Image a world in which the highways are full of cars but the choking smell of sulfur and carbon monoxide don’t penetrate your lungs and kill you slowly. Imagine a trip of a thousand miles where the gas costs just a few cents. Imagine an engine that never has to be cleaned... and making a hot cup of coffee from the sterilized water coming out of the exhaust. Imagine that the gas station is in your own home, where you prepare as much fuel as you need for your trip, or buying a box of energy in the supermarket. This is the world of the hydrogen powered spark-ignited internal combustion engine... and the technology is already here. The motor industry has been testing prototypes, and manufacturers like General Motors, BMW, Mercedes, Mazda, Honda and Toyota are all looking at putting these cars on the roads without sacrificing any of the values of dynamism and driving pleasure. BMW even make a sports car that runs on hydrogen that easily goes over 230 MpH. Mazda’s RX-8 Hydrogen RE vehicles are being leased to Japanese companies.
The advantages are clear. Hydrogen is the only known fuel that leaves no pollutants when combusted and is far more powerful than oil. The by-product is water instead of poison gas. But while the technology is here, the cars are not; manufacturers are sitting on the fence waiting to see in which commercial direction the wind will blow.
In the meantime, they’ve taken an intermediate step in the reduction of oil consumption by producing hybrid cars powered by a dual system of electricity and fossil fuels. These use a lot less gas than traditional engines and also reduce pollutant emissions, but they aren’t pretty and they’ve proven to have all the sex appeal of a Star Trek convention. The hydro-engine though is structurally close to the traditional gasoline engines, with just a few modifications. Drivers report that they’re a joy to handle and there’s no need to sacrifice design.With a bit of luck then, it won’t be too long before we can drive to work, still look cool and enjoy a nice cup of Espresso straight from the exhaust pipe!
This commentary was composed by Urban Neon Car Lights. Kindly visit our site, http://www.urban-neon-car-lights.com/Street-Glow-Lights-p-1-c-39.html to see a bit more with regard to after market car accessories and to peruse our wide variety of fluorescent and led undercar lighting.
For more car customization information from Matthew Barr, please visit http://www.urban-neon-car-lights.com
George Monbiot: It will take more than goodwill and greenwash to save the biosphere
<div><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/12845?ns=guardian&pageName=Comment+is+free%3A+It+will+take+more+than+goodwill+and+greenwash+to+save+the+biosphere&ch=Comment+is+free&c3=The+Guardian&c4=Shell+%28business%29%2COil+and+gas+companies+%28Business%29%2CGreen+business+%28Business%29%2CBusiness%2CAlternative+energy+%28Environment%29%2CFossil+fuels+%28Environment%29%2CEnergy+%28Environment%29%2CClimate+change+%28Environment%29%2CEnvironment&c5=Climate+Change%2CBusiness+Markets%2CEnergy%2CEthical+Living&c6=George+Monbiot&c7=2009_01_06&c8=1142520&c9=article&c10=GU&c11=Comment+is+free&c12=blog&c13=&c14=Comment+is+free&h2=GU%2FComment+is+free%2Fblog%2FComment+is+free" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>For a while it seemed that Shell had stopped pretending. The advertisements that filled the newspapers in 2006, featuring technicians with perfect teeth and open-necked shirts explaining how they were saving the world, vanished. After being slated by environmentalists for greenwash, after two adverse rulings by the Advertising Standards Authority, Shell appeared to have accepted the inescapable truth that it was an oil company with a minor sideline in alternative energy, and that there was no point in trying to persuade people otherwise. </p><p>The interview I conducted with its chief executive, Jeroen van der Veer, broadcast on the Guardian's website today, contains what appears to be an interesting admission. I asked him whether Shell had stopped producing ads extolling its investments in renewable energy. Van der Veer does not express himself clearly at this point, but he seems to admit that his company's previous advertising was not honest. </p><p>"If we are very big in oil and gas and we are so far relatively small in alternative energies, if you then every day only make adverts about your alternative energies and not about 90% of your other activities I don't think that - then I say transparency, honesty to the market, that's nonsense." So, I asked, Shell did not intend to return to that kind of advertising? "Probably not," he told me. "I'm very much: keep your feet on the ground, tell them who you are and explain why you are who you are."</p><p>But since the interview was filmed, Shell's messianic tendencies appear to have resurfaced. In December the company ran a series of ads in the Guardian suggesting again that it had come to save the world. "Tackling climate change and providing fuel for a growing population seems like an impossible problem, but at Shell we try to think creatively," one boasted. It features a diagram of a human brain, divided into sections labelled "fuel from algae", "fuel from straw", "fuel from woodchips", "hydrogen fuels", "windfarm", "gas to liquids" and "coal gasification". This suggests progress of a kind, in that the company is acknowledging that it sometimes dabbles in fossil fuels, but its core business - oil - and its massive investments in tar sands extraction are missing from the corporate mind. Could Shell be having a senior moment? </p><p>The confusion deepens when you watch its latest publicity film. It's called Clearing the Air, and it does just the opposite. It is supposed to tell an inspirational tale of discovery, but the script and the acting are so gobsmackingly bad that it inspires you only to rip your clothes off and run screaming down the street. The lasting impression it leaves is that Shell's staff are chaotic and incompetent. Perhaps the clean-cut corporate clones featured in the ads of 2006 put people off. </p><p>Jeroen van der Veer is neither an incompetent nor an automaton. He is charming, friendly and smart. But he refused to answer some of the questions I had prepared. </p><p>Reading Shell's reports and publicity material, I kept stumbling on an absence. In 2000, the company boasted that it would be investing $1bn in renewable energy between 2001 and 2005. But since then it appears to have produced no figures for its renewables budget. The company now claims that it is "investing significantly in wind energy", but it doesn't say what "significantly" means. Of the 10 windfarms listed on its website, only one appears to be in the planning or development stage: the others are already in operation. Where is the evidence of new money? When Shell pulled out of Britain's biggest windfarm, the London Array, last year, did this represent the end of its major investments? </p><p>I asked Van der Veer a simple question - 15 times. (Only a few of these attempts feature in the edited film.) "What is the value of your annual investments in renewable energy?" He waffled, changed the subject, admitted that he knew the figure, then flatly refused to reveal it. Nor could he give me a convincing explanation of why he wouldn't tell me, claiming only that "those figures are misused and people say it is too small", and it "is not the right message to give to the people". It strikes me that there is only one likely reason for these evasions: that Shell's spending on renewables has fallen sharply from the figure it announced in 2000. It's a fair guess that the current investment would look microscopic by comparison to its spending on the Canadian tar sands, and would make a mockery of its new round of advertising. I challenge Shell - for the 16th time - to prove me wrong. </p><p>Nor would Van der Veer give me a straight answer to another straight question: "Is there any investment you would not make on ethical grounds?" I asked this six times. He was unable to furnish me with an example. It's not hard to see why. As well as exploiting the tar sands, which means destroying forest and wetlands, polluting great quantities of water and producing more CO2 than conventional petroleum production, Shell is still flaring gas in Nigeria, at great cost to both local people and the global climate. It has been fiercely criticised for its secret negotiations with the Iraqi government, which led last year to the first major access for a western company to Iraq's gas reserves. It is prospecting for oil in some of the Arctic's most sensitive habitats. </p><p>All this makes my question difficult to answer. Aside from the greenwash, it is not easy to spot the practical difference between this civilised, progressive company and the Neanderthals at Exxon. </p><p>Like all oil companies, Shell simply follows the opportunities. Shut out of the richest fields by state companies, struggling to extract the dregs from its declining reserves, it has been turning to ever more difficult oil extraction, some of which lies beneath rare and fragile ecosystems. When the price of oil was high, it announced massive investments in the tar sands. Now the price has dropped again, it has cancelled further spending. It has even less of an incentive to invest in renewables. Shell does what the market demands.