The majority of the scientific community believes that global warming is a real threat to the world as we know it today. They believe that global warming mostly results from the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from human activities such as industrial processes, fossil fuel combustion, and deforestation.

There are many causes of global warming. One cause is carbon dioxide that is made from the burning of fossil fuels from power plants for the purpose of electricity generation. Coal makes up 93% of these emissions. Coal emits 1.7 times more carbon per unit of energy when burned than natural gas and 1.25 times more carbon than oil. Consequently, natural gas gives off 50% less carbon dioxide for the same amount of energy produced. Another cause is carbon dioxide that is made from the burning of gasoline in internal-combustion engines of cars, minivans, sport utility vehicles, pick-up trucks, and jeeps. Poor gas mileage is considered the main culprit here. According to the Environmental Protection Agency’s 2000 Fuel Economy Guide, a new Dodge Durango sports utility vehicle (with a 5.9 liter engine) that gets 12 miles per gallon in the city will emit around 800 pounds of carbon dioxide over a distance of 500 city miles; this translates to 19.6 pounds of carbon dioxide emitted into the air for every gallon of gas a vehicle consumes.

Another cause of global warming is carbon dioxide that is made from commercial trucks, contributing another 13% of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions.

Carbon dioxide that is made from airplanes is another cause of global warming – the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that aviation causes 3.5% of global warming, with a projection that it will rise to 15% by 2050.

Another cause of climate warming is carbon dioxide that is emitted by the structure of buildings, accounting for another 12% of carbon dioxide emissions.

Methane is another cause of climate warming, as methane is the second most important greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide. According to the IPCC, methane is 20 times more effective than CO2 in trapping heat in the atmosphere. US Emissions Inventory 2004 levels of atmospheric methane have risen 145% in the last 100 years. Sources of this rise in methane include rice paddies, bovine flatulence, bacteria in bogs, and fossil fuel production.

Another cause of global warming is nitrous oxide, a colourless, non-flammable gas with a sweetish odour. It is naturally produced by oceans and rainforests, while it is also artificially produced in nylon, nitric acid production, agricultural fertilizers, cars with catalytic converters, and burning organic matter.

Deforestation is also one of the causes of global warming, the second-leading cause only to carbon emissions. Deforestation is responsible for 25% of all carbon emissions entering the atmosphere, as 34 million acres of trees are burn and cut each year. The destroying of tropical forests alone emit hundreds of millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year.

City gridlock is another global warming cause. According to an annual study by traffic engineers from Texas A&M University, drivers in Los Angeles and New York alone waste 600 million gallons of gas annually while just sitting in traffic. That translates into around 7.5 million tons of carbon dioxide that is emitted into the atmosphere. And remember, just two major U.S. cities are named, not to mention the rest of the U.S. and the world.

Another global warming cause is just the amount of carbon already in the Earth’s atmosphere naturally, as 750 billion tons of carbon are present. Add in another 800 billion tons of carbon that is dissolved in the surface layers of the world’s oceans.

As you can see, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide are the major causes of global warming. You can also see there are many sources of these gases, especially carbon dioxide. Much work needs to be done in order to address all the causes of global warming.

We are on the doorstep of environmental and energy crises. In 2003, the fourth hottest year since 1880, thirty-five thousand Europeans died in a heat wave. Today we watch as glaciers recede and ice shelves break off into the sea. In the US, we import over 60% of our oil. Energy has been the primary motivator for two wars resulting in thousands of American armed forces deaths and hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths in the Middle East.

Hurricane Katrina exposed our energy supply/demand vulnerability – petroleum and natural gas prices skyrocketed, causing economic upheaval after just this one storm. In 2006, the US trade deficit set a record for the fifth straight year. This is not sustainable and leaves the US vulnerable to a sell-off in US stocks and bonds that would stall the economy. Finally, fossil fuel combustion has caused mercury in fish, acid rain, and increasing incidence of asthma.

These are effects and risks that can be grouped under four categories, which I call The Four Biggies:

1) Global warming (global climate change)
2) Dependence on foreign energy
3) Trade deficit
4) Pollution from non-renewable fuels

These serious problems are all related to the combustion of fossil fuels and our dependence on the finite supply of these fuels. The sooner we address this underlying issue, the easier it will be to fix The Four Biggies.

Society gets enormous benefits from small amounts of fossil fuels. However, the market does not internalize (account for) all the costs of fossil fuel trade, masking the true cost of “cheap energy” and giving false signals on environment and energy problems. Simply put: Non-renewable sources of energy should cost more.

We need a market-based solution to set the stage for our ingenuity, drive, and marketplace to fix our energy problem and solve The Four Biggies. We need a solution similar in function and scope to our patent and antitrust laws – that is, we need to change the “rules” for the long-term benefit of all.

One very effective approach is tax shifting – that is, lowering taxes on beneficial activities (like labor) and raising them on negative activities (like burning fossil fuels), with the net effect on the average consumer being a financial wash.

