Oct 26, 2008: Methane and What We Can Do Today!

Yesterday, a story from the scientific community slipped under the radar. It said:

“After almost eight years of stability, atmospheric methane levels — measured every 40 minutes by monitors near remote coastal cliffs — suddenly started rising in 2006.”

“The total effect of methane on global warming is about one-third that of human-made carbon dioxide.”

“(Methane) lies frozen in permafrost wetlands and trapped in the ocean floor. As the Arctic warms, the concern is this methane will be freed and accelerate warming.”

“It’s still early and the data are far from conclusive, but scientists say they are concerned that what they are seeing could be the start of the release of the Arctic methane.”

“If it’s sustained, it’s bad news,” said MIT atmospheric scientist Ron Prinn, lead author of the methane study, which will be published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters Oct. 31. “This is a heads up. We’re seeing smoke. It remains to be seen whether this is the fire we’re really worried about.”

“Its recent increase coincides with anecdotal evidence of more methane being released in the shallow parts of the Arctic Ocean. A scientific survey in late summer found methane levels in the east Siberian Sea up to 10,000 times higher than normal, said Orjan Gustafsson, an environmental scientist at Stockholm University who has just returned from the six-week survey.”

“Prinn’s data are consistent with the early results of “whole fields of methane bubbles” that Gustafsson said he found last month. The highest methane level increases were seen in monitoring stations in Alert, Canada, which with recent anecdotal evidence points to plants in permafrost thawing and decaying.”

Many of us have had the discussion of whether we should be making public statements about these rather dire observations and warnings by many scientists. The argument goes: if we scare people they won’t do anything because the problem is too big for an individual. I think it’s our duty to report what scientists are finding. Let the chips fall where they might. An informed citizenry is more likely to react quicker to impending disaster than an ignorant one.

Let no one be under any illusion. Climate change cannot be solved by government or new technology. Our fate is in our own collective hands. Each and everyone of us needs to act. Start simply and then make bigger and bigger cuts in your own carbon footprint. This story is yet another warning in a long series that have been coming in the past few months. It’s not too late to pull the planet back from the brink.

Put on a jumper, wear a woolen hat, turn your thermostat all the way down. Save your carbon fuels for days when the temperature outside hits 5C or less. It will cut your home heating CO2 emissions by over 50%. That will make a difference!

PS: Wear your hat and jumper at work, too!

(see http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SCI_GREENHOUSE_GASES?SITE=VTBEN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)

Our Failure to Grasp Climate Change is in the Numbers!

Clues from Wembley Stadium in the UK:

How many of you have been to the new Wembley stadium?  It’s a magnificent structure sitting atop a hill. It looks like Camelot as you stream out of the underground in a procession of humanity toward the gates.  It was an awe inspiring experience as I took my son to the England-Czech Republic football match in August.  Once inside it was amazing to see how high the seating extended into the sky – it’s an enormous stadium.

Wembley made me realise how ludicrous our thinking about climate change is.  How many times have we heard experts tell us we need to cut our CO2 emissions by 20% in 2020, 50% in 2050 and 80% by the centuries end.  How very linear.  This kind of thinking is leading us to mass suicide.  Why?  Because the problem is non-linear; it’s exponential.  Have you seen the graph of CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere and how they have increased over the past two hundred years?  That curve is growing exponentially.

The human mind can’t handle exponential numbers – at least not as some basis for common sense.  Consider this:  We are in Wembley stadium sitting way up in the very last seats as high as we can get.  Far below us on the pitch we see the English football captain hold his hand outstreched.  The official has an eye dropper.  He puts a single drop of water in the captain’s hand.  After one minute he puts two more drops in the captains hand.  A minute later he doubles that and put 4 drops in his hand.  You can barely see the water.  Now each minute thereafter the ref doubles the amount of drops.  That’s exponential growth.  The water drops double every minute.

Now the question is this:  Suppose Wembley stadium was completely waterproof like a giant cereal bowl.  If the ref continues to double the number of drops every minute then how long before the water has completely filled Wembley and we find the water over our heads?

As we sat waiting for the kickoff, my son thought a while.  Was it days, weeks or months?  Would evaporation play a part to slow the filling of the stadium?  Those sitting around us shouted ‘next summer’; my son said three weeks.  Neither answer is correct.  From the very first drop, to completely filling the stadium would take just over 49 minutes!