</p><p>I don't blame Shell or Van der Veer for this: they are discharging their duty to their shareholders. I do blame them for creating the impression that the company has a different agenda, and I blame governments for allowing them to drift into whatever fields they find profitable, regardless of the consequences for people or the environment. </p><p>On this issue Jeroen van der Veer and I agree. Oil companies, he says, should not seek to determine a country's energy mix: that is for the government to decide. </p><p>Saving the biosphere, in other words, cannot be left to goodwill and greenwash: the humanity of pleasant men like Van der Veer will always be swept aside by the imperative to maximise returns. Good people in these circumstances do terrible things. Companies like Shell will pour big money into alternative energy only when more lucrative or immediate opportunities are blocked. Where is the government that is brave enough to block them?</p><p><a href="http://www.monbiot.com">monbiot.com</a></p><div style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/royaldutchshell">Royal Dutch Shell</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/oilandgascompanies">Oil and gas companies</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/greenbusiness">Green business</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/alternativeenergy">Alternative energy</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/fossilfuels">Fossil fuels</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/energy">Energy</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climatechange">Climate change</a></li></ul></div><div class="guRssAdvert"><a href="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/click.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Commentisfree&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534433010603285451565"><img src="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/image.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Commentisfree&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534433010603285451565" border="0" /></a></div><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html">More Feeds</a>
Video: George Monbiot meets ... Jeroen van de Veer
<p>Britain's leading green commentator, <strong>George Monbiot</strong>, goes head-to-head with the chief executive of oil giant Shell, tackling ethics, greenwash advertising, renewable energy investments and gas-flaring in Nigeria</p>
Science Weekly podcast: The Guardian's new environmentally friendly headquarters
<p>As Guardian News & Media moves into its new home at Kings Place in the King's Cross area of London, we look at the measures taken to ensure the building lives up to the company's sustainability goals. </p><p>We speak to <strong>Jeremy Dixon</strong> and <strong>Richard Thompson</strong> from architects <a href="http://www.dixonjones.co.uk/">Dixon Jones</a>. </p><p>The Guardian's environmental manager <strong>Claire Buckley</strong> discusses how the company's waste and energy is being managed. </p><p>Feel free to post your comments about this programme on the blog below. </p><p>You can also join <a href="http://www.new.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2261841960">our Facebook group</a>, where you can scrawl your thoughts on our wall.</p>
Letters: The government lacks a green vision
Letters: Policies such as requiring all new homes to be zero carbon by 2016 will be significantly undermined by its own failure to get its house in order
Maldives 'rubbish island' turns paradise into dump
Elin Hoyland's striking photographs show the growing problem of waste disposal on the Maldives
Nasa climate expert makes personal appeal to Obama
<div><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/65916?ns=guardian&pageName=Environment%3A+Nasa+climate+expert+makes+personal+appeal+to+Obama&ch=Environment&c3=The+Guardian&c4=Climate+change+%28Environment%29%2CEnvironment%2CWorld+news%2CBarack+Obama+%28News%29%2CScience%2CCarbon+emissions+%28Environment%29%2CCarbon+offset+projects+%28Environment%29%2CMichelle+Obama+%28News%29%2CNuclear+issues+%28non-military%29%2CUS+news%2CObama+White+House+%28News%29%2CJames+Hansen+%28Science%29%2CClimate+change+%28Science%29&c5=Not+commercially+useful%2CClimate+Change%2CUS+Elections%2CEthical+Living&c6=James+Randerson&c7=2009_01_02&c8=1141058&c9=article&c10=GU&c11=Environment&c12=Climate+change&c13=&c14=&h2=GU%2FEnvironment%2FClimate+change" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>One of the world's top climate scientists has written a personal new year appeal to Barack and Michelle Obama, warning of the "profound disconnect" between public policy on climate change and the magnitude of the problem.</p><p>With less than three weeks to go until Obama's inauguration, Professor James Hansen, who heads Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, asked the recently appointed White House science adviser Professor John Holdren to pass the missive directly to the president-elect.</p><p>In it, he praises Obama's campaign rhetoric about "a planet in peril", but says that how the new president acts in office will be crucial. Hansen lambasts the current international approach of setting targets through "cap and trade" schemes as not up to the task. "This approach is ineffectual and not commensurate with the climate threat. It could waste another decade, locking in disastrous consequences for our planet and humanity," the letter from Hansen and his wife, Anniek, reads.</p><p>The letter will make uncomfortable reading for officials in 10 US states whose cap and trade mechanism - the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative - got under way yesterday. The scheme is the first mandatory, market-based greenhouse gas reduction programme in the US.</p><p>Hansen advocates a three-pronged attack on the climate problem. First, he wants a phasing out of coal-fired power stations - which he calls "factories of death" - that do not incorporate carbon capture. "Nobody realistically expects that the large readily available pools of oil and gas will be left in the ground. Caps will not cause that to happen - caps only slow the rate at which the oil and gas are used. The only solution is to cut off the coal source," the Hansens wrote.</p><p>Second, he proposes a "carbon tax and 100% dividend". This is a mechanism for putting a price on carbon without raising money for government coffers. The idea is to tax carbon at source, then redistribute the revenue equally among taxpayers, so that high carbon users are penalised while low carbon users are rewarded.</p><p>Finally, he urges a renewed research effort into so-called fourth generation nuclear plants, which can use nuclear waste as fuel.</p><p>Hansen argues that the current emphasis on reduction targets combined with carbon trading schemes make it too easy for countries to wriggle out of their commitments. He cites the example of Japan's increasing coal use, which it has offset by buying credits from China through the clean development mechanism - an instrument set up by the Kyoto protocol - yet China's emissions have continued to increase rapidly. China has overtaken the US as the biggest polluter in the world.</p><p>Hansen has been one of the most prominent advocates of action to tackle climate change since he first spoke on the issue in the 1980s. His testimony to the Senate featured in Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth and he has received numerous honours for his work on the issue, including the WWF's top conservation award.</p><h2>Professor's wish list</h2><p>? Moratorium on and <strong>phasing out of coal</strong> power stations without carbon capture, what Hansen calls the "sine qua non for solving the climate problem". Coal CO2 emissions are the same as those of other fossil fuels combined. </p><p>? Raising the price of emissions via a "<strong>carbon tax</strong> <strong>and 100% dividend</strong>". This is a tax mechanism to "decarbonise" the economy without a net take from taxpayers. Low carbon users are rewarded while high users are punished. </p><p>? Urgent research on "fourth generation" <strong>nuclear power</strong> with international co-operation. This offers one of the best options for nearly carbon-free power, according to Hansen. It would also help to solve the nuclear waste problem by using that material as fuel.</p><div style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climatechange">Climate change</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/barackobama">Barack Obama</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/carbonemissions">Carbon emissions</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/carbonoffsetprojects">Carbon offset projects</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/michelleobama">Michelle Obama</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/nuclear">Nuclear issues</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/usa">United States</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/obama-white-house">Obama White House</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/hansen">James Hansen</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/scienceofclimatechange">Climate change</a></li></ul></div><div class="guRssAdvert"><a href="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/click.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534607010603285451565"><img src="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/image.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534607010603285451565" border="0" /></a></div><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html">More Feeds</a>