To apply this concept to The Four Biggies, Congress would cut federal income taxes but raise taxes on non-renewable energy sources like oil, coal, and natural gas to replace the lost revenue. This tax shift should be phased-in over 10 years. For individuals and families, the shift should be as close to cost-neutral as possible. Those that pay no income tax or currently receive a credit – that is, those whose increased energy costs could not be offset by lowering their income taxes – would be reimbursed for their additional energy costs in other ways, such as a larger credit and/or subsidized transportation.

The very first things that should change under a tax-shifting plan to address global warming (and other problems) are the massive federal subsidies given to US companies that operate in the arenas of oil, gas, nuclear, coal, and mining.

Examples of such institutionalized subsidies include:

1) Waivers of insurance requirements for nuclear power plants and the massive annual government spending on US nuclear-power management and infrastructure via the Department of Energy’s annual budget.

2) Pricing of mining concessions on federal lands based on a US law that is more than a century old.

3) Financial incentives to oil companies to “go out and find more” at the same time these companies are raking in record profits and cutting exploration and development budgets so they can reinvest their cash in their own stocks as they anticipate further supply constriction, price increases, and even higher profits in the future.

4) Weak pollution laws for all extractive and energy industries and lax enforcement of the regulations that do exist.

Eliminating such giveaways and dirty profits – with the changes being reflected in the prices of the products produced by these industries – would be an easy first step in any effort to shift taxes from workers’ paychecks to polluters’ products.

The resulting higher prices for fossil-fuel energy will reduce our use of it and stimulate the US alternative (renewable) energy industry by “leveling the playing field.” As consumption of non-renewable energy decreases, an automatic “ratchet” mechanism would further shift taxes from income to energy to maintain the incentives and the tax base.

Alternative-energy industries have been hindered by cheap fossil-fuel and nuclear energy, both of which are heavily subsidized. Between 1985 and 2005, alternative energy in the US grew by a mere 0.5%, according to the Energy Information Administration. Phased-in intentional increases in energy prices would make many alternative-energy projects economically viable. The renewable energy industry would grow rapidly, refining their technologies and achieving economies of scale.

This would create an export boom, since other countries face similar problems and are already seeking solutions. A revitalized alternative energy industry will create technical jobs in the US and a mighty economic engine providing life-enhancing products for people all over the world.

This shift in taxes will improve our positions on trade, fossil fuel dependence, pollution, and greenhouse gases – The Four Biggies.

It is common to see news in the paper or on television about flashfloods in the country or in other parts of the world. These are all caused by changes in the weather and environment which are usually attributed to global warming. Although you may know that these phenomena are serious and can wreak havoc in the future, you may not be aware that environmental changes may actually have a direct effect on your health. While the melting of the polar caps should be a cause for alarm, you should be more concerned about the little changes in your body that global warming can bring.

Here are some health concerns linked to environmental changes:

Extreme Rashes

Due to the rise in greenhouse gases, deadlier strains of poison ivy are on the rise. As a result, the rashes expected from more lethal strains would be worse. A Duke University study found that urushiol oil, which is the one responsible for making poison ivy dangerous, when exposed to higher levels of carbon dioxide are 30% more potent than those that are exposed in prevalent CO2 levels. In fact, some experts believe that the toxicity of poison in plants like poison ivy is already higher today than decades ago.


Heatstroke

For the past few years, more and more people in the US have died from heatstroke. The people who are at a higher risk of getting heatstroke are the elderly and the very young children. One of the main reasons why temperature is high in some places in the country, particularly during summer, is that changes in climatic patterns are affecting the region’s nighttime cooling. In Europe back in 2003, figures have shown that about 35,000 people were killed during heat waves.

Skin Cancer

Experts have estimated that over 1 million new cases of skin cancer will be reported in the US in 2008. In fact, this type of cancer is the most common in the country today. Although efforts in dramatically reducing the production of chlorofluourocarbons (more commonly known as CFCs) were successful, the damage has already been done in the ozone layer. As a result, more deadly ultraviolet rays are penetrating the earth.

Toxic Seafood

The rising ocean temperature is making sea-borne bacteria flourish. In the past decade, you will see a rising trend of red tide outbreaks in clams, oysters, mussels and other shellfishes that did not only affect fish, but also humans. Aside from making shellfish unfit to eat, these sedimentary organisms are also responsible for turning regular mercury into methylmercury, a more toxic form, which can be found in aquatic animals like shark, tilefish, tuna, king mackerel and swordfish.

Severe Allergic Reactions

People allergic to pollen are sneezing and coughing a lot more as the spring and summer seasons seem to be longer due to global warming. The increase in CO2 is also making plants produce bigger and more pollen. Furthermore, the greenhouse gases are also encouraging more fungi spores to grow.

What You Need To Do

The first thing you need to do is to start caring for the environment. The little things that you do in saving electricity and resources or minimizing garbage and pollution can go a long way in stopping the further deterioration of the planet.

Secondly, it would be wise for you to start protecting yourself from the harmful rays of the sun by using sunscreen every time you go outdoors during the day. Make sure that the sun block that you buy protects you from both UVA and UVB rays.