The second part of that question was: How long before the water reaches the first seats on the pitch and covers the heads of those sitting there?  It turns out that it would take 43 minutes.  Which means that by the time the first people start to realise there is a problem, it will take only 6 additinal minutes before all 90,000 people in Wembley stadium drown.  Six minutes.

Today, we are sitting in the first few seats with climate change.  We don’t have the luxury of LINEAR THINKING.

Editors Note: If you don’t believe those numbers, figure it out for yourself.  You can find details of Wembley’s total volume on the net.  Then calculate the geometric progression for yourself.  It’s a sobering calculation.

Oct 01, 2008: Small Island Leads the Way!

Danish island cuts its carbon footprint by a staggering 140%. Now, with a simple grid of windfarms, solar panels and sheep, it’s selling power to the mainland and taking calls from Shell

In pictures: the miraculous island of Samso

• Robin McKie
• The Observer,
• Sunday September 21 2008
• Article history

The Danish island of Samso is entirely self sufficient, these huge turbines are off the islands southern tip. Photograph: Nicky Bonne

Isle of plenty

“Something like this starts with a few people.
It just needs time to spread. That is the real
lesson of Samso.”

Jorgen Tranberg looks a farmer to his roots: grubby blue overalls, crumpled T-shirt and crinkled, weather-beaten features. His laconic manner, blond hair and black clogs also reveal his Scandinavian origins. Jorgen farms at Norreskifte on Samso, a Danish island famed for its rich, sweet strawberries and delicately flavoured early potatoes. This place is steeped in history – the Vikings built ships and constructed canals here – while modern residents of Copenhagen own dozens of the island’s finer houses.

But Samso has recently undergone a remarkable transformation, one that has given it an unexpected global importance and international technological standing. Although members of a tightly knit, deeply conservative community, Samsingers – with Jorgen in the vanguard – have launched a renewable-energy revolution on this windswept scrap of Scandinavia. Solar, biomass, wind and wood-chip power generators have sprouted up across the island, while traditional fossil-fuel plants have been closed and dismantled. Nor was it hard to bring about these changes. ‘For me, it has been a piece of cake,’ says Jorgen. Nevertheless, the consequences have been dramatic.

Ten years ago, islanders drew nearly all their energy from oil and petrol brought in by tankers and from coal-powered electricity transmitted to the island through a mainland cable link. Today that traffic in energy has been reversed. Samsingers now export millions of kilowatt hours of electricity from renewable energy sources to the rest of Denmark. In doing so, islanders have cut their carbon footprint by a staggering 140 per cent. And what Samso can do today, the rest of the world can achieve in the near future, it is claimed.

Last year, carbon dioxide reached a record figure of 384 parts per million – a rise of around 35 per cent on levels that existed before the Industrial Revolution. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has warned that such changes could soon have a dramatic impact on the world’s weather patterns. Already, Arctic sea ice is dwindling alarmingly and scientists say the world has only a few years left to make serious carbon-output cuts before irreversible, devastating climate change ensues. Samso suggests one route for avoiding such a fate.

Everywhere you travel on the island you see signs of change. There are dozens of wind turbines of various sizes dotted across the landscape, houses have solar-panelled roofs, while a long line of giant turbines off the island’s southern tip swirl in the wind. Towns are linked to district heating systems that pump hot water to homes. These are either powered by rows of solar panels covering entire fields, or by generators which burn straw from local farms, or timber chips cut from the island’s woods.

None of these enterprises has been imposed by outsiders or been funded by major energy companies. Each plant is owned either by a collective of local people or by an individual islander. The Samso revolution has been an exercise in self-determination – a process in which islanders have decided to demonstrate what can be done to alleviate climate damage while still maintaining a comfortable lifestyle.

Consider Jorgen. As he wanders round his cowsheds, he scarcely looks like an energy entrepreneur. Yet the 47-year-old farmer is a true power broker. Apart from his fields of pumpkins and potatoes, as well as his 150 cows, he has erected a giant 1 megawatt (mw) wind turbine that looms down on his 120-hectare dairy farm. Four other great machines stand beside it, swirling in Samso’s relentless winds. Each device is owned either by a neighbouring farmer or by a collective of locals. In addition, Jorgen has bought a half share in an even bigger, 2.3mw generator, one of the 10 devices that guard the south coast of Samso and now help to supply a sizeable chunk of Denmark’s electricity.