Slowdown of coral growth extremely worrying, say scientists
<div><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/79730?ns=guardian&pageName=Environment%3A+Slowdown+of+coral+growth+extremely+worrying%2C+say+scientists&ch=Environment&c3=guardian.co.uk&c4=Environment%2CScience%2CWorld+news%2CEndangered+habitats+%28Environment%29%2CClimate+change+%28Environment%29%2CClimate+change+%28Science%29&c5=Climate+Change%2CNot+commercially+useful%2CEthical+Living&c6=James+Randerson&c7=2009_01_01&c8=1141033&c9=article&c10=GU&c11=Environment&c12=Endangered+habitats&c13=&c14=&h2=GU%2FEnvironment%2FEndangered+habitats" width="1" height="1" /></div><p><strong></strong><strong></p><p></strong>Coral growth across the Great Barrier Reef has suffered a "severe and sudden" slowdown since 1990 that is unprecedented in the last four centuries, according to scientists.</p><p>The researchers analysed the growth rates of 328 coral colonies on 69 individual reefs that make up the 1,250 mile-long Great Barrier Reef, off north-east Australia. They found that the rate at which the corals were laying down calcium in their skeletons dropped by 14.2% between 1990 and 2005.</p><p>Corals around the world are severely threatened by coastal pollution, warming seas and over-exploitation, but the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/dec/10/road-to-copenhagen-poznan" title="Fifth of world's coral reefs dead, say marine scientists">most probable explanation</a> for the drop in the growth rate of the corals' calcium carbonate skeletons is acidification of the water due to rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. More acid water makes it more difficult for the coral polyps to grab the minerals they need to build their skeletons from the sea water.</p><p>"Our data shows that growth and calcification of massive <em>Porites</em> in the GBR [Great Barrier Reef] are already declining and are doing so at a rate unprecedented in coral records reaching back 400 years," wrote Dr Glenn De'ath from the <a href="http://www.aims.gov.au/" title="http://www.aims.gov.au/">Australian Institute of Marine Science</a> in Townsville, Queensland, and his colleagues in the journal <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/" title="Science magazine">Science</a>. "Verification of the causes of this decline should be made a high priority."</p><p><em>Porites</em> corals can be centuries old and grow into 6m tall mounds. Rather like a tree ring, each year's growth is visible as a band, so by drilling into the corals the scientists could examine the extent of growth in specific years. The team used x-rays and a technique called gamma densitometry to measure annual growth and skeletal density, which then allowed them to calculate the amount of calcification annually. They found that the calcification rate rose 5.4% between 1900 and 1970, but this dropped by 14.2% between 1990 and 2005. The drop was mainly due to a growth slowdown from 1.43cm a year to 1.24cm. The researchers measured the same effect in both nearshore and offshore reefs, suggesting it is not due to pollution from the land.</p><p>"This study has provided the first really rigorous snapshot of how calcification might be changing," marine biologist Ove Hoegh-Guldberg of the University of Queensland in Australia told Science. "The results are extremely worrying."</p><div style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/endangeredhabitats">Endangered habitats</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climatechange">Climate change</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/scienceofclimatechange">Climate change</a></li></ul></div><div class="guRssAdvert"><a href="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/click.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534643010603285451565"><img src="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/image.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534643010603285451565" border="0" /></a></div><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html">More Feeds</a>
A letter to Obama
We write to you as fellow parents concerned about the Earth that will be inherited by our children, grandchildren, and those yet to be born
Nasa's James Hansen warns Barack Obama on climate change
<div><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/53500?ns=guardian&pageName=Environment%3A+Climate+change+policies+failing%2C+Nasa+scientist+warns+Obama&ch=Environment&c3=guardian.co.uk&c4=Climate+change+%28Environment%29%2CBarack+Obama+%28News%29%2CJames+Hansen+%28Science%29%2CObama+White+House+%28News%29%2CCarbon+emissions+%28Environment%29%2CCarbon+offset+projects+%28Environment%29%2CMichelle+Obama+%28News%29%2CNuclear+issues+%28non-military%29%2CUS+news%2CEnvironment%2CWorld+news%2CScience&c5=Not+commercially+useful%2CClimate+Change%2CEthical+Living%2CUS+Elections&c6=James+Randerson&c7=2009_01_02&c8=1141013&c9=article&c10=GU&c11=Environment&c12=Climate+change&c13=&c14=&h2=GU%2FEnvironment%2FClimate+change" width="1" height="1" /></div><p><strong></strong>Current approaches to deal with climate change are ineffectual, one of the world's top climate scientists said today in a personal new year appeal to Barack Obama and his wife Michelle on the urgent need to tackle global warming.</p><p>With less than three weeks to go until Obama's <a href="http://www.presidential-inauguration.com/" title="">inauguration</a>, Prof <a href="http://www.giss.nasa.gov/staff/jhansen.html" title="">James Hansen</a>, head of Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, asked the recently appointed White House science adviser Prof John Holdren to pass the missive directly to the president-elect.</p><p>Obama spoke repeatedly during his campaign about the need to tackle climate change, and environmentalists fervently hope he will live up to his promises to pursue green policies.</p><p><a href="http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/20081229_DearMichelleAndBarack.pdf " title="">The letter</a>, from Hansen and his wife Anniek, is a personal plea to the first couple. It begins: "We write to you as fellow parents concerned about the Earth that will be inherited by our children, grandchildren, and those yet to be born ? Jim has advised governments previously through regular channels. But urgency now dictates a personal appeal."</p><p>In a covering letter to Holdren, Hansen explains that he wrote the letter a few weeks ago while in London. His wife had suffered a heart attack ("fortunately we were near a very good hospital") and while they waited for doctors to give the go-ahead to fly back to the US he decided to compose his petition to the new first family.</p><p>Hansen has been one of the most prominent advocates of action to tackle climate change since he first spoke on the issue at congressional hearings in the 1980s. His testimony to the senate featured in Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth and he has received numerous honours for his work on the issue, including <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/nov/22/climatechange.climatechangeenvironment" title="">the WWF's top conservation award</a>.</p><p>Hansen wrote that there is a "profound disconnect" between public policy on climate change and the magnitude of the problem as described by the science. He praised Obama's campaign rhetoric about "a planet in peril", but said that how the new president responds in office will be crucial. The letter contains a wish list of three policy measures to tackle global warming.</p><p>Hansen lambasts the current international approach of setting targets to be met through "cap and trade" schemes as not up to the task. "This approach is ineffectual and not commensurate with the climate threat. It could waste another decade, locking in disastrous consequences for our planet and humanity," the Hansens wrote.</p><p>The letter will make uncomfortable reading for officials in 10 north-eastern and middle?Atlantic states whose carbon cap and trade mechanism ? <a href="http://www.rggi.org/home " title="">the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative</a> ? got under way today. The scheme is the first mandatory, market-based greenhouse gas reduction programme in the US and it aims to cut greenhouse gas emissions from the power sector by 10% by 2018.</p><p>Hansen advocates a three-pronged attack on the climate problem ? all measures he has promoted before. First, he wants a moratorium and phase-out of coal-fired power stations ? which he calls "factories of death" ? that do not incorporate carbon capture and storage.</p><p>"Coal is responsible for as much atmospheric carbon dioxide as the other fossil fuels combined, and its reserves make coal even more important for the long run," the Hansens wrote.</p><p>Second, he proposes a "carbon tax and 100% dividend": a mechanism for putting a price on carbon without raising money for government coffers. The idea is to tax carbon at source, then redistribute the revenue equally among taxpayers, so high carbon users are penalised while low carbon users are rewarded.</p><p>Finally, Hansen wants a renewed research effort into so-called fourth generation nuclear plants, which can use nuclear waste as fuel. "In our opinion [fourth generation nuclear power] deserves your strong support, because it has the potential to help solve past problems with nuclear power: nuclear waste, the need to mine for nuclear fuel, and release of radioactive material."