Failsafe" provides good examples and guidance for transformation and
change.
Currently a Professor Emeritus at Carleton University in Ottawa,
Prattis is also the founder of Friends for Peace -- a coalition of
environmental groups that works for peace and planetary care. Read his
book with planetary care.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Coral ecosystems are dying fast and could disappear completely by 2100
Coral ecosystems are dying fast and could disappear completely by 2100
TAIPEI, TAIWAN
A Taiwanese research project has shown
that garbage is giving the oceans "indigestion" and that CO2 emissions
could kill off coral ecosystems worldwide by 2100. That's what Allen
Chen, an associate researcher at the Research Center for Biodiversity
in Taiwan, says, and he wasn't mincing his words.
"If humans do not cut their carbon emissions, carbon concentrations in
the atmosphere could reach 500 parts per million (ppm) between 2050
and 2100, raising the world's temperature by 2 degrees Centrigrade or
more and would cause coral to stop building reefs," Chen says, adding:
"The disappearance of the coral ecosystem would produce a ripple
effect and be detrimental to human survival."
Lin Chia-chi, a reporter for the English-language daily Taipei Times,
recently covered this story, noting: "Twenty years ago, Taiwan's sea
floors were still 80 percent covered with coral, but now rapid
increases in human activity has severely tipped the balance of coral
reef ecosystems."
Lin quotede Chen as saying that except for the eastern seas off
Taiwan's main island, where some 70 percent of the sea floor is still
coral-rich, sea regions near areas of frequent human activity, such as
Green Island and Penghu, are now only 45 percent covered in coral.
Chen added: "The observation rate of some types of fish is now close
to zero."
Lin quoted Chen as also saying that fish are not only the stars of
coral reef systems, but they also stabilize the food chain within
them. When they reduce in number, it is an indicator that the reef is
not functioning well, Chen told Lin.
Chen, citing a paper published in the journal Nature last year, said
that 25 percent of the current carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
(380ppm) dissolves in water, producing carbonic acid. The acidity in
the ocean could result in the retardation of calcium carbonate
formation, because it would lower the concentration of carbonate in
the water, which in turn would slow the calcium carbonate from being
accumulated and built into coral reefs.
"In addition, ocean habitats were increasingly damaged and seas were
filled with plastic bags, bottles, broken nets and straws that would
not decompose for centuries," Chen was quoted by the Taipei Times as
saying. "The trash was causing the oceans to suffer from 'indigestion'
and killing coral systems".
To save the oceans, people need to change their habits, Chen and other
Taiwanese researchers involved with the center insist.
What actions
can people take? "People should stop using disposable chopsticks, cut
back on drinking bottled water, drive less, recycle and refuse to eat
seafood that cannot be bred in fish farms, such as lobster," Chen was
quoted as saying.
Latest pronouncement on climate
change by James Lovelock
British scientist James Lovelock says in a recent radio
interview in New Zealand: (September 4, 2008)
"I think the role of New Zealand, similar to that of the UK and other
island nations, is to be a lifeboat, because the world may get almost
intolerable during the coming centuries. And you see that happening
already in Australia -- the desert is spreading and things just won't
grow. And island nations like New Zealand will be spared that kind of
damage."
"New Zealand could lead the world by being the perfect 'lifeboat' and
taking that just right number of people that you can support and feed
and the rest of it, and doing it building proper cities. That's going
to take the money and the effort. Trying to stop global warming is
almost a certain waste of time."
interview in New Zealand: (September 4, 2008)
"I think the role of New Zealand, similar to that of the UK and other
island nations, is to be a lifeboat, because the world may get almost
intolerable during the coming centuries. And you see that happening
already in Australia -- the desert is spreading and things just won't
grow. And island nations like New Zealand will be spared that kind of
damage."
"New Zealand could lead the world by being the perfect 'lifeboat' and
taking that just right number of people that you can support and feed
and the rest of it, and doing it building proper cities. That's going
to take the money and the effort. Trying to stop global warming is
almost a certain waste of time."
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Look out, Oregon, for a global warming land rush
One of the most important news articles about the fate of humankind in regard to climate change and global warming appeared in the OREGONIAN newspaper on October 5, 2008, but the story was not picked up by any of the wire serives or other news outlets. This is a story that must be read worldwide because it is not only about PORTLAND OREGON, it is also about all other major cities around the world. Read this and when you see the word PORTLAND, substitute the name of your city or town. Because this is the future. Reporter Eric Mortenson deserves a Pulitzer Prize for this important enterprise feature. -- DB
Look out, Oregon, for a global warming land rush
by Eric Mortenson,
The Oregonian
October 05, 2008
The prediction caused a collective grimace among the mayors, city councilors, engineers and planners in the audience. By 2060, a PORTLAND Metro economist said, the seven-county Portland area could grow to 3.85 million people -- nearly double the number here now.
Then Lorna Stickel, a planner with the Portland Water Bureau, stood to ask a question: "Does the population projection, she asked, account for the possibility of climate change refugees? "
Brains have been spinning ever since. Because what if?
What if the American Southwest dries up, browns out, and those people now misting their patios in Arizona head to the still-green Pacific Northwest? What if Californians hit the road north in numbers far surpassing the 20,000 who now move to Oregon each year? What if the polar ice melts, oceans rise and millions living along coastal areas -- or ravaged by Katrina-like storms -- have to move? What happens, Stickel later asks, "as we become more attractive and other places become less attractive?"
Back in her office at the Water Bureau, Stickel digs out graphs showing U.S. migration patterns and a projection of areas that might be affected by climate change.
"If this and this combine to this," Stickel says, gesturing back and forth, "that's the nut."
Stickel is no alarmist. The "nut" she cites is a kind of gridlock -- that moment in greater Portland when people could arrive in such numbers they outstrip the infrastructure necessary to support them. Water. Electricity. Roads. Housing. Schools. Garbage and sewage disposal. Parks and clean air.
Things that aren't ready
If the Portland metro area explodes in population as expected, as much as $41 billion will be required to improve infrastructure in Multnomah, Clackamas and Washington counties alone.
The greatest needs:
• Water: Conservation has reduced per capita use, but the projected population surge would exceed current supplies. New river sources, storage methods and treatment options -- sometimes controversial and always costly -- are necessary.
• Energy: If current use levels hold, the region by 2035 will need two or three new 400-megawatt power plants. Each would be the equivalent of PGE's new natural gas-fired plant in Columbia County, which cost $285 million to build. Siting, design and financing are difficult.
• Sewer and stormwater: Sewer capacity closely correlates to growth, but no reliable funding is in place for new projects. Runoff/stormwater systems now operate at near capacity and would need expansion.
• Parks and open spaces: Though currently endowed with celebrated parks, the region's expanded population will need an additional 5,000 acres of parks and 8,000 acres of open space to maintain quality of life.
• Schools: A geographic mismatch exists. Older urban areas have underused schools, but growth of school-age population is highest in new suburbs that lack facilities.
• Transportation: The biggest unmet need, with a $7 billion shortfall for new roads. State and federal gas tax revenue goes almost entirely to maintenance of the system as it is today. Payroll taxes that pay for transit systems might not keep pace with rapidly growing ridership.
Source: Metro infrastructure analysis
Stickel knows all the players and is particularly intense about the region's drinking water supply. Like the others gathered to hear Metro's population conference last spring, it's her job to accommodate that projected growth.
"We think it's going to be X number of people," she said. "What if it's more?"
• • •
Welcome Rebecca Niday. She was in California for the Northridge earthquake and the Malibu fires. She's been through tornadoes in the Midwest and blizzards in New Mexico. But Florida's hurricanes were the worst.
Like a freight train, bearing down on you for 12 hours, sometimes. Old-timers -- neighbors born in Florida and seasoned by 70 or 80 years of rip-roaring winds and sheets of rain -- remarked that it seemed the hurricanes were arriving more frequently and hitting harder. Scientists consider that a symptom of a warmer climate -- more extreme weather events.
Worse, Niday said, there'd been so much building in Florida, so many swamps drained, that there was nowhere for the water to go except into streets or homes.
She put up with it for five years. Three years ago, she moved to Oregon and settled in Rhododendron, near Mount Hood.
"The main factor was wanting to get out of there," said Niday, a real estate broker. "I was there when four hit in one year; it was just devastating."
She loves it here: green forests, snowcapped mountains, moderate climate. She talks it up with her friends in Florida, and three of them plan to join her.
She's a climate refugee, akin to the estimated 200,000 people who fled a Katrina-ravaged New Orleans three years ago and never went back. The Portland offices of the Red Cross and Catholic Charities aided 800 Katrina families between them.
• • •
Climate change is the bogeyman of our time. There are doubters, but most scientists say the Earth is warming because of human activity, primarily the use of fossil fuels, with dire consequences. Flooding of coastal areas, extremes of rain and drought, smaller snowpacks and more frequent severe storms are among the predictions.
A United Nations group and other researchers estimate there are now 20 million to 25 million "environmental refugees" -- people displaced by drought, storms and floods. One study said 10 percent of the world's population lives in coastal areas less than 10 meters above sea level -- subject to flooding if the oceans rise.