The people of Samso were once the producers of more than 45,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide every year – about 11 tonnes a head. Through projects like these, they have cut that figure to -15,000. (That strange minus figure comes from the fact that Samsingers export their excess wind power to mainland Denmark, where it replaces electricity that would otherwise be generated using coal or gas.) It is a remarkable transformation, wrought mainly by Samsingers themselves, albeit with the aid of some national and European Union funds and some generous, guaranteed fixed prices that Denmark provides for wind-derived electricity. The latter ensures turbines pay for themselves over a six- or seven-year period. After that, owners can expect to rake in some tidy profits.

‘It has been a very good investment,’ admits Jorgen. ‘It has made my bank manager very happy. But none of us is in it just for the money. We are doing it because it is fun and it makes us feel good.’ Nor do his efforts stop with his turbines. Jorgen recently redesigned his cowshed so it requires little straw for bedding for his cattle. Each animal now has its own natty mattress. Instead, most of the straw from Jorgen’s fields is sold to his local district heating plant, further increasing his revenue and limiting carbon dioxide production. (Carbon dioxide is absorbed as crops grow in fields. When their stalks – straw – are burned, that carbon dioxide is released, but only as a gas that has been recycled within a single growing season. By contrast, oil, coal and gas are the remains of plants that are millions of years old and so, when burned, release carbon dioxide that had been sequestered aeons ago.)

Samso’s transformation owes its origin to a 1997 experiment by the Danish government. Four islands, Laeso, Samso, Aero and Mon, as well as the region of Thyholm in Jutland, were each asked to compete in putting up the most convincing plan to cut their carbon outputs and boost their renewable-energy generation. Samso won.

Although it lies at the heart of Denmark, the nation’s fractured geography also ensures the island is one of its most awkward places to reach, surrounded as it is by the Kattegat, an inlet of the North Sea. To get to Samso from Copenhagen, you have to travel by train for a couple of hours to Kalundborg and then take one of the twice daily ferries to Samso. A total of 4,100 people live here, working on farms or in hotels and restaurants. The place is isolated and compact and ideal for an experiment in community politics and energy engineering – particularly as it is low-lying and windswept. Flags never droop on Samso.

The job of setting up the Samso experiment fell to Soren Harmensen, a former environmental studies teacher, with thinning greyish hair and an infectious enthusiasm for all things renewable. Outside his project’s headquarters, at the Samso Energiakademi – a stylish, barn-like building designed to cut energy consumption to an absolute minimum – there is an old, rusting petrol pump parked on the front steps. A label on it says, simply: ‘No fuel. So what now, my love?’ Step inside and you will find no shortage of answers to that question.

Soren is a proselytiser and proud of his island’s success. However, achieving it was not an easy matter. It took endless meetings to get things started. Every time there was a community issue at stake, he would arrive and preach his sermon about renewable energy and its value to the island. Slowly, the idea took hold and eventually public meetings were held purely to discuss his energy schemes. Even then, the process was erratic, with individual islanders’ self-interest triggering conflicts. One Samsinger, the owner of a cement factory, proposed a nuclear plant be built on the island instead of wind turbines. He would then secure the concrete contract for the reactor, he reasoned. The plan was quietly vetoed.

‘We are not hippies,’ says Soren. ‘We just want to change how we use our energy without harming the planet or without giving up the good life.’

Eventually the first projects were launched, a couple of turbines on the west coast, and a district heating plant. ‘Nothing was achieved without talk and a great deal of community involvement,’ says Soren, a message he has since carried round the planet. ‘I visited Shropshire recently,’ he says. ‘A wind-farm project there was causing a huge fuss, in particular among the three villages nearest the proposed site. The planners would soothe the objections of one village, only for the other two to get angry – so local officials would turn to them. Then the first village started to object all over again. The solution was simple, of course. Give each village a turbine, I told them. The prospect of cheap electricity would have changed everyone’s minds.’ Needless to say, this did not happen.

On another visit – this time to Islay, off the west coast of Scotland – Soren found similar problems. ‘I was asked to attend a public meeting to debate the idea of turning the island into a renewable energy centre like Samso. But nearly all the speakers droned on about ideals and about climate change in general. But what people really want is to be involved themselves and to do something that can make a difference to the world. That point was entirely lost.