</p><p>Hansen argues that the current emphasis on reduction targets combined with carbon trading schemes make it too easy for countries to wriggle out of their commitments. He cites the example of Japan's increasing coal use ? the dirtiest fuel in terms of carbon emissions. To offset these increases in emissions Japan has bought credits from China through the <a href="http://cdm.unfccc.int/about/index.html" title="">clean development mechanism</a> ? an instrument set up by the Kyoto protocol ? yet China's emissions have continued to increase rapidly. China has now overtaken the US as the biggest polluter in the world.</p><p>"Nobody realistically expects that the large readily available pools of oil and gas will be left in the ground. Caps will not cause that to happen ? caps only slow the rate at which the oil and gas are used. The only solution is to cut off the coal source," the Hansens wrote.</p><div style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climatechange">Climate change</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/barackobama">Barack Obama</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/hansen">James Hansen</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/obama-white-house">Obama White House</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/carbonemissions">Carbon emissions</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/carbonoffsetprojects">Carbon offset projects</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/michelleobama">Michelle Obama</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/nuclear">Nuclear issues</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/usa">United States</a></li></ul></div><div class="guRssAdvert"><a href="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/click.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534708010603285451565"><img src="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/image.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534708010603285451565" border="0" /></a></div><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html">More Feeds</a>
Andrew Simms: 95 months and counting to save the planet
<div><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/15342?ns=guardian&pageName=Comment+is+free%3A+95+months+and+counting&ch=Comment+is+free&c3=guardian.co.uk&c4=Climate+change+%28Environment%29%2CEnvironment&c5=Climate+Change%2CEthical+Living&c6=Andrew+Simms&c7=2009_01_01&c8=1140770&c9=article&c10=GU&c11=Comment+is+free&c12=blog&c13=&c14=Comment+is+free&h2=GU%2FComment+is+free%2Fblog%2FComment+is+free" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>From today, based on the best estimates available, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/aug/01/climatechange.carbonemissions"> we have eight years</a> to head-off potentially uncontrollable <a href="http://www.onehundredmonths.org/">climatic upheaval</a>. What can happen in eight years? Quite a lot, actually. A world war can begin, and end. Two, in fact. <br /> <br />Last month there was a lacklustre meeting on climate change in <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/poznan">Poznan</a>, Poland. It was talks about more talks set to come later this year in Copenhagen. But that's all it was, talks. Now, on New Year's Day, hangovers and environmental ennui could prove a lethal combination. But squeeze those eyes open to 2009, and history tells us great things are possible. We are still in control. We just need to build, rapidly, new energy and transport systems and change our behaviour. <br /> <br />Only, we seem to have forgotten what we are capable of. <br /> <br />Victorian engineers would have been aghast at our timidity. Within our 8 year time frame, for example, between 1845 and 1852 there were 4,400 miles of railway track laid in Britain. <br /> <br />Today we desperately need to get people out of their cars and on to cleaner transport. But, after a decade of work and around £9bn spent just to upgrade the west coast mainline, it still <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/dec/15/transport-railtravel">didn't work</a> properly when "opened" last month. <br /> <br />Skip back to a weekend in1892. By contemporary standards, engineers began a project of breathtaking ambition on the morning of Saturday May 21, and they finished it by 4am on the following Monday morning, May 23. In just those two days a small, perfectly coordinated army of 4,200 workers, laid a total of 177 miles of track along the Great Western route to the south west, converting the old broad gauge lines to the new standard, or narrow gauge. <br /> <br />As Barack Obama waits in the wings to assume the presidency, he must be acutely conscious of the other great, if short-lived, American new dawn that began in 1961 when John F Kennedy became President. <br /> <br />In the first few months of Kennedy's term of office, he announced his nation's intention to put a man on the moon. As fantastic and, literally, other worldly as that must have seemed at the time, only eight years later, in July 1969, the US achieved its goal. By the time that the <a href="http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/Apollomon/Apollo.html">moon missions</a> were over in 1973, an estimated $20bn dollars had been spent. <br /> <br />For a meaningful comparison of what that would represent today you need to look at it as a relative share of GDP. That brings the modern equivalent figure to a substantial $200bn. It's big. But considering the iconic nature of the project, the virtually standing start it had, and the speed of accomplishment, it looks rather affordable now, compared with the sums thrown at the banking crisis. And, of course, they could say, "Hey, we put a man on the Moon." With the trillions thrown at the financial crisis it can, at best, be said, "Hey, it could've been worse." <br /> <br />The Apollo programme was money spent for a handful of men to become the only people in history to set foot on another celestial body. Now, what price is it worth paying to preserve for the whole of humanity the conditions under which civilisation emerged? In America they are indeed invoking the Apollo programme as a precedent for the overdue climate-response. <br /> <br />There are inverted, negative examples, too, of our ability to mobilise resources. According to Nobel Prize winning economist <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/07/AR2008030702846_pf.html">Joseph Stiglitz</a> the Iraq war has cost the US around $3tn. The war has been going for just under six years, has made an enormous mess, and is far from over. <br /> <br />An increasing number of voices in the climate change debate are beginning to express despair. Among them are concerned, informed and well-motivated scientists and journalists. Fair enough. Comparing the emerging trends on greenhouse gas emissions with the past track record of achievements in energy conservation, increased efficiency, and the introduction of renewable energy options provides little encouragement. <br /> <br />But that is to look in the wrong place for hope. The beginnings of the great transition are already visible in the 1,000 flowers blooming as green energy projects at the local level. But, the clean energy shift has, until now, been nowhere a political priority on the scale of war or the Apollo programme. Neither has it had the wild ambition that the architects of empire brought to building their new infrastructure. The eight years we now have left is time enough if this kind of boldness and vision can be wrestled towards solving the climate predicament. If we build it, they will come, and the great transition will run on time. Happy New Year.</p><div style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climatechange">Climate change</a></li></ul></div><div class="guRssAdvert"><a href="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/click.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Commentisfree&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534728010603285451565"><img src="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/image.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Commentisfree&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534728010603285451565" border="0" /></a></div><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html">More Feeds</a>
British engineers have developed a new environmentally friendly cement that is carbon-negative