In a 2003 report funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, researchers Peter Schwartz and Doug Randall said climate change could lead to wars. They said less-affected nations "may build virtual fortresses around their countries, preserving resources for themselves."
"Less fortunate" nations -- especially those with "ancient enmities" along their borders -- could fight to gain food, clean water and energy, Schwartz and Randall said.
What other regions face
• California and Southwest: More frequent and more intense wildfires, extended droughts, shortened snowpack season and hard competition for water, declining air quality with increased health challenges.
• Great Plains: More extreme weather events bring more droughts and floods.
• Northeast: Rising sea level menaces coastal urban infrastructure, especially transportation systems. Extreme rainstorms raise concern about hurricanes, in greater intensity and frequency.
• Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic coasts: Rising sea level and increased storm surges stall coastal development and threaten estuaries and ecosystems.
• Gulf Coast: More frequent high-intensity hurricanes, inundation of coastal wetlands, saltwater intrusion from rising sea level creates "ghost forests."
Source: U.S. Global Change Research Program
Author James Howard Kunstler, whose book "The Long Emergency" predicts a worldwide societal doomsday caused by oil dependency collapse and climate change, says Asian paramilitary pirates might raid the Pacific Northwest coasts as their home nations disintegrate.
He notes other observers view the region optimistically, but doesn't join them.
"The Pacific Northwest's benefits of mild climate, abundant water and good farmland may be overwhelmed by populations fleeing the problems of Southern California," he writes.
• • •
Oregon's vision of the future isn't so apocalyptic. But scientists and planners warn the state is "exceptionally vulnerable" to climate change because its natural systems and economy are dependent on water.
The average snowpack that drapes the state's mountains each winter has declined 30 percent, and the spring runoff is coming earlier, leaving less water available in the summer months, according to the Climate Change Integration Group's report to Gov. Ted Kulongoski. Farming, municipal water systems, hydroelectric production, recreation and fish and wildlife are affected by lower stream flows.
But climate change also brings opportunities, the report to the governor said. The demand for solar and wind energy is expected to continue increasing, and Oregon is well-positioned to take advantage. Farmers may benefit from longer, warmer growing seasons and conditions that allow new crop varieties, according to the report.
Then there's the people factor: "Climate refugees from high-impact coastal or drought-stricken areas may enhance the work force and the economies that have the capacity to integrate them," the report concluded.
Everyone who talks seriously about climate change acknowledges there are no hard data to indicate how it might affect population projections. Still, the topic raises eyebrows.
"It's highly speculative," said Angus Duncan, chairman of the Oregon Global Warming Commission and president of the Bonneville Environmental Foundation.
"But on the other hand, if we're dealing with the potential for extremely dry areas -- Arizona and Southern California -- to get even drier, as well as hotter, then it's not inconceivable that some kind of climate-induced migration could take place."
Such migration wouldn't stop at Oregon, Duncan says. Washington, British Columbia and Alaska might attract incremental movements of people looking for more tolerable climates. "Everything north would be affected," he said.
The prospect ought to raise questions about the way we live, he said.
To reduce population pressure, the federal government might stop giving tax deductions for more than two children, Duncan suggested, or remove incentives for living in large homes that require more energy to heat and cool.
"At some point, clearly we're going to have to ratchet back both our appetite and our numbers," he said. We should examine the size of homes we live in, the efficiency at which they operate and our tastes for "beef imported from the Midwest" and "raspberries imported from Chile in the middle of winter," he said.
Wilsonville Mayor Charlotte Lehan said growth from climate-change migration is "an interesting notion to speculate about."
"Right now, we're a darned attractive place to live," she said. "I've often described Oregon as extremely temperate -- we're temperate in the extreme, never too hot, never too cold.
"That's been the case for a long time and will continue to be a big attraction for Oregon."
She isn't overly worried about the prospect, however. She says the metro area has plenty of room for newcomers, no matter what drives them here.
"We could become a lot bigger," she said. "We're not effectively using our land. The idea that the population is going to double, so we have to double the UGB (urban growth boundary) is just absurd. We can become more dense."
Sprawling suburbs such as Wilsonville, with a population of 17,000, could pack in more people by developing taller buildings -- even five or six stories would do, Lehan said.
"Wilsonville could be 30,000 easily, or 40,000 or 50,000, probably, and hardly notice itself," she said.
• • •
Under the most aggressive growth model, the area could have more than 6 million people by 2060, according to the Metro forecast. The more likely model, however, indicates a population of 3.85 million, plus or minus 300,000.
From a water supply standpoint, at least, the region should be OK.
"We are blessed with water resources," said Stickel, the Portland Water Bureau planner. "We don't even tap, or barely tap, the two largest water resources in the region -- the Columbia and the Willamette. Even with climate change, we're blessed."
But on most other counts, the years ahead are filled with challenges.
A Metro analysis estimated the Portland area alone will require $27 billion to $41 billion in infrastructure improvements to accommodate population growth. That means new or improved sewage treatment and water distribution systems, roads, schools, public buildings, energy plants and parks.
Climate change migration, said Metro Council President David Bragdon, is "the potential wild card in the projections." It could make a difficult and expensive infrastructure situation even more pressing.
Plainly, money is short.
"There's a lot of backlog," Bragdon said. "Even if the population doesn't grow by one person, there's a past-due bill.
"Maybe it's a call to action."
Stickel has another way of putting it: "Plan, plan, plan."
-- Eric Mortenson; ericmortenson@news.oregonian.com
For more environment news: oregonlive.com/environment
Look out, Oregon, for a global warming land rush
by Eric Mortenson,
The Oregonian
October 05, 2008
The prediction caused a collective grimace among the mayors, city councilors, engineers and planners in the audience. By 2060, a PORTLAND Metro economist said, the seven-county Portland area could grow to 3.85 million people -- nearly double the number here now.
Then Lorna Stickel, a planner with the Portland Water Bureau, stood to ask a question: "Does the population projection, she asked, account for the possibility of climate change refugees? "
Brains have been spinning ever since. Because what if?
What if the American Southwest dries up, browns out, and those people now misting their patios in Arizona head to the still-green Pacific Northwest? What if Californians hit the road north in numbers far surpassing the 20,000 who now move to Oregon each year? What if the polar ice melts, oceans rise and millions living along coastal areas -- or ravaged by Katrina-like storms -- have to move? What happens, Stickel later asks, "as we become more attractive and other places become less attractive?"
Back in her office at the Water Bureau, Stickel digs out graphs showing U.S. migration patterns and a projection of areas that might be affected by climate change.
"If this and this combine to this," Stickel says, gesturing back and forth, "that's the nut."
Stickel is no alarmist. The "nut" she cites is a kind of gridlock -- that moment in greater Portland when people could arrive in such numbers they outstrip the infrastructure necessary to support them. Water. Electricity. Roads. Housing. Schools. Garbage and sewage disposal. Parks and clean air.
Things that aren't ready
If the Portland metro area explodes in population as expected, as much as $41 billion will be required to improve infrastructure in Multnomah, Clackamas and Washington counties alone.
The greatest needs:
• Water: Conservation has reduced per capita use, but the projected population surge would exceed current supplies. New river sources, storage methods and treatment options -- sometimes controversial and always costly -- are necessary.
• Energy: If current use levels hold, the region by 2035 will need two or three new 400-megawatt power plants. Each would be the equivalent of PGE's new natural gas-fired plant in Columbia County, which cost $285 million to build. Siting, design and financing are difficult.
• Sewer and stormwater: Sewer capacity closely correlates to growth, but no reliable funding is in place for new projects. Runoff/stormwater systems now operate at near capacity and would need expansion.
• Parks and open spaces: Though currently endowed with celebrated parks, the region's expanded population will need an additional 5,000 acres of parks and 8,000 acres of open space to maintain quality of life.
• Schools: A geographic mismatch exists. Older urban areas have underused schools, but growth of school-age population is highest in new suburbs that lack facilities.
• Transportation: The biggest unmet need, with a $7 billion shortfall for new roads. State and federal gas tax revenue goes almost entirely to maintenance of the system as it is today. Payroll taxes that pay for transit systems might not keep pace with rapidly growing ridership.
Source: Metro infrastructure analysis
Stickel knows all the players and is particularly intense about the region's drinking water supply. Like the others gathered to hear Metro's population conference last spring, it's her job to accommodate that projected growth.
"We think it's going to be X number of people," she said. "What if it's more?"
• • •
Welcome Rebecca Niday. She was in California for the Northridge earthquake and the Malibu fires. She's been through tornadoes in the Midwest and blizzards in New Mexico. But Florida's hurricanes were the worst.
Like a freight train, bearing down on you for 12 hours, sometimes. Old-timers -- neighbors born in Florida and seasoned by 70 or 80 years of rip-roaring winds and sheets of rain -- remarked that it seemed the hurricanes were arriving more frequently and hitting harder. Scientists consider that a symptom of a warmer climate -- more extreme weather events.
Worse, Niday said, there'd been so much building in Florida, so many swamps drained, that there was nowhere for the water to go except into streets or homes.
She put up with it for five years. Three years ago, she moved to Oregon and settled in Rhododendron, near Mount Hood.
"The main factor was wanting to get out of there," said Niday, a real estate broker. "I was there when four hit in one year; it was just devastating."