‘Later I found that a local Islay distillery was installing a new set of boilers. Why not use the excess water to heat local homes, I suggested. That would be far too much bother, I was told. Yet that was just the kind of scheme that could kick-start a renewable-energy revolution.’

Of course, there is something irritating about this Scandinavian certainty. Not every community is as cohesive as Samso’s, for one thing. And it should also be noted that the island’s transformation has come at a price: roughly 420m kroner – about £40m – that includes money from the Danish government, the EU, local businessmen and individual members of collectives. Thus the Samso revolution cost around £10,000 per islander, although a good chunk has come from each person’s own pockets.

‘This is a pilot project to show the world what can be done. We are not suggesting everyone makes the sweeping changes that we have. People should cherry pick from what we have done in order to make modest, but still meaningful carbon emission cuts. The crucial point is that we have shown that if you want to change how we generate energy, you have to start at the community level and not impose technology on people. For example, Shell heard about what we were doing and asked to be involved – but only on condition they ended up owning the turbines. We told them to go away. We are a nation of farmers, of course. We believe in self-sufficiency.’

Jesper Kjems was a freelance journalist based in Copenhagen when he and his wife came to Samso for a holiday four years ago. They fell in love with the island and moved in a few months later, although neither had jobs. Jesper started playing in a local band and met Soren Harmensen, its bassist, who sold him the Samso energy dream. Today Jesper is official spokesman for the Samso project.

Outside the town of Nordby, he showed me round its district heating project. A field has been covered with solar panels mounted to face the sun. Cold water is pumped in at one end to emerge, even on a gloomy day, as seriously hot water – around 70C – which is then piped to local houses for heating and washing. On particularly dark, sunless days, the plant switches mode: wood chips are scooped by robot crane into a furnace which heats the plant’s water instead. The entire system is completely automated. ‘There are some living creatures involved, however,’ adds Jesper. ‘A flock of sheep is sent into the field every few days to nibble the grass before it grows long enough to prevent the sun’s rays hitting the panels.’  image of district heating collectors

Everywhere you go, you find renewable- energy enthusiasts like Jesper. Crucially, most of them are recent recruits to the cause. Nor do planning rows concerning the sight of ‘eyesore’ wind turbines affect Samsingers as they do Britons. ‘No one minds wind turbines on Samso for the simple reason that we all own a share of one,’ says electrician Brian Kjar.

And that is the real lesson from Samso. What has happened here is a social not a technological revolution. Indeed, it was a specific requirement of the scheme, when established, that only existing, off-the-shelf renewable technology be used. The real changes have been those in attitude. Brian’s house near the southern town of Orby reveals the consequences. He has his own wind turbine, which he bought second-hand for £16,000 – about a fifth of its original price. This produces more electricity than his household needs, so he uses the excess to heat water that he keeps in a huge insulated tank that he also built himself. On Samso’s occasional windless days, this provides heating for his home when the 70ft turbine outside his house is not moving.

‘Everyone knows someone who is interested in renewable energy today,’ he adds. ‘Something like this starts with a few people. It just needs time to spread. That is the real lesson of Samso.’

Sep 23, 2008: BULLETIN – Devastating News from the Arctic

Our Worst case scenario is being realised … Substantial Methane leaks found bubbling up from the Arctic ocean floor!

Below is an article from today’s Independent.   We’ve been talking about this as a possible effect of the warming Arctic ocean waters.  Now it has been confirmed as fact!  If you can, go buy a copy of the Independent before they sell out.  This is likely to signal a real turning point for the CO2 Reduction movement.  It’s now or never.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/exclusive-the-methane-time-bomb-938932.html

Exclusive: The methane time bomb

Arctic scientists discover new global warming threat as melting permafrost releases millions of tons of a gas 20 times more damaging than carbon dioxide

ALAMY
Preliminary findings suggest that massive deposits of subsea methane are bubbling to the surface as the Arctic region becomes warmer and its ice retreats

The first evidence that millions of tons of a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide is being released into the atmosphere from beneath the Arctic seabed has been discovered by scientists.

The Independent has been passed details of preliminary findings suggesting that massive deposits of sub-sea methane are bubbling to the surface as the Arctic region becomes warmer and its ice retreats.