<div><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/61392?ns=guardian&pageName=Environment%3A+Revealed%3A+The+cement+that+eats+carbon+dioxide%3Cbr+%2F%3E&ch=Environment&c3=guardian.co.uk&c4=Carbon+emissions+%28Environment%29%2CClimate+change+%28Environment%29%2CChemistry+%28Science%29%2CClimate+change+%28Science%29%2CEnvironment%2CPollution+%28Environment%29%2CConstruction+industry+%28Business%29%2CBusiness%2CUK+news%2CScience&c5=Business+Markets%2CNot+commercially+useful%2CClimate+Change%2CEthical+Living&c6=Alok+Jha&c7=2009_01_02&c8=1140768&c9=article&c10=GU&c11=Environment&c12=Carbon+emissions&c13=&c14=&h2=GU%2FEnvironment%2FCarbon+emissions" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>Cement, a vast source of planet-warming carbon dioxide, could be transformed into a means of stripping the greenhouse gas from the atmosphere, thanks to an innovation from British engineers.</p><p>The new environmentally friendly formulation means the cement industry could change from being a "significant emitter to a significant absorber of CO2," says Nikolaos Vlasopoulos, chief scientist at London-based Novacem, whose invention has garnered support and funding from industry and environmentalists.</p><p>The new cement, which uses a different raw material, certainly has a vast potential market. Making the 2bn tonnes of cement used globally every year pumps out <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/12/climatechange">5% of the world's CO2 emissions</a> - more than the entire aviation industry. And the long-term trends are upwards: a recent report by the French bank Credit Agricole estimated that, by 2020, demand for cement will increase by 50% compared to today.</p><p>Making traditional cement results in greenhouse gas emissions from two sources: it requires intense heat, and so a lot of energy to heat up the ovens that cook the raw material, such as limestone. That then releases further CO2 as it burns. But, until now, noone has found a large-scale way to tackle this fundamental problem.</p><p>Novacem's cement, based on magnesium silicates, not only requires much less heating, it also absorbs large amounts of CO2 as it hardens, making it carbon negative. Set up by Vlasopoulos and his colleagues at Imperial College London, Novacem has already attracted the attention of major construction companies such as Rio Tinto Minerals, WSP Group and Laing O'Rourke, and investors including the Carbon Trust.</p><p>The company has just started a £1.5m project funded by the government-backed Technology Strategy Board to build a pilot plant. If all goes well, Vlasopoulos expects to have Novacem products on the market within five years.</p><p>Jonathan Essex, a civil engineer at the building consultancy Bioregional who also sits on the environment and sustainability panel for the Institution of Civil Engineers, welcomed Novacem's ideas to tackle the carbon impact of cement. "In the UK the climate bill commits us to reduce CO2 emissions, and every sector should play its part. The construction industry needs to take greater responsibility for its own environmental impact." Essex said that, if Novacem can make their cement at a competitive price, the next step could be to take even more CO2 emissions out of the process by using renewable energy to fire the furnaces.</p><p>According to Novacem, its product can absorb, over its lifecycle, around 0.6 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of cement. This compares to carbon emissions of about 0.4 tonnes per of standard cement. "From that point of view, it's attractive," said Rachael Nutter, head of business incubators at the Carbon Trust. "The real challenge is what is the supply chain, who do you need to partner with to take it to market? The million-dollar question is what are the applications of it? If it ends up as decorative applications such as floor tiles, it's quite interesting but not as much as if you get into load-bearing structural stuff."</p><p>Previous attempts to make cement greener have included adding more aggregate to a concrete mixture, thereby using less cement. But this still does not tackle the problem of the carbon emissions from making the cement in the first place. Other systems use polymers in the mix, but none have yet made a significant impact on the market.</p><p>A spokesperson for the British Cement Association expressed a sceptical note, saying that though there was much ongoing laboratory work on new types of cement, there were also problems. "The reality is that the geological availability, and global distribution, of suitable natural resources, coupled with the extensive validation needed to confirm fitness-for-purpose, make it highly unlikely that these cements will a be realistic alternative for volume building."</p><p>Vlasopoulos responded that magnesium silicates are abundant worldwide, with 10,000 billion tonnes available, according to some estimates. "In addition, the production process of our cement is of a chemical nature, which means it can also utilise various industrial byproducts containing magnesium in its composition." He is confident the material will be strong enough for use in buildings but acknowledged that getting licenses to use it will take several years of testing.</p><h2>Explainer: Ecofriendly vs traditional cement</p><p></h2><p>Standard cement, also known as Portland cement, is made by heating limestone or clay to around 1,500C. The processing of the ingredients releases 0.8 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of cement. When it is eventually mixed with water for use in a building, each tonne of cement can absorb up to 0.4 tonnes of CO2, but that still leaves an overall carbon footprint per tonne of 0.4 tonnes.</p><p>Novacem's cement, which has a patent pending on it, uses magnesium silicates which emit no CO2 when heated. Its production process also runs at much lower temperatures - around 650C. This leads to total CO2 emissions of up to 0.5 tonnes of CO2 per tonne of cement produced. But the Novacem cement formula absorb far more CO2 as it hardens - about 1.1 tonnes. So the overall carbon footprint is negative - ie the cement removes 0.6 tonnes of CO2 per tonne used.</p><div style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/carbonemissions">Carbon emissions</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climatechange">Climate change</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/chemistry">Chemistry</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/scienceofclimatechange">Climate change</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/pollution">Pollution</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/construction">Construction industry</a></li></ul></div><div class="guRssAdvert"><a href="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/click.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534775010603285451565"><img src="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/image.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534775010603285451565" border="0" /></a></div><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html">More Feeds</a>
John Vidal on the lack of green campaigners among 2008's New Year's honours list
<div><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/49688?ns=guardian&pageName=Environment%3A+Where+are+the+green+New+Year%27s+honours%3F&ch=Environment&c3=guardian.co.uk&c4=Activists+%28Environment%29%2CClimate+change+%28Environment%29%2CConservation+%28Environment%29%2CCarbon+emissions+%28Environment%29%2CEnvironment&c5=Climate+Change%2CEthical+Living&c6=John+Vidal&c7=2008_12_31&c8=1140753&c9=article&c10=GU&c11=Environment&c12=blog&c13=&c14=Environment+blog&h2=GU%2FEnvironment%2Fblog%2FEnvironment+blog" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>This year's <a href="http://" title="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/new-years-honours-list-2008">New Year's honours list</a> is as good a way as any of gauging who and what the the establishment thinks is important. Judging by this year's crop, the natural world doesn't figure highly at all and campaigners for action on climate change and the scientists who have woken people up to what is happening have been studiously ignored.</p><p>Of the 1,000 names put forward by central and local government, professional bodies and others, I count no one who has played a major role in the climate change debate. There is no recognition of the NGOs, or industry's efforts to reduce emissions, and just a handful of people who have anything to do ? past, present or future - with the environment.</p><p>But there are plenty of controversial figures. <strong>Mike Parker</strong>, the former chief executive of <a href="http://www.bnfl.com/" title="">British Nuclear Fuels</a> (BNFL), was the Dow chemicals man who Tony Blair brought in when he decided Britain needed a new generation of nuclear power. Parker did himself out of a job in 2008 by flogging off most of BNFL's assets and, apart from his £1.4m salary and bonuses in the year to March 2008, got £526,100 from the public purse as a goodbye present. He will be remembered for leading the fight to ensure Britain kept nuclear power.</p><p>There's a gong, too, for <strong>David Dingle</strong>, the chief executive of Carnival UK, the largest cruise ship company in the world. Never mind that <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/739287/Flying-three-times-greener-than-cruising.html" title="">cruise ships were found earlier this year</a> to be emitting three times more greenhouse gases per passenger than aviation - , Dingle was almost certainly rewarded for his parallel work as president of the UK chamber of shipping. This industry body reacted furiously to the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/feb/13/climatechange.pollution" title="">Guardian's revelations that shipping was a giant source of emissions</a>, but has since accepted it must support an emissions trading scheme.</p><p>Also high in the controversy stakes is <strong>Lesley Ann Glover</strong>, Scotland's chief scientific adviser, a leading genetic engineer and exponent of GM foods. Joining her is <strong>David Mark Shucksmith</strong>, the academic who carried out a <a href="http://www.croftingfoundation.co.uk/index.php/consultations" title="">review of crofting for the Scottish government</a> and succeeded in offending nearly every crofter in the land by proposing that local boards take regulatory decisions and - undemining 'real burdens' of residency should be imposed on all croft houses.