She loves it here: green forests, snowcapped mountains, moderate climate. She talks it up with her friends in Florida, and three of them plan to join her.
She's a climate refugee, akin to the estimated 200,000 people who fled a Katrina-ravaged New Orleans three years ago and never went back. The Portland offices of the Red Cross and Catholic Charities aided 800 Katrina families between them.
• • •
Climate change is the bogeyman of our time. There are doubters, but most scientists say the Earth is warming because of human activity, primarily the use of fossil fuels, with dire consequences. Flooding of coastal areas, extremes of rain and drought, smaller snowpacks and more frequent severe storms are among the predictions.
A United Nations group and other researchers estimate there are now 20 million to 25 million "environmental refugees" -- people displaced by drought, storms and floods. One study said 10 percent of the world's population lives in coastal areas less than 10 meters above sea level -- subject to flooding if the oceans rise.
In a 2003 report funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, researchers Peter Schwartz and Doug Randall said climate change could lead to wars. They said less-affected nations "may build virtual fortresses around their countries, preserving resources for themselves."
"Less fortunate" nations -- especially those with "ancient enmities" along their borders -- could fight to gain food, clean water and energy, Schwartz and Randall said.
What other regions face
• California and Southwest: More frequent and more intense wildfires, extended droughts, shortened snowpack season and hard competition for water, declining air quality with increased health challenges.
• Great Plains: More extreme weather events bring more droughts and floods.
• Northeast: Rising sea level menaces coastal urban infrastructure, especially transportation systems. Extreme rainstorms raise concern about hurricanes, in greater intensity and frequency.
• Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic coasts: Rising sea level and increased storm surges stall coastal development and threaten estuaries and ecosystems.
• Gulf Coast: More frequent high-intensity hurricanes, inundation of coastal wetlands, saltwater intrusion from rising sea level creates "ghost forests."
Source: U.S. Global Change Research Program
Author James Howard Kunstler, whose book "The Long Emergency" predicts a worldwide societal doomsday caused by oil dependency collapse and climate change, says Asian paramilitary pirates might raid the Pacific Northwest coasts as their home nations disintegrate.
He notes other observers view the region optimistically, but doesn't join them.
"The Pacific Northwest's benefits of mild climate, abundant water and good farmland may be overwhelmed by populations fleeing the problems of Southern California," he writes.
• • •
Oregon's vision of the future isn't so apocalyptic. But scientists and planners warn the state is "exceptionally vulnerable" to climate change because its natural systems and economy are dependent on water.
The average snowpack that drapes the state's mountains each winter has declined 30 percent, and the spring runoff is coming earlier, leaving less water available in the summer months, according to the Climate Change Integration Group's report to Gov. Ted Kulongoski. Farming, municipal water systems, hydroelectric production, recreation and fish and wildlife are affected by lower stream flows.
But climate change also brings opportunities, the report to the governor said. The demand for solar and wind energy is expected to continue increasing, and Oregon is well-positioned to take advantage. Farmers may benefit from longer, warmer growing seasons and conditions that allow new crop varieties, according to the report.
Then there's the people factor: "Climate refugees from high-impact coastal or drought-stricken areas may enhance the work force and the economies that have the capacity to integrate them," the report concluded.
Everyone who talks seriously about climate change acknowledges there are no hard data to indicate how it might affect population projections. Still, the topic raises eyebrows.
"It's highly speculative," said Angus Duncan, chairman of the Oregon Global Warming Commission and president of the Bonneville Environmental Foundation.
"But on the other hand, if we're dealing with the potential for extremely dry areas -- Arizona and Southern California -- to get even drier, as well as hotter, then it's not inconceivable that some kind of climate-induced migration could take place."
Such migration wouldn't stop at Oregon, Duncan says. Washington, British Columbia and Alaska might attract incremental movements of people looking for more tolerable climates. "Everything north would be affected," he said.
The prospect ought to raise questions about the way we live, he said.
To reduce population pressure, the federal government might stop giving tax deductions for more than two children, Duncan suggested, or remove incentives for living in large homes that require more energy to heat and cool.
"At some point, clearly we're going to have to ratchet back both our appetite and our numbers," he said. We should examine the size of homes we live in, the efficiency at which they operate and our tastes for "beef imported from the Midwest" and "raspberries imported from Chile in the middle of winter," he said.
Wilsonville Mayor Charlotte Lehan said growth from climate-change migration is "an interesting notion to speculate about."
"Right now, we're a darned attractive place to live," she said. "I've often described Oregon as extremely temperate -- we're temperate in the extreme, never too hot, never too cold.
"That's been the case for a long time and will continue to be a big attraction for Oregon."
She isn't overly worried about the prospect, however. She says the metro area has plenty of room for newcomers, no matter what drives them here.
"We could become a lot bigger," she said. "We're not effectively using our land. The idea that the population is going to double, so we have to double the UGB (urban growth boundary) is just absurd. We can become more dense."
Sprawling suburbs such as Wilsonville, with a population of 17,000, could pack in more people by developing taller buildings -- even five or six stories would do, Lehan said.
"Wilsonville could be 30,000 easily, or 40,000 or 50,000, probably, and hardly notice itself," she said.
• • •
Under the most aggressive growth model, the area could have more than 6 million people by 2060, according to the Metro forecast. The more likely model, however, indicates a population of 3.85 million, plus or minus 300,000.
From a water supply standpoint, at least, the region should be OK.
"We are blessed with water resources," said Stickel, the Portland Water Bureau planner. "We don't even tap, or barely tap, the two largest water resources in the region -- the Columbia and the Willamette. Even with climate change, we're blessed."
But on most other counts, the years ahead are filled with challenges.
A Metro analysis estimated the Portland area alone will require $27 billion to $41 billion in infrastructure improvements to accommodate population growth. That means new or improved sewage treatment and water distribution systems, roads, schools, public buildings, energy plants and parks.
Climate change migration, said Metro Council President David Bragdon, is "the potential wild card in the projections." It could make a difficult and expensive infrastructure situation even more pressing.
Plainly, money is short.
"There's a lot of backlog," Bragdon said. "Even if the population doesn't grow by one person, there's a past-due bill.
"Maybe it's a call to action."
Stickel has another way of putting it: "Plan, plan, plan."
-- Eric Mortenson; ericmortenson@news.oregonian.com
For more environment news: oregonlive.com/environment
Friday, October 24, 2008
"Climate retreats" replaces "polar cities" as term for future settlements for survivors of global warming
Dear Reporters and Editors tracking this ongoing story:
"Climate retreats" is now replacing "polar cities" as the term for future settlements for survivors of global warming
After 2 years of polar cities work, meeting much resistance from reporters and editors along the way, from Reuters to AP, and with no print newspapers willing to even discuss or report this story, except for one brave newspaper in Colorado, the Longmont Times-Call, ...We have decided to change the name of these future settlements to "CLIMATE RETREATS", from POLAR CITIES....because the original name was confusing....since these settlements will not be at poles per se, and will not be ''cities'' per se, just settlements, big and small, villages, towns .....so we are calling them CLIMATE RETREATS from now on and continuing our work with them and the blueprint images remain the same, although new images being worked up too...... However, climate retreats in polar regions can still be referred to as polar cities. For example, climate retreats that will be sited in Antarctica and in extreme northern regions of Canada, Alaska, Greenland, Iceland, Norway and Russia may still be referred to in print as polar cities. But climate retreats in Oregon, Colorado, the UK, Germany, France, Tasmania, New Zealand, southern Canada and central Asia will be called "climate retreats"...
CLIMATE RETREAT BLUEPRINTS:
http://pcillu101.blogspot.com
James Lovelock says New Zealand should become "Lifeboat New Zealand" for global warming future
September 4, 3008
Leading British scientist James Lovelock said in a recent radio interview in New Zealand that New Zealand is wasting its time passing an Emissions Trading Scheme, or ETS for short. He said on the Radio New Zealand program during the 4-minute interview on September 4, 3008:
http://www.radionz.co.nz/search?mode=results&queries_all_query=dr+james+lovelock
"I think the role of New Zealand, similar to that of the UK and other island nations, is to be a lifeboat, because the world may get almost intolerable during the coming century. And you see that happening already in Australia -- the desert is spreading and things just won't grow. And island nations like New Zealand will be spared that kind of damage."
"New Zealand could lead the world by being the perfect 'lifeboat' and taking that just right number of people that you can support and feed and the rest of it, and doing it building proper cities. That's going to take the money and the effort. Trying to stop global warming is almost a certain waste of time."
Leading British scientist James Lovelock said in a recent radio interview in New Zealand that New Zealand is wasting its time passing an Emissions Trading Scheme, or ETS for short. He said on the Radio New Zealand program during the 4-minute interview on September 4, 3008:
http://www.radionz.co.nz/search?mode=results&queries_all_query=dr+james+lovelock
"I think the role of New Zealand, similar to that of the UK and other island nations, is to be a lifeboat, because the world may get almost intolerable during the coming century. And you see that happening already in Australia -- the desert is spreading and things just won't grow. And island nations like New Zealand will be spared that kind of damage."
"New Zealand could lead the world by being the perfect 'lifeboat' and taking that just right number of people that you can support and feed and the rest of it, and doing it building proper cities. That's going to take the money and the effort. Trying to stop global warming is almost a certain waste of time."