Underground stores of methane are important because scientists believe their sudden release has in the past been responsible for rapid increases in global temperatures, dramatic changes to the climate, and even the mass extinction of species. Scientists aboard a research ship that has sailed the entire length of Russia’s northern coast have discovered intense concentrations of methane – sometimes at up to 100 times background levels – over several areas covering thousands of square miles of the Siberian continental shelf.

In the past few days, the researchers have seen areas of sea foaming with gas bubbling up through “methane chimneys” rising from the sea floor. They believe that the sub-sea layer of permafrost, which has acted like a “lid” to prevent the gas from escaping, has melted away to allow methane to rise from underground deposits formed before the last ice age.

They have warned that this is likely to be linked with the rapid warming that the region has experienced in recent years.

Methane is about 20 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide and many scientists fear that its release could accelerate global warming in a giant positive feedback where more atmospheric methane causes higher temperatures, leading to further permafrost melting and the release of yet more methane.

The amount of methane stored beneath the Arctic is calculated to be greater than the total amount of carbon locked up in global coal reserves so there is intense interest in the stability of these deposits as the region warms at a faster rate than other places on earth.

Orjan Gustafsson of Stockholm University in Sweden, one of the leaders of the expedition, described the scale of the methane emissions in an email exchange sent from the Russian research ship Jacob Smirnitskyi.

“We had a hectic finishing of the sampling programme yesterday and this past night,” said Dr Gustafsson. “An extensive area of intense methane release was found. At earlier sites we had found elevated levels of dissolved methane. Yesterday, for the first time, we documented a field where the release was so intense that the methane did not have time to dissolve into the seawater but was rising as methane bubbles to the sea surface. These ‘methane chimneys’ were documented on echo sounder and with seismic [instruments].”

At some locations, methane concentrations reached 100 times background levels. These anomalies have been seen in the East Siberian Sea and the Laptev Sea, covering several tens of thousands of square kilometres, amounting to millions of tons of methane, said Dr Gustafsson. “This may be of the same magnitude as presently estimated from the global ocean,” he said. “Nobody knows how many more such areas exist on the extensive East Siberian continental shelves.

“The conventional thought has been that the permafrost ‘lid’ on the sub-sea sediments on the Siberian shelf should cap and hold the massive reservoirs of shallow methane deposits in place. The growing evidence for release of methane in this inaccessible region may suggest that the permafrost lid is starting to get perforated and thus leak methane… The permafrost now has small holes. We have found elevated levels of methane above the water surface and even more in the water just below. It is obvious that the source is the seabed.”

The preliminary findings of the International Siberian Shelf Study 2008, being prepared for publication by the American Geophysical Union, are being overseen by Igor Semiletov of the Far-Eastern branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Since 1994, he has led about 10 expeditions in the Laptev Sea but during the 1990s he did not detect any elevated levels of methane. However, since 2003 he reported a rising number of methane “hotspots”, which have now been confirmed using more sensitive instruments on board the Jacob Smirnitskyi.

Dr Semiletov has suggested several possible reasons why methane is now being released from the Arctic, including the rising volume of relatively warmer water being discharged from Siberia’s rivers due to the melting of the permafrost on the land.

The Arctic region as a whole has seen a 4C rise in average temperatures over recent decades and a dramatic decline in the area of the Arctic Ocean covered by summer sea ice. Many scientists fear that the loss of sea ice could accelerate the warming trend because open ocean soaks up more heat from the sun than the reflective surface of an ice-covered sea.

Sep 22, 2008: Do We Need Central Heating?

Can anyone help me with this?

I understand this might be an unthinkable question to ask the pubic given our present habit of keeping homes at Mediterranean temperature levels: Do we really need central heating during the increasingly mild British winters?

My wife and I experimented with this last winter.  Our older semi-detached home with solid walls (no insulation), double glazing and 150mm loft insulation will maintain a 6-7C temperature differential between inside and outside temperatures with no heating at all.  When inside temperatures dipped below 20C last winter we put on woolen caps.  Something like 50% of body heat is radiated through the skull so the simple act of putting on a hat makes you feel considerably warmer.  Our cold tolerance threshold dropped to about 14C – only when the room temperature reached that level did we think about the need to add heat in the form of burning wood in a fireplace or turning on an electric heater.