</p><p>Then there's <strong>Gideon Amos</strong>, the head of the <a href="http://www.tcpa.org.uk/" title="">Town and Country Planning Association</a>, who is rewarded for "services to sustainable development". This is a shorthand way of thanking him for backing government plans to build more on the green belt and supporting the concept of "ecotowns".</p><p>Some awards are are beyond doubt excellent. <strong>Alan Barber</strong> gets a gong "for services to the environment". This founder member of the <a href="http://www.cabe.org.uk/" title="">Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment</a> has long been a fantastic champion of parks and the environment and has worked with many cities.</p><p>UK-based conservationists are barely recognised, but one of the most popular awards is likely to be to <strong>Keith Datchlere</strong>, the inventor of a new way of collecting and sowing wild seeds to help restore medieval hay meadows.</p><p>And in a particularly lean year for awards for international environment and development, just one person from all the aid agencies is recognised. But congratulations nonetheless to <strong>Bruce Crowther</strong> of <a href="http://www.oxfam.org.uk/" title="">Oxfam</a>, "for services to "fair trade". Bruce initiated the first <a href="http://www.fairtrade.org.uk/get_involved/campaigns/fairtrade_towns/default.aspx" title="">Fairtrade Town campaign</a> way back in 2000 in Garstang, Lancashire.</p><p>Here's the full list. Let us know whom you think should have been rewarded by adding your comments below.</p><p><strong>CBE</strong></p><p><strong>Michael David Parker</strong>, former CEO, British Nuclear Fuels plc. For services to the energy industry</p><p><strong>OBE</strong></p><p><strong>Gideon Amos</strong>, chief exec, Town and Country Planning Association. For services to sustainable development</p><p><strong>Dr Alan Barber</strong>, for services to the environment</p><p><strong>Keith James Datchler</strong>, for services to conservation and to environmental land management</p><p><strong>Peter Parks</strong>, photographer. For services to natural history and to the film industry</p><p><strong>Prof David Mark Shucksmith</strong>, professor of planning, Newcastle University. For services to rural development and to crofting</p><p><strong>MBE</strong></p><p><strong>Elizabeth Anne Bolton</strong>, for services to animal welfare</p><p><strong>Bruce Crowther</strong>, for services to Oxfam and to fair trade</p><p><strong>David Niel Curwen</strong>, for services to the environment and to the community in the Cotswolds</p><p><strong>John Drayton</strong>, for services to the quarry industry and to geology</p><p><strong>Hugh Mervyn Edwards</strong>, for services to farming in Cumbria</p><p><strong>Denice Fennell</strong>, for services to nature conservation</p><p><strong>John Hansford</strong>, former director, Swindon Office, Natural Environment Research Ccl. For services to science</p><p><strong>Roger Jukes</strong>, for services to farming and to the environment in Powys</p><p><strong>David Alan Stroud</strong>, for services to nature conservation</p><p><strong>John Robert Walker</strong>, for services to nature conservation in Lincolnshire.</p><p><strong>Michael William Young</strong>, chairman, Institute of Northern Ireland Beekeepers. For voluntary services to apiculture and to conservation</p><p><strong>Prof David Norse</strong>, emeritus professor of environmental management, University College London Environment Institute and Whitehall China taskforce member. For services to international sustainable development and UK/China relations</p><p><strong>Nicholas Charles Young</strong>, journalist, researcher and trainer for aid agencies. For services to sustainable development and to civil society in China.</p><div style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/activists">Activists</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climatechange">Climate change</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/conservation/">Conservation</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/carbonemissions">Carbon emissions</a></li></ul></div><div class="guRssAdvert"><a href="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/click.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534802010603285451565"><img src="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/image.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534802010603285451565" border="0" /></a></div><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html">More Feeds</a>
Devon stands in for polar icecap
<div><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/62146?ns=guardian&pageName=UK+news%3A+Devon+stands+in+for+polar+icecap&ch=UK+news&c3=The+Guardian&c4=UK+news%2CArctic+%28News%29%2CClimate+change+%28Environment%29%2CEnvironment%2CWorld+news&c5=Climate+Change%2CNot+commercially+useful%2CEthical+Living&c6=Steven+Morris&c7=2008_12_31&c8=1140582&c9=article&c10=GU&c11=UK+news&c12=Arctic&c13=&c14=&h2=GU%2FUK+news%2FArctic" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>Dartmoor is to be the training ground for three explorers who are about to set out on a £3m scientific expedition to find out just how vulnerable the Arctic icecap is.</p><p>Polar veteran Pen Hadow is leading the team that in February will take radar measurements of the icecap. Their findings will be made available to next year's UN climate change conference and will hopefully help scientists calculate how long the dwindling icecap could last. </p><p>Hadow, and his team members Ann Daniels and Martin Hartley, are building up their stamina by dragging car tyres over the awkward terrain and clambering over the granite outcrops with heavy packs."We are using Dartmoor to help replicate the icescape that we will travel across," said Hadow. "The tors are as good as gyms." The team is also toughening up with mentally and physically punishing sessions at the commando training centre at Lympstone, in east Devon. </p><p>"We are going to be on the sea ice for about 100 days ... measuring the thickness of the ice and snow in temperatures as low as -50C," said Hadow. "Up to 12 hours a day pulling sledges of up to 100kg requires a huge physical effort."</p><div style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/arctic">Arctic</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climatechange">Climate change</a></li></ul></div><div class="guRssAdvert"><a href="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/click.ng/richmedia=yes&site=News&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534840010603285451565"><img src="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/image.ng/richmedia=yes&site=News&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534840010603285451565" border="0" /></a></div><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html">More Feeds</a>
Windfarm revolution tangled in red tape
<div><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/93735?ns=guardian&pageName=Environment%3A+Windfarm+revolution+tangled+in+red+tape&ch=Environment&c3=The+Guardian&c4=Wind+power+%28Environment%29%2CAlternative+energy+%28Environment%29%2CRenewable+energy+%28Environment%29%2CEnergy+%28Environment%29%2CClimate+change+%28Environment%29%2CCarbon+emissions+%28Environment%29%2CBusiness&c5=Business+Markets%2CClimate+Change%2CEnergy%2CEthical+Living&c6=Terry+Macalister&c7=2008_12_29&c8=1139726&c9=article&c10=GU&c11=Environment&c12=Wind+power&c13=&c14=&h2=GU%2FEnvironment%2FWind+power" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>Britain's wind power industry is facing a double blow of lengthy planning delays and rapidly rising construction costs in a crisis that threatens to sink the government's climate-change goals.</p><p>Dozens of projects are being held up by planning inquiries, with the average length of time taken to win permission being 15 to 20 months in England and far longer in Scotland and Northern Ireland, where the bulk of the schemes are being developed.</p><p>There are 262 different projects representing seven gigawatts stuck in the planning stages. And the rate of approvals is slowing despite government promises, according to the British Wind Energy Association (BWEA).</p><p>It said that the start of a third inquiry into one project in Norfolk that has already been delayed for seven years showed that the government has not cured the problem despite introducing the Planning Act to speed up the process.</p><p>Meanwhile Centrica, owner of British Gas and one of the most powerful energy utilities, said a 250-megawatt scheme off the Lincolnshire coast was hanging in the balance because turbine manufacturers and other suppliers had raised their prices so high they were jeopardising the economics of the scheme.</p><p>With Britain committed to producing 15% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020 to meet European Union targets, the government would be blown off course unless it intervened more robustly, said the BWEA.</p><p>"The government does not want the political problems of undermining local democracy by taking control out of the hands of local councillors," said Charles Anglin, director of communications at the BWEA. "But if it fails to act it is just storing up more difficult problems further down the road when it gives the go-ahead to coal or expensive gas projects instead."