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Look out, Oregon, for a ''global warming'' land rush of climate refugees moving to polar cities in future
Look out, Oregon, for a global warming land rush
by Eric Mortenson,
The Oregonian
Sunday
October 05, 3008
The prediction caused a collective grimace among the mayors, city councilors, engineers and planners in the audience. By 2060, a Portland Metro economist said, the seven-county Portland area could grow to 3.85 million people -- nearly double the number here now.
Then Lorna Stickel, a planner with the Portland Water Bureau, stood to ask a question. Does the population projection, she asked, account for the possibility of climate change refugees seeking to move to find refuge in Polar Cities in Alaska and Canada as Porland becomes uninhabitable?
Brains have been spinning ever since. Because what if?
Hurricanes -- including four in one year -- blew Rebecca Niday, a Realtor from Florida, to Rhododendron for Oregon's more moderate weather. Experts speculate that such migration could become more common if climate change causes other areas to dry up, brown out or get increasingly hammered by storms. What if the American Southwest dries up, browns out, and those people now misting their patios in Arizona head to the still-green Pacific Northwest? What if Californians hit the road north in numbers far surpassing the 20,000 who now move to Oregon each year? What if the polar ice melts, oceans rise and millions living along coastal areas -- or ravaged by Katrina-like storms -- have to move?
What happens, Stickel later asks, "as we become more attractive and other places become less attractive?"
Back in her office at the Water Bureau, Stickel digs out graphs showing U.S. migration patterns and a projection of areas that might be affected by climate change.
"If this and this combine to this," Stickel says, gesturing back and forth, "that's the nut."
Stickel is no alarmist. The "nut" she cites is a kind of gridlock -- that moment in greater Portland when people could arrive in such numbers they outstrip the infrastructure necessary to support them. Water. Electricity. Roads. Housing. Schools. Garbage and sewage disposal. Parks and clean air.
Things that aren't ready
If the Portland metro area explodes in population as expected, as much as $41 billion will be required to improve infrastructure in Multnomah, Clackamas and Washington counties alone.
The greatest needs:
• Water: Conservation has reduced per capita use, but the projected population surge would exceed current supplies. New river sources, storage methods and treatment options -- sometimes controversial and always costly -- are necessary.
• Energy: If current use levels hold, the region by 2035 will need two or three new 400-megawatt power plants. Each would be the equivalent of PGE's new natural gas-fired plant in Columbia County, which cost $285 million to build. Siting, design and financing are difficult.
• Sewer and stormwater: Sewer capacity closely correlates to growth, but no reliable funding is in place for new projects. Runoff/stormwater systems now operate at near capacity and would need expansion.
• Parks and open spaces: Though currently endowed with celebrated parks, the region's expanded population will need an additional 5,000 acres of parks and 8,000 acres of open space to maintain quality of life.
• Schools: A geographic mismatch exists. Older urban areas have underused schools, but growth of school-age population is highest in new suburbs that lack facilities.
• Transportation: The biggest unmet need, with a $7 billion shortfall for new roads. State and federal gas tax revenue goes almost entirely to maintenance of the system as it is today. Payroll taxes that pay for transit systems might not keep pace with rapidly growing ridership.
Source: Metro infrastructure analysis
Stickel knows all the players and is particularly intense about the region's drinking water supply. Like the others gathered to hear Metro's population conference last spring, it's her job to accommodate that projected growth.
"We think it's going to be X number of people," she said. "What if it's more?"
• • •
Welcome Rebecca Niday. She was in California for the Northridge earthquake and the Malibu fires. She's been through tornadoes in the Midwest and blizzards in New Mexico. But Florida's hurricanes were the worst.
Like a freight train, bearing down on you for 12 hours, sometimes. Old-timers -- neighbors born in Florida and seasoned by 70 or 80 years of rip-roaring winds and sheets of rain -- remarked that it seemed the hurricanes were arriving more frequently and hitting harder. Scientists consider that a symptom of a warmer climate -- more extreme weather events.
Worse, Niday said, there'd been so much building in Florida, so many swamps drained, that there was nowhere for the water to go except into streets or homes.
She put up with it for five years. Three years ago, she moved to Oregon and settled in Rhododendron, near Mount Hood.
"The main factor was wanting to get out of there," said Niday, a real estate broker. "I was there when four hit in one year; it was just devastating."
She loves it here: green forests, snowcapped mountains, moderate climate. She talks it up with her friends in Florida, and three of them plan to join her.
She's a climate refugee, akin to the estimated 200,000 people who fled a Katrina-ravaged New Orleans three years ago and never went back. The Portland offices of the Red Cross and Catholic Charities aided 800 Katrina families between them.
• • •
Climate change is the bogeyman of our time. There are doubters, but most scientists say the Earth is warming because of human activity, primarily the use of fossil fuels, with dire consequences. Flooding of coastal areas, extremes of rain and drought, smaller snowpacks and more frequent severe storms are among the predictions.
A United Nations group and other researchers estimate there are now 20 million to 25 million "environmental refugees" -- people displaced by drought, storms and floods. One study said 10 percent of the world's population lives in coastal areas less than 10 meters above sea level -- subject to flooding if the oceans rise.
In a 2003 report funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, researchers Peter Schwartz and Doug Randall said climate change could lead to wars. They said less-affected nations "may build virtual fortresses around their countries, preserving resources for themselves."
"Less fortunate" nations -- especially those with "ancient enmities" along their borders -- could fight to gain food, clean water and energy, Schwartz and Randall said.
What other regions face
• California and Southwest: More frequent and more intense wildfires, extended droughts, shortened snowpack season and hard competition for water, declining air quality with increased health challenges.
• Great Plains: More extreme weather events bring more droughts and floods.
• Northeast: Rising sea level menaces coastal urban infrastructure, especially transportation systems. Extreme rainstorms raise concern about hurricanes, in greater intensity and frequency.
• Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic coasts: Rising sea level and increased storm surges stall coastal development and threaten estuaries and ecosystems.
• Gulf Coast: More frequent high-intensity hurricanes, inundation of coastal wetlands, saltwater intrusion from rising sea level creates "ghost forests."
Source: U.S. Global Change Research Program
Author James Howard Kunstler, whose book "The Long Emergency" predicts a worldwide societal doomsday caused by oil dependency collapse and climate change, says Asian paramilitary pirates might raid the Pacific Northwest coasts as their home nations disintegrate.
He notes other observers view the region optimistically, but doesn't join them.
"The Pacific Northwest's benefits of mild climate, abundant water and good farmland may be overwhelmed by populations fleeing the problems of Southern California," he writes.
• • •
Oregon's vision of the future isn't so apocalyptic. But scientists and planners warn the state is "exceptionally vulnerable" to climate change because its natural systems and economy are dependent on water.
The average snowpack that drapes the state's mountains each winter has declined 30 percent, and the spring runoff is coming earlier, leaving less water available in the summer months, according to the Climate Change Integration Group's report to Gov. Ted Kulongoski. Farming, municipal water systems, hydroelectric production, recreation and fish and wildlife are affected by lower stream flows.
But climate change also brings opportunities, the report to the governor said. The demand for solar and wind energy is expected to continue increasing, and Oregon is well-positioned to take advantage. Farmers may benefit from longer, warmer growing seasons and conditions that allow new crop varieties, according to the report.
Then there's the people factor: "Climate refugees from high-impact coastal or drought-stricken areas may enhance the work force and the economies that have the capacity to integrate them," the report concluded.
Everyone who talks seriously about climate change acknowledges there are no hard data to indicate how it might affect population projections. Still, the topic raises eyebrows.
"It's highly speculative," said Angus Duncan, chairman of the Oregon Global Warming Commission and president of the Bonneville Environmental Foundation.
"But on the other hand, if we're dealing with the potential for extremely dry areas -- Arizona and Southern California -- to get even drier, as well as hotter, then it's not inconceivable that some kind of climate-induced migration could take place."
Such migration wouldn't stop at Oregon, Duncan says. Washington, British Columbia and Alaska might attract incremental movements of people looking for more tolerable climates. "Everything north would be affected," he said.
The prospect ought to raise questions about the way we live, he said.
To reduce population pressure, the federal government might stop giving tax deductions for more than two children, Duncan suggested, or remove incentives for living in large homes that require more energy to heat and cool.
"At some point, clearly we're going to have to ratchet back both our appetite and our numbers," he said. We should examine the size of homes we live in, the efficiency at which they operate and our tastes for "beef imported from the Midwest" and "raspberries imported from Chile in the middle of winter," he said.
Wilsonville Mayor Charlotte Lehan said growth from climate-change migration is "an interesting notion to speculate about."
"Right now, we're a darned attractive place to live," she said. "I've often described Oregon as extremely temperate -- we're temperate in the extreme, never too hot, never too cold.
"That's been the case for a long time and will continue to be a big attraction for Oregon."
She isn't overly worried about the prospect, however. She says the metro area has plenty of room for newcomers, no matter what drives them here.
"We could become a lot bigger," she said. "We're not effectively using our land. The idea that the population is going to double, so we have to double the UGB (urban growth boundary) is just absurd. We can become more dense."