We did that for about 3 weeks then fell back into the habit of central heating again.  Why?  Because we could!   It was more convenient, but it was also unnecessary.

When we talk about cutting CO2 emissions by 80%, we have to face the inevitability that oil and gas fired central heating is not going to be possible.  Wood burning may come back into vogue but we could create an ugly monster if everyone starts doing that without the means to capture fine particulates that have serious health implications.

Older British homes once had doors between rooms to preserve precious heat.  Central heating allowed us to open spaces because we no longer need to limit heating to one or two rooms in a home.  Thermostats gradually went up and up as we shed more and more clothing.

True … winters are getting milder (and wetter) thanks to global warming.  However, reducing winter fuel emissions (and costs) is something we need to face in a 20% carbon world.

Do you remember the old days?  Or stories your great grandmother used to tell you about the harsh English winters?   Can you share any of their secrets to staying warm?

Please tell us all .. we need to re-learn what was once common knowledge.

Sep 16, 2008: Nevermind Polar Bears! WE are the ones at risk …

This morning’s Scotsman reports that this years total ice cover in the arctic appears to be the lowest since records began.  Both the northwest passage to Asia along the Canadian coast and the northeast passage along the Russian coast are ice free and completely open to shipping.

While the total area covered by ice is slightly more than last year’s record low, the ice that remains is far thinner than previously recorded.  “The continuing loss of older, thicker ice means the cover has become dramatically thinner this year. The area of ice that is at least five years old has already decreased by 56 per cent between 1985 and 2007.”

“With concerns over house prices and the credit crunch, for some people it might not seem like the biggest priority.” However, unless we tackle climate change the entire world economy will fall apart.  Food supplies and needed resources will be severely disrupted. “Apart from all-out nuclear war or an asteroid hitting the planet, there isn’t anything bigger than climate change.”

People are failing to react in the numbers required for change. Perhaps they have more immediate concerns, or perhaps they are paralyzed by the enormity of the task.  Governments are failing to act because the people aren’t demanding immediate action.

The message is clear:  It’s up to us to act.  This is no time for apathy, no time for delaying even one more day. Don’t wait for someone to lead you. Talk to your neighbours.  Bring them to the next HICCA meeting.  Help them find ways to reduce their CO2 emissions.  Work together to make our villages models for the entire country.

Full stories at:

http://news.scotsman.com/uk/Arctic-ice-could-be-thinnest.4494049.jp

http://www.enn.com/ecosystems/article/38183

Sep 14, 2008: Jury Shocks Ministers and Energy Company Executives

Last week the jury in the case of the six activists who caused £35,000 damage to Kingsnorth Coal fired power plant reached their verdict:

NOT GUILTY!

“In a verdict that will have shocked ministers and energy companies the jury at Maidstone Crown Court cleared six Greenpeace activists of criminal damage.”

“Jurors accepted defence arguments that the six had a “lawful excuse” to damage property at Kingsnorth power station in Kent to prevent even greater damage caused by climate change. The defence of “lawful excuse” under the Criminal Damage Act 1971 allows damage to be caused to property to prevent even greater damage”

The activists had painted Gordon Brown’s name on the power plant’s chimney which had cost £35,000 to remove.

Kingsnorth is one of a new generation of coal fired power plants that is being backed by government in a strange twist of anti-carbon policy thinking.  It would emit more CO2 than any other type of power plant of similar size.  The “strange twist” comes from the requirement that new plant must be built so that is it ‘Carbon Capture Ready’.  What’s that?  It’s an unproven technology  (some say a non-existant technology) that is supposed to remove CO2 from the exhaust emissions of coal fired powr plants.  The CO2 is compressed, transported and sequestered deep underground in old coal mines or pumped into north sea oil wells to extract more oil.

There are clearly many problems.  First, the technology to reliably do this doesn’t exist.  Second, when and if it does, the taxpayers will be footing the bill.  Third, no one knows if CO2 can be safely sequestered underground for thousands of years. And finally, the use of this technology drastically reduces the efficiency of the power plant.

Coal fired power plants operate at about 40% efficiency.  That means for every 100 kWh of coal energy that is burned, only 40 kWh comes out as usable electricity.  Adding CO2 capture technology reduces that to 24%. By comparison, wind turbines operate at an average of 28% efficiency and produce 0% CO2.  Plus, the fuel is free!