</p><p>To meet the 15% target, the BWEA estimates that Britain needs more than 30GW of wind capacity. "We think you can get 20GW offshore, which means you need 10-12GW onshore, and yet so far we have only got 2.5GW," Anglin said.</p><p>"We are aware that the planning system does need to be quicker and there are other barriers to projects," said a department of energy and climate change spokesman. "That is why we are going to unveil a renewable energy strategy with the next steps to meeting our goals."</p><p>The planning problem is highlighted by the battle waged by Ecotricity at Shipdham in Norfolk over a wind farm application submitted in December 2001. The company has won two planning inquiries only to find the final decision challenged in the high court by two local residents claiming potential noise problems.</p><p>The Planning Act applies only to schemes in England - and then only those over 50MW. "Eighty to 90% of the schemes in England are under 50MW anyway so the Planning Act does virtually nothing," Anglin said. </p><p>Offshore operators are also struggling because of the mounting costs that have already chased Shell and BP off to the US.</p><p>The cost of Centrica's 250MW Lincs wind farm off Skegness has increased from £2bn to £3bn a GW. "We are committed to building wind farms," said a company spokesman, "but we have got to get the costs down to an economic level."</p><div style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/windpower">Wind power</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/alternativeenergy">Alternative energy</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/renewableenergy">Renewable energy</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/energy">Energy</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climatechange">Climate change</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/carbonemissions">Carbon emissions</a></li></ul></div><div class="guRssAdvert"><a href="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/click.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534877010603285451565"><img src="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/image.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534877010603285451565" border="0" /></a></div><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html">More Feeds</a>
Third of Britain's mammals 'at risk'
<div><img alt="" src="http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.15.1/37937?ns=guardian&pageName=Environment%3A+Third+of+Britain%27s+mammals+%27at+risk%27&ch=Environment&c3=The+Observer&c4=Wildlife+%28Environment%29%2CAnimals+%28News%29%2CConservation+%28Environment%29%2CClimate+change+%28Environment%29%2CEndangered+species+%28Environment%29%2CEnvironment%2CUK+news%2CWorld+news%2CObserver&c5=Environment+Conservation%2CUnclassified%2CNot+commercially+useful%2CClimate+Change%2CEthical+Living&c6=Jo+Adetunji&c7=2008_12_28&c8=1139468&c9=article&c10=GU&c11=Environment&c12=Wildlife&c13=&c14=&h2=GU%2FEnvironment%2FWildlife" width="1" height="1" /></div><p>The hedgehog, water vole and hazel dormouse are among a number of British mammals that face becoming seriously endangered, research published today reveals.</p><p>Climate change and habitat loss have led to a dramatic increase in the number of mammals whose future survival is a cause for concern among conservationists, the study commissioned by the People's Trust for Endangered Species concludes. The Bechstein's bat, one of the country's rarest mammals, has shown a marked decline while the number of soprano pipistrelle bats has fallen by 46% in six years.</p><p>The report, the seventh annual assessment of the state of land mammals in Britain, says that more effort is needed to help the endangered species, which now number 18 - more than 30% of Britain's mammal species - up from 10 last year. Only two species on the UK Biodiversity Action Plan list, the otter and the lesser horseshoe bat, have increased their numbers. </p><p>Professor David Macdonald, conservation biologist in the wildlife conservation unit at Oxford University and co-author of the report, said: "Next year, the focus of biodiversity conservation in England will shift from individual species to a more integrated eco-system approach, incorporating climate change adaptation principles and establishing complementary species and habitat conservation."</p><p>Unpredictable and extreme weather conditions, combined with hotter, drier summers and wetter winters, were causing changes in the distribution and behaviour of some species, such as the hazel dormouse, the study finds.</p><p>Although modern agricultural practices and the disappearance of hedgerows have had a significant impact on mammals such as the hedgehog, "conflict" between mammal species, particularly involving the invasive American mink, is also posing problems for conservationists, it adds. Mink-free zones on a large scale need to be established to stop the "catastrophic decline" of water voles that has been seen over the last 20 years. </p><p>Pine martens, one of the species on the list of conservation concern and extremely rare in England and Wales, are preying on capercaillie in Scotland, one of the fastest-declining gamebirds.</p><p>Wild deer, whose distribution has been increasing over the last 30 years, are the major cause of damage to Woodland Sites of Special Scientific Interest and are also destroying vegetation cover for smaller mammals. The damage caused is likely to worsen unless more work is done to fence in deer and manage their populations, the report concludes.</p><p>"The interaction between people and nature has positive and negative parts. If people are looking for a single, simple answer then they're going to be frustrated," Macdonald said. </p><p>"Conservation is as much about control and management as it is about preservation. Sometimes you've too many and in other places too few, which involves fostering where necessary and controlling elsewhere."</p><p>The report also tackles the controversial issue of reintroducing species into the wild where they have become extinct, including the beaver, which will be put back into Scotland next spring for the first time in 400 years. The report said the introduction would bring more benefits than costs to biodiversity. Other species being considered for release are up to 450 Eurasian lynx, which would give Scotland the fourth largest lynx population in Europe. Nida al-Fulaij, development manager for the People's Trust for Endangered Species, said mammals had often been neglected in people's imagination. </p><p>"We've been funding more and more mammal conservation work in the UK and are concerned about the number of mammals on the conservation priority list. There's no overall organisation for mammals, in the way that there is the RSPB for birds, and mammal conservation has been very fragmented. Mammals are not as easy to see as birds - many are nocturnal," al-Fulaij said. </p><p>"Lots are considered vermin and it's not until numbers drop, as with the hedgehog, that people notice. Sometimes there's a misconception that they're very numerous when in fact numbers are falling. Urban areas, hedgerows and gardens are great habitats and we would encourage people to go out and enjoy them."</p><div style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;"><ul><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/wildlife">Wildlife</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/animals">Animals</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/conservation/">Conservation</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climatechange">Climate change</a></li><li><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/endangeredspecies">Endangered species</a></li></ul></div><div class="guRssAdvert"><a href="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/click.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534921010603285451565"><img src="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/image.ng/richmedia=yes&site=Environment&country=usa&spacedesc=rss&system=rss&transactionID=1231212534921010603285451565" border="0" /></a></div><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk">guardian.co.uk</a> © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our <a href="http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html">Terms & Conditions</a> | <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/webfeeds/1,,1309488,00.html">More Feeds</a>
Additional Resources
How Specialty Gases Differ From Industrial Gases
By Bob Jefferys, Fri Dec 9th
When it comes to compressed gases, there is often confusion overthe difference between industrial gases (sometimes referred toas commodity or bulk gases) and specialty gases (sometimesreferred to Read more...
|
Additional Resources
Honda Parts Meet The Standards Of The Reduction Of Fuel Emissions
Honda ties up with SELEV, "Study of Extremely Low Emission Vehicles", a Riverside program hosted by the University of California, which shows the advantage of upgrading the internal combustion engine Read more...
|
We strive to provide only quality articles, so if
there is a specific topic related to climate change that you would
like us to cover, please contact us at any time.
And again, thank you to those contributing daily to
our climate change website.