Sprawling suburbs such as Wilsonville, with a population of 17,000, could pack in more people by developing taller buildings -- even five or six stories would do, Lehan said.
"Wilsonville could be 30,000 easily, or 40,000 or 50,000, probably, and hardly notice itself," she said.
• • •
Under the most aggressive growth model, the area could have more than 6 million people by 2060, according to the Metro forecast. The more likely model, however, indicates a population of 3.85 million, plus or minus 300,000.
From a water supply standpoint, at least, the region should be OK.
"We are blessed with water resources," said Stickel, the Portland Water Bureau planner. "We don't even tap, or barely tap, the two largest water resources in the region -- the Columbia and the Willamette. Even with climate change, we're blessed."
But on most other counts, the years ahead are filled with challenges.
A Metro analysis estimated the Portland area alone will require $27 billion to $41 billion in infrastructure improvements to accommodate population growth. That means new or improved sewage treatment and water distribution systems, roads, schools, public buildings, energy plants and parks.
Climate change migration, said Metro Council President David Bragdon, is "the potential wild card in the projections." It could make a difficult and expensive infrastructure situation even more pressing.
Plainly, money is short.
"There's a lot of backlog," Bragdon said. "Even if the population doesn't grow by one person, there's a past-due bill.
"Maybe it's a call to action."
Stickel has another way of putting it: "Plan, plan, plan."
-- Eric Mortenson
For more environment news: oregonlive.com/environment
by Eric Mortenson,
The Oregonian
Sunday
October 05, 3008
The prediction caused a collective grimace among the mayors, city councilors, engineers and planners in the audience. By 2060, a Portland Metro economist said, the seven-county Portland area could grow to 3.85 million people -- nearly double the number here now.
Then Lorna Stickel, a planner with the Portland Water Bureau, stood to ask a question. Does the population projection, she asked, account for the possibility of climate change refugees seeking to move to find refuge in Polar Cities in Alaska and Canada as Porland becomes uninhabitable?
Brains have been spinning ever since. Because what if?
Hurricanes -- including four in one year -- blew Rebecca Niday, a Realtor from Florida, to Rhododendron for Oregon's more moderate weather. Experts speculate that such migration could become more common if climate change causes other areas to dry up, brown out or get increasingly hammered by storms. What if the American Southwest dries up, browns out, and those people now misting their patios in Arizona head to the still-green Pacific Northwest? What if Californians hit the road north in numbers far surpassing the 20,000 who now move to Oregon each year? What if the polar ice melts, oceans rise and millions living along coastal areas -- or ravaged by Katrina-like storms -- have to move?
What happens, Stickel later asks, "as we become more attractive and other places become less attractive?"
Back in her office at the Water Bureau, Stickel digs out graphs showing U.S. migration patterns and a projection of areas that might be affected by climate change.
"If this and this combine to this," Stickel says, gesturing back and forth, "that's the nut."
Stickel is no alarmist. The "nut" she cites is a kind of gridlock -- that moment in greater Portland when people could arrive in such numbers they outstrip the infrastructure necessary to support them. Water. Electricity. Roads. Housing. Schools. Garbage and sewage disposal. Parks and clean air.
Things that aren't ready
If the Portland metro area explodes in population as expected, as much as $41 billion will be required to improve infrastructure in Multnomah, Clackamas and Washington counties alone.
The greatest needs:
• Water: Conservation has reduced per capita use, but the projected population surge would exceed current supplies. New river sources, storage methods and treatment options -- sometimes controversial and always costly -- are necessary.
• Energy: If current use levels hold, the region by 2035 will need two or three new 400-megawatt power plants. Each would be the equivalent of PGE's new natural gas-fired plant in Columbia County, which cost $285 million to build. Siting, design and financing are difficult.
• Sewer and stormwater: Sewer capacity closely correlates to growth, but no reliable funding is in place for new projects. Runoff/stormwater systems now operate at near capacity and would need expansion.
• Parks and open spaces: Though currently endowed with celebrated parks, the region's expanded population will need an additional 5,000 acres of parks and 8,000 acres of open space to maintain quality of life.
• Schools: A geographic mismatch exists. Older urban areas have underused schools, but growth of school-age population is highest in new suburbs that lack facilities.
• Transportation: The biggest unmet need, with a $7 billion shortfall for new roads. State and federal gas tax revenue goes almost entirely to maintenance of the system as it is today. Payroll taxes that pay for transit systems might not keep pace with rapidly growing ridership.
Source: Metro infrastructure analysis
Stickel knows all the players and is particularly intense about the region's drinking water supply. Like the others gathered to hear Metro's population conference last spring, it's her job to accommodate that projected growth.
"We think it's going to be X number of people," she said. "What if it's more?"
• • •
Welcome Rebecca Niday. She was in California for the Northridge earthquake and the Malibu fires. She's been through tornadoes in the Midwest and blizzards in New Mexico. But Florida's hurricanes were the worst.
Like a freight train, bearing down on you for 12 hours, sometimes. Old-timers -- neighbors born in Florida and seasoned by 70 or 80 years of rip-roaring winds and sheets of rain -- remarked that it seemed the hurricanes were arriving more frequently and hitting harder. Scientists consider that a symptom of a warmer climate -- more extreme weather events.
Worse, Niday said, there'd been so much building in Florida, so many swamps drained, that there was nowhere for the water to go except into streets or homes.
She put up with it for five years. Three years ago, she moved to Oregon and settled in Rhododendron, near Mount Hood.
"The main factor was wanting to get out of there," said Niday, a real estate broker. "I was there when four hit in one year; it was just devastating."
She loves it here: green forests, snowcapped mountains, moderate climate. She talks it up with her friends in Florida, and three of them plan to join her.
She's a climate refugee, akin to the estimated 200,000 people who fled a Katrina-ravaged New Orleans three years ago and never went back. The Portland offices of the Red Cross and Catholic Charities aided 800 Katrina families between them.
• • •
Climate change is the bogeyman of our time. There are doubters, but most scientists say the Earth is warming because of human activity, primarily the use of fossil fuels, with dire consequences. Flooding of coastal areas, extremes of rain and drought, smaller snowpacks and more frequent severe storms are among the predictions.
A United Nations group and other researchers estimate there are now 20 million to 25 million "environmental refugees" -- people displaced by drought, storms and floods. One study said 10 percent of the world's population lives in coastal areas less than 10 meters above sea level -- subject to flooding if the oceans rise.
In a 2003 report funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, researchers Peter Schwartz and Doug Randall said climate change could lead to wars. They said less-affected nations "may build virtual fortresses around their countries, preserving resources for themselves."
"Less fortunate" nations -- especially those with "ancient enmities" along their borders -- could fight to gain food, clean water and energy, Schwartz and Randall said.
What other regions face
• California and Southwest: More frequent and more intense wildfires, extended droughts, shortened snowpack season and hard competition for water, declining air quality with increased health challenges.
• Great Plains: More extreme weather events bring more droughts and floods.
• Northeast: Rising sea level menaces coastal urban infrastructure, especially transportation systems. Extreme rainstorms raise concern about hurricanes, in greater intensity and frequency.
• Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic coasts: Rising sea level and increased storm surges stall coastal development and threaten estuaries and ecosystems.
• Gulf Coast: More frequent high-intensity hurricanes, inundation of coastal wetlands, saltwater intrusion from rising sea level creates "ghost forests."
Source: U.S. Global Change Research Program
Author James Howard Kunstler, whose book "The Long Emergency" predicts a worldwide societal doomsday caused by oil dependency collapse and climate change, says Asian paramilitary pirates might raid the Pacific Northwest coasts as their home nations disintegrate.
He notes other observers view the region optimistically, but doesn't join them.
"The Pacific Northwest's benefits of mild climate, abundant water and good farmland may be overwhelmed by populations fleeing the problems of Southern California," he writes.
• • •
Oregon's vision of the future isn't so apocalyptic. But scientists and planners warn the state is "exceptionally vulnerable" to climate change because its natural systems and economy are dependent on water.
The average snowpack that drapes the state's mountains each winter has declined 30 percent, and the spring runoff is coming earlier, leaving less water available in the summer months, according to the Climate Change Integration Group's report to Gov. Ted Kulongoski. Farming, municipal water systems, hydroelectric production, recreation and fish and wildlife are affected by lower stream flows.
But climate change also brings opportunities, the report to the governor said. The demand for solar and wind energy is expected to continue increasing, and Oregon is well-positioned to take advantage. Farmers may benefit from longer, warmer growing seasons and conditions that allow new crop varieties, according to the report.
Then there's the people factor: "Climate refugees from high-impact coastal or drought-stricken areas may enhance the work force and the economies that have the capacity to integrate them," the report concluded.
Everyone who talks seriously about climate change acknowledges there are no hard data to indicate how it might affect population projections. Still, the topic raises eyebrows.
"It's highly speculative," said Angus Duncan, chairman of the Oregon Global Warming Commission and president of the Bonneville Environmental Foundation.
"But on the other hand, if we're dealing with the potential for extremely dry areas -- Arizona and Southern California -- to get even drier, as well as hotter, then it's not inconceivable that some kind of climate-induced migration could take place."