Not only is carbon capture a bad idea at the present level of technology, it is also going to cost more for you and me.  We have to subsidise the technology with tax money that could be used in much better ways and we are going to pay more for energy because it is so fuel-inefficient.

“But the proposals, from the energy giant E.ON, are firmly backed by the Business Secretary, John Hutton, and the Energy minister, Malcolm Wicks. Some members of the Cabinet are thought to be unhappy about them, including the Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, and the Environment Secretary, Hilary Benn. Mr Brown is likely to have the final say on the matter later this year.”  Is this why Gordon Brown is under so much pressure to resign?  And, which side is doing the pressuring?

“During the eight-day trial, the world’s leading climate scientist, Professor James Hansen of NASA, who had flown from American to give evidence, appealed to the Prime Minister personally to “take a leadership role” in cancelling the plan and scrapping the idea of a coal-fired future for Britain. Last December he wrote to Mr Brown with a similar appeal. At the trial, he called for an moratorium on all coal-fired power stations, and his hour-long testimony about the gravity of the climate danger, which painted a bleak picture, was listened to intently by the jury of nine women and three men.”

The real story is that a jury of citizens like us made a brave and historic decision.  Ben Stewart, one of the defendents said: “This verdict marks a tipping point for the climate change movement. When a jury of normal people say it is legitimate for a direct action group to shut down a coal-fired power station because of the harm it does to our planet, then where does that leave Government energy policy? We have the clean technologies at hand to power our economy. It’s time we turned to them instead of coal.”

We should be aware, however,  the government may use this as an excuse to go full speed ahead with nuclear power plant development.  It is likely that activists will respond accordingly using these new ‘lawful’ tactics.  

Clearly it is time we all agree that wind and solar technologies have now come to the forefront of  ‘The War on Climate Change’!

Quotes from the Independent Thurs 11 Sept 2008. For more see: http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/cleared-jury-decides-that-threat-of-global-warming-justifies-breaking-the-law-925561.html

1

Sep 6, 2008: Arctic melting and what it means to us

“It’s time to act!” We have heard that phrase echoing throughout the last 10 or more years. “Drastic cuts in CO2 required to stabilise the planet’s climate” is another familiar headline. We talk about it, argue about it, even protest about it. The fact is we are doing nothing of consequence about it.

We have become quite complacent about doing nothing – even congratulating ourselves that more and more people are talking about it. We seem content to let the ubiquitous ‘THEY’ solve the problem for us. After all, ‘THEY” will know what to do; “THEY” will have the money and political resources to do it. Why should we worry or go out of our way to act?

The earth is reacting to our complacency. We talk about the changes we see around us as ‘canaries in the coal mine’ – a reference to times when those small song birds would act as early warning signs of dangerous gas buildups requiring immediate evacuation of miners.

One of those ‘climate canaries’ is in the arctic. We’ve been bringing news of the arctic melt this year. As you may recall, last year (2007) saw the greatest amount of summer arctic ice melting in recorded human history. This year looked better. If you asked most scientists in July they would have breathed a sigh of relief saying that the trend for this year looked like the melt was returning to normal. Then a sudden change occurred in August. Ice began melting suddenly at a rate that far exceeded the norm. Look at the chart below.

Before August 1st, The loss of arctic ice was midway between the long term average (1979-2000) and last year’s record. Scientists hoped the melt would not go below 6 million square kilometers (compared to approximately 4 million last year). As you can see clearly from the chart, and as we have been reporting for many weeks, the ice melt accelerated in August. It’s possible a new record may be set in the next week to ten days. That’s of little consequence, however. The real worry isn’t about the polar ice, it’s about what happens in the arctic ocean and along it’s coast that really has environmental scientists worried.

NASA has been watching atmospheric methane concentrations for many years. Each kilo of methane gas is the equivalent of 23 kilos, or more, of CO2. Methane levels rose sharply last year as you can see from the second chart below. Satellites detected emissions from thawing Siberian permafrost. The climate scientists at NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory are warning: “rising wetland emissions in the Arctic and tropics are the most likely causes of the recent methane increase.”