CNN global warming misinformation makes its way to <em>The Radio Factor</em>
On <em>The Radio Factor</em>, guest host Douglas Urbanski cited a December 18 segment from CNN's <em>Lou Dobbs Tonight</em> to support the assertion, which has been widely discredited, that "man-made climate change" is "one of the biggest lies of our time" and in doing so echoed several of the debunked claims and suggestions about global warming included in that CNN segment.
"Winter storm" causes Dobbs to ask: "What's that global warming deal?"
Lou Dobbs said during the introduction of his CNN show: "And tonight, unusual winter storms are dumping snow in unusual places across Western states, and a huge snowstorm is headed toward the Northeast. This is global warming?" During his segment on the issue, Dobbs hosted Heartland Institute senior fellow and science director Jay Lehr without disclosing that Heartland receives funding from the energy industry and without challenging Lehr's assertions that "[t]he last 10 years have been quite cool" and that "the sun" -- rather than humans -- is responsible for recent climate change.
Levin cited "global cooling" study to dismiss efforts to "control carbon dioxide" emissions, ignoring warning by study's co-author not to do so
On his radio show, Mark Levin cited a recent study predicting that an ice age will occur in the next 10,000 to 100,000 years as purported evidence that humans should not "try and control carbon dioxide" emissions that contribute to global climate change. But Levin did not mention that the study's co-author reportedly warned against using the study to argue that "we should stop fighting warming" and stated: "There's no excuse for saying 'we've got to keep pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.' "
Milwaukee radio host smeared "greedy, overpaid unionized schoolteacher[s]" who talk about global warming
On his Milwaukee radio talk show, Mark Belling referred to schoolteachers who talk to their students about global warming as "idiot union teacher[s]," "liberal unionized hack[s]," "greedy, overpaid unionized schoolteacher[s]," and "fruitcake[s]."
Hannity compared carbon offsets to "cheat[ing] on your wife," ignored Murdoch's efforts to make News Corp. carbon neutral
On <em>Hannity & Colmes</em>, Sean Hannity criticized the purchase of credits to offset one's "carbon footprint," asserting, "Those offsets -- that is the biggest hoax in the world. ... You know what it's like? You go cheat on your wife, and then say, 'Honey, but don't worry. I bought an offset.' Good luck." Hannity has yet to address the pledge by News Corp. chairman and CEO Rupert Murdoch "to be carbon neutral, across all our businesses" -- which includes Fox News -- "by 2010."
Discussing TCPR claims, O'Reilly said he'd "like to hear [Gore's] side of things," but ignored Gore's response to TCPR
Bill O'Reilly asserted: "The Tennessee Center for Policy Research [TCPR] says the former vice president [Al Gore] is still using a massive amount of energy at his Tennessee mansion -- more than 20 times the national average." O'Reilly later stated: "So it looks like Gore is a pinhead, but we would like to hear his side of things. And he has an open invitation to appear on the <em>Factor</em>." But at no point did O'Reilly mention that Gore has reportedly given "his side of things" in response to a June 17 TCPR press release on the subject of Gore's purported energy use.
Hume claimed Gore's "energy use has surged more than 10 percent," ignored Gore's response that it's all "green power"
On <em>Special Report</em>, citing purported findings by the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, Brit Hume claimed that Al Gore's "energy use has surged more than 10 percent" since environmentally friendly renovations were completed on his home. Hume offered no response from Gore. Responding to the charge, a Gore spokeswoman stated that "[w]hen [the Gores] do use power, it's green power." According to the Tennessee Valley Authority, green power "create[s] less waste and pollution" than standard electricity.
<em>Wash. Times</em>' Pruden falsely claimed that "the earth has been measurably cooling for the last decade"
In a <em>Washington Times</em> column, Wesley Pruden falsely claimed that "the earth has been measurably cooling for the last decade, despite everything [former Vice President] Al [Gore] and his followers have done about it." In fact, the United Kingdom's Met (Meteorological) Office lists as a "fact" that "[t]emperatures are continuing to rise" and states that "temperature change over the latest decade (1998-2007) alone shows a continued warming of 0.1° C per decade."
MSNBC hosted Breaux and Lott to defend oil and gas companies -- but failed to note they're lobbyists for them
On <em>MSNBC Live</em>, Andrea Mitchell discussed energy policy with former Sens. John Breaux and Trent Lott but failed to disclose that both are lobbyists for major oil and gas companies. While Mitchell said that Lott and Breaux "formed a firm" together, she did not note that their firm conducts lobbying or that its clients include oil and gas companies Chevron, Shell, and Plains Exploration & Production Co.
Beck revived falsehood that Bill Clinton said, "We've got to slow down our economy" to fight global warming
On his nationally syndicated radio show, Glenn Beck falsely claimed that former President Bill Clinton said, "We've got to slow down our economy" in order to combat global warming, and aired a portion of a speech Clinton made in January. However, as Clinton's full remarks make clear, he did not suggest "slow[ing] down our economy" to fight global warming.
Jonah Goldberg misrepresented Gore's comments about Hurricane Katrina
In his <em>Los Angeles Times</em> column, Jonah Goldberg asserted that in an NPR interview, Al Gore "chuckled" at the idea that Hurricane Katrina "was God's wrath for New Orleans' sexual depravity," then "went on to blame Katrina on man's energy sinfulness." In fact, Gore stated during the interview that "any individual storm can't be linked singularly to global warming." Goldberg also claimed that the numbers of polar bears "have quadrupled in the last 50 years"; in fact, data to support estimates of the polar bear population 50 years ago are reportedly nonexistent, recent growth in the polar bear population is believed to be linked to hunting bans, and the Department of Interior found that "the polar bear is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future."
Previewing McCain's environment speech, Reuters did not mention his voting record or include criticisms of his positions
Reuters reported that Sen. John McCain would pledge "to take the lead in combating global climate change if elected president in a speech that set him apart from the policies of U.S. President George W. Bush." However, in reporting on McCain's environmental positions that his campaign believes will "win support from independents and centrist Democrats," Reuters did not mention his voting record and did not include any criticism of McCain's positions. By contrast, <em>The Washington Post</em> noted that "McCain's lifetime League of Conservation Voters score is 24 percent, compared with 86 for Obama and 86 for Clinton."
Fox's Baier misrepresented Gore's comments about Myanmar cyclone
Fox News' Bret Baier claimed that in an interview on NPR, "Former Vice President Al Gore says global warming is to blame for the cyclone in Myanmar." In fact, while Gore did discuss the cyclone in the context of global warming, he also stated -- just moments earlier -- that "any individual storm can't be linked singularly to global warming."
Fox's E.D. Hill falsely claimed that "U.N. meteorologists" say "the planet may actually cool off for the 10th year in a row"
On<em> America's Pulse</em>, host E.D. Hill falsely claimed, in a teaser for an upcoming segment, that "the U.N. says the planet may actually cool off for the 10th year in a row." Hill later asserted: "U.N. meteorologists now saying that we could have, for the 10th year in a row, a colder year, temperatures ... decreasing, not warming, getting colder." In fact, global mean temperatures, as measured in two widely used data sets, have not decreased in each of the past 10 years; further, according to those data sets' producers, the data continue to show a long-term warming trend.
<em>NY Times</em> understated Inhofe's views on global warming
In an article discussing potentially competitive 2008 Senate elections, <em>The New York Times</em> understated Sen. James Infohe's views on global warming, reporting that Inhofe "has said that its effects are exaggerated." In fact, Inhofe has repeatedly referred to global warming as the "greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people" and reportedly compared Al Gore's global warming documentary to Adolf Hitler's <em>Mein Kampf</em>.