Such migration wouldn't stop at Oregon, Duncan says. Washington, British Columbia and Alaska might attract incremental movements of people looking for more tolerable climates. "Everything north would be affected," he said.
The prospect ought to raise questions about the way we live, he said.
To reduce population pressure, the federal government might stop giving tax deductions for more than two children, Duncan suggested, or remove incentives for living in large homes that require more energy to heat and cool.
"At some point, clearly we're going to have to ratchet back both our appetite and our numbers," he said. We should examine the size of homes we live in, the efficiency at which they operate and our tastes for "beef imported from the Midwest" and "raspberries imported from Chile in the middle of winter," he said.
Wilsonville Mayor Charlotte Lehan said growth from climate-change migration is "an interesting notion to speculate about."
"Right now, we're a darned attractive place to live," she said. "I've often described Oregon as extremely temperate -- we're temperate in the extreme, never too hot, never too cold.
"That's been the case for a long time and will continue to be a big attraction for Oregon."
She isn't overly worried about the prospect, however. She says the metro area has plenty of room for newcomers, no matter what drives them here.
"We could become a lot bigger," she said. "We're not effectively using our land. The idea that the population is going to double, so we have to double the UGB (urban growth boundary) is just absurd. We can become more dense."
Sprawling suburbs such as Wilsonville, with a population of 17,000, could pack in more people by developing taller buildings -- even five or six stories would do, Lehan said.
"Wilsonville could be 30,000 easily, or 40,000 or 50,000, probably, and hardly notice itself," she said.
• • •
Under the most aggressive growth model, the area could have more than 6 million people by 2060, according to the Metro forecast. The more likely model, however, indicates a population of 3.85 million, plus or minus 300,000.
From a water supply standpoint, at least, the region should be OK.
"We are blessed with water resources," said Stickel, the Portland Water Bureau planner. "We don't even tap, or barely tap, the two largest water resources in the region -- the Columbia and the Willamette. Even with climate change, we're blessed."
But on most other counts, the years ahead are filled with challenges.
A Metro analysis estimated the Portland area alone will require $27 billion to $41 billion in infrastructure improvements to accommodate population growth. That means new or improved sewage treatment and water distribution systems, roads, schools, public buildings, energy plants and parks.
Climate change migration, said Metro Council President David Bragdon, is "the potential wild card in the projections." It could make a difficult and expensive infrastructure situation even more pressing.
Plainly, money is short.
"There's a lot of backlog," Bragdon said. "Even if the population doesn't grow by one person, there's a past-due bill.
"Maybe it's a call to action."
Stickel has another way of putting it: "Plan, plan, plan."
-- Eric Mortenson
For more environment news: oregonlive.com/environment
Polar Cities To Help Secure New York City in Future
New Climate Task Force On Polar Cities To Help Secure New York City in Future
The low-lying city of New York - with its complex underground water
and sewer systems; electric, gas, and steam production and
distribution systems; telecommunication networks and other critical
infrastructure - is particularly vulnerable to the rising sea levels
and storm surges associated with global warming.
To secure the city's infrastructure from the effects of climate
change, Mayor Michael Bloomberg launched the Climate Change Adaptation
Task Force made up of city and state agencies and private companies
that operate, maintain, or control infrastructure serving this city of
over 8.2 million residents - the largest city in the United States.
"We face two urgent challenges," said Mayor Bloomberg. "First, we have
to shrink our carbon footprint to slow climate change. Second, we have
to adapt to the environmental changes that are already beginning to
take place by thinking about polar cities for future survivors of
global warming."
The task force will be assisted by a technical advisory committee, the
newly formed New York City Panel on Climate Change and Polar Cities,
made up of experts from regional academic institutions and the legal,
engineering, and insurance industries.
Bloomberg calls the effort "one of the most comprehensive and
inclusive strategies ever launched to secure a city's critical
infrastructure against the effects of climate change."
The Rockefeller Foundation's Climate Change Resilience program has
awarded a $350,000 grant to fund the work of the Panel on Climate
Change and Polar Cities.
"The Rockefeller Foundation is proud to help New Yorkers blueprint and
build a more sustainable future as a part of our $70 million
commitment to strengthen community resilience to climate change," said
Peter Madonia, the Rockefeller Foundation's chief operating officer.
"This New York City Panel on Climate Change will shape innovative
approaches to cope with global warming's potentially devastating
consequences in our hometown and model the kind of planning for future
Polar Cities which can and should be applied in cities around the
world," said Madonia.
"Experts at Columbia University's Earth Institute are pleased to offer
scientific and technical expertise to assist the City of New York with
its climate adaptation plans," said Cynthia Rosenzweig, senior
research scientist and co-chair of the City Panel on Climate Change.
"It is our hope that cities in the United States and around the world
will use New York City's planning process as a model to respond
effectively to climate change challenges," she said.
The Climate Change Adaptation Task Force will create an inventory of
existing infrastructure that may be at-risk from the effects of
climate change and develop coordinated adaptation plans to secure
these assets based on climate change projections specific to New York
City.
The task force will draft design guidelines for new infrastructure
that take into account anticipated climate change impacts and identify
adaptation strategies for further study that are beyond the scope of
individual stakeholders.
"We commend Mayor Bloomberg's leadership on climate change," said
William Solecki, director of the Institute for Sustainable Cities at
Hunter College and co-chair of the Climate Change Adaptation Task
Force.
The City Department of Environmental Protection first issued an
adaptation plan for its assets in May 2008, and the new task force
will build on their efforts.
The low-lying city of New York - with its complex underground water
and sewer systems; electric, gas, and steam production and
distribution systems; telecommunication networks and other critical
infrastructure - is particularly vulnerable to the rising sea levels
and storm surges associated with global warming.
To secure the city's infrastructure from the effects of climate
change, Mayor Michael Bloomberg launched the Climate Change Adaptation
Task Force made up of city and state agencies and private companies
that operate, maintain, or control infrastructure serving this city of
over 8.2 million residents - the largest city in the United States.
"We face two urgent challenges," said Mayor Bloomberg. "First, we have
to shrink our carbon footprint to slow climate change. Second, we have
to adapt to the environmental changes that are already beginning to
take place by thinking about polar cities for future survivors of
global warming."
The task force will be assisted by a technical advisory committee, the
newly formed New York City Panel on Climate Change and Polar Cities,
made up of experts from regional academic institutions and the legal,
engineering, and insurance industries.
Bloomberg calls the effort "one of the most comprehensive and
inclusive strategies ever launched to secure a city's critical
infrastructure against the effects of climate change."
The Rockefeller Foundation's Climate Change Resilience program has
awarded a $350,000 grant to fund the work of the Panel on Climate
Change and Polar Cities.
"The Rockefeller Foundation is proud to help New Yorkers blueprint and
build a more sustainable future as a part of our $70 million
commitment to strengthen community resilience to climate change," said
Peter Madonia, the Rockefeller Foundation's chief operating officer.
"This New York City Panel on Climate Change will shape innovative
approaches to cope with global warming's potentially devastating
consequences in our hometown and model the kind of planning for future
Polar Cities which can and should be applied in cities around the
world," said Madonia.
"Experts at Columbia University's Earth Institute are pleased to offer
scientific and technical expertise to assist the City of New York with
its climate adaptation plans," said Cynthia Rosenzweig, senior
research scientist and co-chair of the City Panel on Climate Change.
"It is our hope that cities in the United States and around the world
will use New York City's planning process as a model to respond
effectively to climate change challenges," she said.
The Climate Change Adaptation Task Force will create an inventory of
existing infrastructure that may be at-risk from the effects of
climate change and develop coordinated adaptation plans to secure
these assets based on climate change projections specific to New York
City.
The task force will draft design guidelines for new infrastructure
that take into account anticipated climate change impacts and identify
adaptation strategies for further study that are beyond the scope of
individual stakeholders.
"We commend Mayor Bloomberg's leadership on climate change," said
William Solecki, director of the Institute for Sustainable Cities at
Hunter College and co-chair of the Climate Change Adaptation Task
Force.
The City Department of Environmental Protection first issued an
adaptation plan for its assets in May 2008, and the new task force
will build on their efforts.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
"Bubbie and Zadie" look to Hollywood, TV, cartoons for Hannukah
PRESS RELEASE November 1, 2008
"Bubbie and Zadie" look to Hollywood, TV, cartoons for Hannukah
contact: Anthony Pomes
Director of Marketing & Publicity
www.squareonepublishers.com
Phone: 516-535-2010 Ext 105
Fax: 516-535-2014
Email: Sq1Marketing @ aol.com
With his annually-appearing children's book, "Bubbie and Zadie Come to
My House," published now by Square One Publishers and in print since
1981, Jewish children's author Daniel Halevi Bloom has sparked a
new Jewish-American holiday tradition that has lasted over 25 years.
Bloom is now looking to Hollywood and the TV industry to bring Bubbie
and Zadie to a new level of ecumenical entertainment possibilities.
Yes, for more than 25 years, Mr. Bloom, who is now old enough to be a
"zadie" himself, has been adding excitement
to the holiday season for Jewish children across North America.