We don’t know for sure whether or not the arctic is beginning to release it’s enormous store of trapped methane. We do know there are billions of tonnes which could be released into the atmosphere. We also know there’s even more trapped CO2. We would be fools to dismiss this as “nothing to worry about at the moment.” A ‘wait and see’ attitude is suicidal because if we delay action now then we may seal our fate forever. Once the thawing permafrost begins to release its trapped greenhouse gases in earnest, the process of ‘positive feedback’ kicks in. There will be nothing we can do to prevent runaway climate change and a mass destruction of human life and civilisation.

Is that prediction ‘over the top’ or a ‘hysterical reaction’? The foolish would make you think that’s the case: “Nah, it would never happen, you can’t believe the hype from tree-huggers …’ The earth could care less what any of us ‘think’; it is reacting. And clear-sighted scientists are seeing the message. They cannot predict when the ‘tipping point’ will occur. But, it would be utter folly for us to wait any longer. We are losing too many ‘climate canaries’.

For us in HICCA and for our friends elsewhere who read our messages: We must redouble our efforts NOW. Let’s face the truth … people have not responded in the numbers required to make even a small dent in our CO2 emissions. Our ‘cut your CO2′ movement is weak at best. We have to get out there and do the work needed to organise people and give them the tools they need for change. That’s not going to happen by talking about it, or making excuses. It is going to require sacrifice and dogged determination. We need to demonstrate positively ‘YES WE CAN’.

Human society is approaching the last crossroad. YES we can control emissions and yes we can stabilise the atmosphere. Yes, we have the technology – we’ve had it for 20 years or more. What we lack is the will to act. Every concerned member of the global village can provide the leadership needed at the grass roots level. It’s up to us. Where the grassroots go, the world will follow. Only we can save us from ourselves.

Are we up for it?

Sept 3 2008: Scientists Surprised as Arctic Break-up Speeds Tenfold in Canada

Reuters is reporting this morning that a huge 19 square mile (55 square km) ice shelf in  Canada northern Arctic has broke away.  The remaining shelves have shrunk at a “massive and disturbing” rate, the latest sign of accelerating climate change in the remote region, scientists said on Tuesday.  They also said two large chunks totaling 47 square miles had broken off the nearby Serson Ice Shelf, reducing it in size by 60 percent.

“These changes are irreversible under the present climate and indicate that the environmental conditions that have kept these ice shelves in balance for thousands of years are no longer present,”

The total amount of ice lost from the shelves along Ellesmere Island this summer totaled 83 square miles — more than three times the area of Manhattan island. The figure is more than 10 times the amount of ice shelf cover that scientists estimated on July 30 would vanish from around the island this summer.

“Extensive new cracks across remaining parts of the largest remaining ice shelf, the Ward Hunt, mean that it will continue to disintegrate in the coming years.”

The satellite radar images for September 1st show only 5 small areas where the ice remains completely solid.  Most of the ice cap is either fractured into small icebergs or has melted and what remains is a mix of  sea and ice.

A new ice-free passage between Western Europe and the Far East has opened along the Siberian coast within the past few days.

August 29 2008 Arctic Ice May Be Thinner Than News Reports Indicate

Analysis of satellite photos taken 2 days ago on August 29th indicate the extent of this years polar ice melt. Vast areas are completely ice free. However, what remains is highly fractured. There are vast areas where only 20%-30% of the ice remains. One researcher recently commented: “It’s impossible to get to the north pole this summer without a boat.”

The photo shows exactly how fractured the polar ice was just two days ago. The bright white areas show solid ice, darker areas show a mix of sea and ice. The western part of the photo shows vast areas where ice density has fallen to 50% or less.

News outlets are missing the crisis that is developing in the arctic. “We’ve seen reports about how disappearing ice means shorter routes to far eastern manufacturing centres and how new oil and gas fields will open up as arctic ice receeds, but there has been little reported about how accelerating climate change is starting to destabilise the world population and the UK economy.”

Last year, polar ice shrank to the lowest amount in recorded human history. This year’s ice melt is coming in a very close second, and may still beat last year’s record before the melting season is finished at the end of September. “With so much dark ocean water replacing polar ice heat is being absorbed very rapidly whch leads to further melting.” U.S. Navy satellite data continues to show temperatures in the region up to 9C above normal.

The continued loss of the polar icecap is expected to have dramatic effects on the UK’s weather patterns putting at risk normal agricultural activity leading to lower crop yields and increasing food prices.