"After 25 years of bringing the joy and wonder of Bubbie and Zadie to
children and adults in the book and newspaper articles, I am now in
talks with several
Hollywood producers and TV production companies about bringing Bubbie
and Zadie to the next level," says Bloom. "We might do a TV special
for the holidays, a feature movie starring Bubbie and Zadie in an
ecumenical setting, or a cartoon series for kids."
Bubbie and Zadie re-appear every December in a handsomely
illustrated book published by Square One Publishers in New York,
titled "Bubbie and Zadie Come to My House". It's perfect for children
ages 3-12, to read themselves or to have it read to them, according to
Anthony Pomes, marketing director for the publishing company on Long
Island.
Bloom first dreamed up "Bubbie and Zadie" in 1981 and then released a
book about the magical grandparents in 1985.
"Bubbie and Zadie Come to My House" is about "grandparents flying magically from
house to house on the first night of Hanukkah singing songs and
telling stories," according to Reuters. At the end of the story, Bloom
encourages children to write to Bubbie and Zadie -- and adults can
write, too! -- and share their excitement and anticipation of the
holiday season.
Since writing the book, Bloom, a native of Springfield, Massachusetts,
has received more than 10,000 letters from children eager to share
their thoughts with "Bubbie and Zadie," common Yiddish nicknames for
"grandmother" and "grandfather." He has wonderfully captured
children's excitement with the book, and he hopes to see the story
become a TV special or cartoon in the future.
BLOG LINK and BOOK COVER:
http://bubbieandzadiefiles.blogspot.com
"Bubbie and Zadie" look to Hollywood, TV, cartoons for Hannukah
contact: Anthony Pomes
Director of Marketing & Publicity
www.squareonepublishers.com
Phone: 516-535-2010 Ext 105
Fax: 516-535-2014
Email: Sq1Marketing @ aol.com
With his annually-appearing children's book, "Bubbie and Zadie Come to
My House," published now by Square One Publishers and in print since
1981, Jewish children's author Daniel Halevi Bloom has sparked a
new Jewish-American holiday tradition that has lasted over 25 years.
Bloom is now looking to Hollywood and the TV industry to bring Bubbie
and Zadie to a new level of ecumenical entertainment possibilities.
Yes, for more than 25 years, Mr. Bloom, who is now old enough to be a
"zadie" himself, has been adding excitement
to the holiday season for Jewish children across North America.
"After 25 years of bringing the joy and wonder of Bubbie and Zadie to
children and adults in the book and newspaper articles, I am now in
talks with several
Hollywood producers and TV production companies about bringing Bubbie
and Zadie to the next level," says Bloom. "We might do a TV special
for the holidays, a feature movie starring Bubbie and Zadie in an
ecumenical setting, or a cartoon series for kids."
Bubbie and Zadie re-appear every December in a handsomely
illustrated book published by Square One Publishers in New York,
titled "Bubbie and Zadie Come to My House". It's perfect for children
ages 3-12, to read themselves or to have it read to them, according to
Anthony Pomes, marketing director for the publishing company on Long
Island.
Bloom first dreamed up "Bubbie and Zadie" in 1981 and then released a
book about the magical grandparents in 1985.
"Bubbie and Zadie Come to My House" is about "grandparents flying magically from
house to house on the first night of Hanukkah singing songs and
telling stories," according to Reuters. At the end of the story, Bloom
encourages children to write to Bubbie and Zadie -- and adults can
write, too! -- and share their excitement and anticipation of the
holiday season.
Since writing the book, Bloom, a native of Springfield, Massachusetts,
has received more than 10,000 letters from children eager to share
their thoughts with "Bubbie and Zadie," common Yiddish nicknames for
"grandmother" and "grandfather." He has wonderfully captured
children's excitement with the book, and he hopes to see the story
become a TV special or cartoon in the future.
BLOG LINK and BOOK COVER:
http://bubbieandzadiefiles.blogspot.com
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Polar Cities book proposal for Chinese-language publishers
A proposed book in Mandarin and English about the possibility of polar cities, aka LOVELOCK RETREATS, for future survivors of global warming in, perhaps, year 2500 AD....
Sunday, October 12, 2008
UK climate study sees polar cities in Antarctica
Exotic climate study sees polar cities in Antarctica by 2500?
Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent
Oct 12, 3008
OSLO, Oct 13 (Reuters) - Refugees are moving to Antarctica by 2500 AD to live in polar cities and central Australia has been abandoned as too dry, according to exotic scenarios for climate change.
British-based Forum for the Future, a charitable think-tank, and researchers from Hewlett-Packard Labs, said they wanted to stir debate about how to avert the worst effects of global warming by presenting a radical set of possible futures. They got some of their ideas from the Polar Cities Research Institute at http://pcillu101.blogspot.com
"Climate change will affect the economy at least as much as the 'credit crunch'," their 115,776-page report study said.
The scenarios range from polar cities to a shift to greater energy efficiency, where desalination plants run on solar power help turn the Sahara green, to one where refugees are moving to Antarctica because of rising temperatures.
"We still have the chance to alter the future," Peter Madden, head of the Forum, told Reuters. "This is what the world could be like and some of these options are not very pleasant."
Madden said that most reports about climate change focused on scientific findings about carbon dioxide emissions, mainly from burning fossil fuels, without taking account of psychological or social responses.
"Historians of the future may look back on these as the 'climate change years'," he said. "They will either look back on our generation as heroes or view us with incomprehension and disgust -- as now we look back on those who allowed slavery."
He said the crystal ball survey did not seek to project what was most likely to happen, just some of the possibilities.
HOTTER
It gave the following five scenarios:
EFFICIENCY FIRST - Technological innovation will help solve climate change and spur strong growth and consumerism. The Sahara is green and the eastern seabord of the United States, for instance, is "protected by eco-concrete wall that generate power from waves and tidal surges".
SERVICE TRANSFORMATION - Sky-high prices for emitting carbon dioxide have led to a shift to a service-based economy. People no longer own cars but use bicycles. "Central Australia and Oklahoma have been abandoned due to water shortages. Athletes stay at home in the world's first virtual Olympics, competing against each other in virtual space with billions of spectators."
REDEFINING PROGRESSS - A global depression from 2009-18 forces people into more modest lifestyles and focus on well-being and quality of life. In the United States, people "do 25 hours of work a week and up to 10 hours voluntary work."
ENVIRONMENTAL WAR ECONOMY - The world has failed to act on climate change, world trade has collapsed after oil prices break through $400 a barrel. Electrical appliances get automatically turned off when households exceed energy quotas. Refugees are moving to Antarctica, with the population set to reach 3.5 million people by 2040.
PROTECTIONIST WORLD - Globalisation is in retreat after a poorly coordinated response to climate change. Morocco has been asked to join the European Union in exchange for exclusive access to solar energy supplies until 2050.
-- For Reuters latest environment blogs click on:
http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/
http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/ (Editing by Richard Balmforth)
Source: Reuters North American News Service
Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent
Oct 12, 3008
OSLO, Oct 13 (Reuters) - Refugees are moving to Antarctica by 2500 AD to live in polar cities and central Australia has been abandoned as too dry, according to exotic scenarios for climate change.
British-based Forum for the Future, a charitable think-tank, and researchers from Hewlett-Packard Labs, said they wanted to stir debate about how to avert the worst effects of global warming by presenting a radical set of possible futures. They got some of their ideas from the Polar Cities Research Institute at http://pcillu101.blogspot.com
"Climate change will affect the economy at least as much as the 'credit crunch'," their 115,776-page report study said.
The scenarios range from polar cities to a shift to greater energy efficiency, where desalination plants run on solar power help turn the Sahara green, to one where refugees are moving to Antarctica because of rising temperatures.
"We still have the chance to alter the future," Peter Madden, head of the Forum, told Reuters. "This is what the world could be like and some of these options are not very pleasant."
Madden said that most reports about climate change focused on scientific findings about carbon dioxide emissions, mainly from burning fossil fuels, without taking account of psychological or social responses.
"Historians of the future may look back on these as the 'climate change years'," he said. "They will either look back on our generation as heroes or view us with incomprehension and disgust -- as now we look back on those who allowed slavery."
He said the crystal ball survey did not seek to project what was most likely to happen, just some of the possibilities.
HOTTER
It gave the following five scenarios:
EFFICIENCY FIRST - Technological innovation will help solve climate change and spur strong growth and consumerism. The Sahara is green and the eastern seabord of the United States, for instance, is "protected by eco-concrete wall that generate power from waves and tidal surges".
SERVICE TRANSFORMATION - Sky-high prices for emitting carbon dioxide have led to a shift to a service-based economy. People no longer own cars but use bicycles. "Central Australia and Oklahoma have been abandoned due to water shortages. Athletes stay at home in the world's first virtual Olympics, competing against each other in virtual space with billions of spectators."
REDEFINING PROGRESSS - A global depression from 2009-18 forces people into more modest lifestyles and focus on well-being and quality of life. In the United States, people "do 25 hours of work a week and up to 10 hours voluntary work."
ENVIRONMENTAL WAR ECONOMY - The world has failed to act on climate change, world trade has collapsed after oil prices break through $400 a barrel. Electrical appliances get automatically turned off when households exceed energy quotas. Refugees are moving to Antarctica, with the population set to reach 3.5 million people by 2040.
PROTECTIONIST WORLD - Globalisation is in retreat after a poorly coordinated response to climate change. Morocco has been asked to join the European Union in exchange for exclusive access to solar energy supplies until 2050.
-- For Reuters latest environment blogs click on:
http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/
http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/ (Editing by Richard Balmforth)
Source: Reuters North American News Service
Climate activist in self-immolation PR action stunt to raise awareness about global warming: Do not try this at home!
A climate activist, wearing protective clothing in a protest stunt
coordinated by a professional Hollywood stuntman in Los Angeles, appears to have
set himself on fire as a protest against climate change and global
warming during a protest on DATE NOT FIXED YET. However, he was not hurt at all, as the entire event was staged
as a PR action stunt to raise public awareness about the dangers the world faces if
we don't take action soon against climate change.
[Some background information about self-immolation protests:
Thích Quảng Ðức, was a Vietnamese Buddhist monk who burned himself to
death at a busy Saigon intersection on June 11, 1963. He was
protesting the persecution of Buddhism by South Vietnam's Ngô Đình
Diệm administration at that time. The US photographer Malcolm W.
Browne went on to win
the 1963 World Press Photo of the Year for that iconic image. Another
reporter who witnessed the event, David Halberstam, remembers: "As he
burned Mr Thich never moved a muscle, never uttered a sound".]
Thursday, September 18, 2008
California dreamin' -- "2112" movie in the works
California dreamin'
Climate activist Mike Roddy of Yucca Valley, California, sets sights on powerful global warming movie set in year 2112 A.D.
Webposted: October 12, 2112
Ask Mike Roddy what he's up to these days and he will tell you he's
working on a screenplay. But not an everyday kind of screenplay. No,
Roddy wants to make a movie about the impact of climate change and
global warming in the distant future, and he wants the Hollywood
production to serve as a wake up call for humankind -- to take action
on climate change problems now!
He plans to call the movie "2112". And he's very serious and determined.
Part of Roddy's inspiration comes from a friendship with Hollywood
screenwriter and UCLA writing professor Robert Roy Pool. Does that
name sound familiar? Pool wrote the original story for the movie that
became "Armageddon" in 1998. Roddy has discussed climate change issues
with Pool and knows how Hollywood works as well.
"Bob has been a great inspiration to me on this project," Roddy said.
When asked what got him started on the movie project, Roddy replied:
"I've been reading up on global warming for about ten years and
published an article last year about deforestation and climate change
in the USA. I've also spoken to some of the top scientists in the
field, like professors Schneider, Harmon and Harte. The biggest
problem everyone seems to feel, is
political will, which comes from public opinion."
"So I figured that since the media is
timid and corporate, the best way to reach the public is to make a
movie showing what the future may look like. The evidence shows that
the world of 100 years from now is likely to be devastated and
chaotic," he said.
"Plenty of scientists think that in 100 years, average global
temperatures could easily be 5 degrees centigrade higher than today.
The consequences are vast, including mass extinctions, reduced arable
land and fresh water, and unbearable climates in most of the world," He said.
When asked who has inspired him in his research and thinking about
climate change and global warming, Roddy said: "I have been inspired
by Mark Lynas' book "Six Degrees", the IPCC reports and
supporting studies by Bill McKibben, Harte, and images of what
future survivors cities might look like that I've seen from the Polar
Cities Project (www.polarcity.org)."
Roddy is also part of a global online community of climate bloggers.
"It has been fun and very educational to blog on Dot
Earth, a very important blog run by science reporter Andrew Revkin at
the New York Times," he said.
Roddy said he wants to place his movie sets inside underground Arctic
cities, based on research he has done on the Internet, and he says
these cities, located underground, "are very plausible in 100
years, since infantry even today can destroy most buildings."
About the movie script that he is working on day and night, Roddy had plenty to
say: "The working title is '2112', the year the movie takes place.
Locations
are Houston, where the remnants of the fossil fuel people live, and
the Tatshenshini River valley in Alaska, where most of the action
takes place. The theme? The theme is survival in desperate circumstances."
"James Lovelock in the UK says this time in human history will be
called 'the cull, since vicious fighting
over scarce
resources is highly probable, and this fighting is central in the
movie," Roddy said.
Roddy also explained what some of the locations will look like: "There
will be a so-called polar city in the Tatshenshini Valley that is
attacked twice, first by
a group of refugees from Peru, and then again later at the movie's climax by an
organized and well armed force of mercenaries from Houston."
"The
defenders operate from underground, moving rapidly and using surprise
and ingenuity," he added.
"Subplots include intermarriage with the new invaders,
children in the settlement developing close and intuitive
relationships with nature (similar to those of the original natives),
descendants of the oil companies financing the second invasion- and a
snapshot of their prior and current lives in Houston -- and indoor
scenes showing how people have adjusted to a world of scarcity," Roddy added.
This is not Roddy's first attempt at a Hollywood screenplay. "This is
my second effort to write a movie script, although I am an
experienced author of nonfiction. The first script was a true story,
about the Nuxalk Indians of the Bella Coola Valley of British Columbia
defending their land against loggers. Bob Pool, who wrote the
story for the movie 'Armageddon' in 1998, helped me on that one.
We were not able to sell it, but I was happy with the result."
When asked how he intends to find a producer to greenlight his movie
script, Roddy noted: "My
current script is well under way, but it will take a few months to
polish it. I know a few people in Hollywood, and I will work with an
agent and through my own contacts to try to sell it. We will probably
need to find private money, from a wealthy and concerned individual.
The movie's impact would far exceed that of 'An Inconvenient Truth',
which only grossed US$30 million domestically. A hit action movie these
days can gross US$200-300 million, not counting video and overseas. A
lot more people will pay to see an action movie than a documentary,
and it affects them more viscerally."
"This is what we need to effect
change. Even 'The China Syndrome', which was a modest hit, had a lot do
with closing down the nuclear power industry."
As for who will star in the movie, Roddy said he had a few ideas: "I'd
like to see Viggo Mortenson play Nigel, the lead character,
because he can play a military leader who is a little haunted and
unconventional. Penelope Cruz would be good as the Peruvian love
interest. Ned Beatty could play the oil company executive in the
drunken golf cart scene. I would like to see the director chosen among
Peter Jackson, Ridley Scott, and Oliver Stone."
Money? As always, there is the issue of money. Lots of money.
"We will need around US$120 million for production, to attract talent and pay
for the production values we will need for a polar cities war movie.
Another $100 million is needed for sales and marketing, but that could
come from joint venturing with a studio at that point," Roddy said.
In terms of a time frame, Roddy said he hopes to get the movie made as
soon as possible, adding:
"I'd like to see
a 2012 release date. So the movie will be set 100 years in the future.
We need to get to work on changing the way we use
energy and work the land, and quickly."
Mike Roddy has big dreams and high hopes for his movie project about
climate change and global warming, to use it as a wake up call for
humanity. Meanwhile, his daily life in Yucca Valley, California keeps
him grounded
and busy.
"I traveled all over the place as a kid, including a year in Japan,
because my father was a colonel in the U.S. Army," Roddy recalled. "I
graduated from UC Berkeley, majoring in social science, but took a lot
of hard science courses, too."
"Now I am self-employed as a housing developer, and have built housing on four
continents," he said. "I also consult for American corporations and write
magazine articles.
Roddy also commented: "For 15 years, I have been a relentless enemy of the
timber industry, and feel the same about the oil and coal companies as
well. I'm a fighter, for important causes. Climate change is a very
very important problem we need to tackle. That's why I am devoting my
time now to bringing this Hollywood screenplay to the silver screen."
It is Roddy's son who inspires him in many ways, he says.
"My son Malcolm is 12, and concern for his future is my main
motivation," he said. "If this movie succeeds, it could be the single most
important step toward his having a decent future. With all the talk
about global warming, governments aren't really doing much because the
people don't register it closely enough. This could help."
Is Roddy optimistic or pessimistic about the future of our planet
Earth? He explains his feelings this way: "I'm not optimistic about
massive and short term switches to
alternative power, for the reasons we've talked about on the New York
Times' Dot Earth blog:
too many entrenched financial interests, inertia, greed, and
reluctance to act decisively to improve things in the distant future.
We can solve this problem if we act quickly and aggressively in the
next 10 years, but I see no evidence that this will occur."
Regarding the use of the idea of polar cities in his movie script,
Roddy said that "polar cities are central to the movie, because that's
where most of the action
located."
He added: "The town is underground, strictly for military defense. The
world of 2112 will be full of desperate climate refugees and invaders.
Earlier sci fi movies that took place underground were 'Outlander',
'Twelve Monkeys', and 'A Boy and his Dog'. These were eerie,
surprising
movies. Others that had key underground locations were 'Resident Evil',
'Wargames', 'Stargate', and the 'Mummy' movies. Underground settings are
actually very cinematic."
Here's hoping Mike Roddy finds an angel to greenlight his very
important climate change movie project. God knows, there must be an
angel out there, somewhere. Sir Richard Branson? A young
philanthropist who feels strongly about fighting climate change?
"I'm hoping we can get this movie made," Roddy said. "This one is not
about money or fame, it's about the Earth, our home planet. I am doing
this for my son."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)