Lastly, boost your health by eating right and exercising daily. You may also perform detoxification at least once or twice a year to make sure that the toxins inside you will be safely eliminated out of your body and system. One product that can help you undergo detoxification with ease is Colpurin. For more information about Colpurin, simply click on to http://www.colpurin.com/.

www.ukipmeps.org ► European Parliament, Strasbourg – 20.01.2010 ► Debate Council and Commission statements – Outcome of the Copenhagen summit on climate change Speaker: Godfrey Bloom MEP, UKIP (Yorkshire & Lincs.), EFD group. The document mentioned by Godfrey Bloom is a paper collated by Richard Treadgold, of the Climate Conversation Group, from a combined research project undertaken by members of the Climate Conversation Group and the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition. You can find it on the UKIP MEPs’ website in our CO2 Scam blog here: www.ukipmeps.org ……………………………. ►Credits: Video: European Parliament Audio Visual ……………………………. FULL TRANSCRIPT Well, Mr. President, of course you can tell I’m a sceptic [there was a cut in the actual recording here] because I don’t dress like a scarecrow. I fought my way through the blizzard in Copenhagen like many of you did – interesting isn’t it that we had the coldest winter so far on record in London for 30 years. It’s the same in Poland, it’s the same in Korea, it’s the same in China. We’ve had the coldest temperatures in Florida, Arizona, Texas – the first snow in Texas, I think, for a hundred years. And of course as Giles Coren of the London Times said – my goodness me, we simply don’t get it, of course. Of course that’s what global warming is all about – we’ve got to get used to freezing temperatures. Well we’ve seen the Al Gore Hockey stick which is still, I gather, being shown in … Video Rating: 4 / 5

At first glance, there doesn’t seem like there could be any connection between global warming and seismic activity. After all, why would the earth become less stable just because it’s a little warmer?
Well, connected they are. The earth’s crust is a lot more sensitive than you might think. There are well documented cases of even the load of water in a new dam triggering earthquakes in the local area.
A number of geologists say glacial melting, in particular, will unleash pent-up pressures in the Earth’s crust, causing extreme geological events such as earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanic eruptions.
Consider this: a cubic meter of ice weighs nearly a ton and some glaciers are kilometers thick. This prodigious weight acts to suppress tectonic movements in the underlying crust, and plug cracks where volcanic magma might otherwise escape to the surface. When the weight is removed through melting, the suppressed strains and stresses of the underlying rock are free to come to life.
As reported only this year, Harvard seismologist Göran Ekström has found a striking increase in the frequency of glacial quakes, particularly in Greenland, but also in Alaska and Antarctica.
Greenland quakes have risen from 6 to 15 a year between 1993 and 2002, to 30 in 2003, 23 in 2004 and 32 in the first 10 months of 2005, closely matching the rise in Greenland’s temperatures over the same period. Their source was traced to surges and slips within ice sheets, where rapid melting is causing water to collect under glaciers, making them glide faster into the sea, triggering quakes.
Similarly, retreating glaciers in southern Alaska are likely to open the way for future earthquake activity.
Accelerated melting of glacial ice decreases the load on the Earth’s crust, thereby decreasing the pressure holding volcanic conduits closed. Already, we are seeing evidence of new volcanic activity in Antarctica. A new, previously unknown volcano has appeared on the sea bottom in waters off the Antarctic Peninsula, in an area with no previous record of volcanic activity. Investigations into a large area of surface slumping on the West Antarctic Ice Sheet revealed a huge accumulation of water underneath that has now been shown to be due to an active volcano erupting under the sheet.
Glacial melting has a less direct but just as unsettling additional impact on global seismic activity. The reliquified water released raises sea levels and increases the weight on the ocean floor, unbalancing tectonic forces deep below the surface. Underwater quakes and therefore tsunamis could thus become more frequent. Though they get little attention, glacial melting of the Antarctic ice is already causing earthquakes and underwater landslides.
Other hotspots at high risk of submarine earthslides – similar to the one that set off the disastrous tsunami in Indonesia in 2004 – include seaward of the mouths of the Ganges, Nile and Amazon rivers, as well as much of the Atlantic and US coast (E. G. Nisbet, 2004.)
Even the shape of the Earth appears to have been significantly influenced by climate events due to changes in the mass of water stored in oceans, continents and atmosphere. Satellite data indicate the bulge in Earth’s gravity field at the equator is growing, counteracting the long-term shrinking up to 1998 due to post-glacial rebound.
Current estimates of polar ice melting are too small to explain the recent changes in the gravity field. Scientists postulate that global warming-induced redistribution of existing water mass is possibly behind the phenomenon. However, the specific cause still remains a mystery.
Dramatic climate shifts of the past have also been associated with spectacular seismic activity. During the late glacial and early Holocene periods when climate was see-sawing from one extreme to another in the interval known as the Younger Dryas, submarine landslips were widespread. For example, 8,200 years ago an enormous slip in the Norwegian Sea involving over 3000 cubic kilometers of material set off a massive tsunami more than 20 meters high. At about the same time mega-earthquakes ruptured the crust and lifted Scandinavia’s mountain backbone by 5 to 15 meters. Could it happen again?
The science suggests that as redistribution of the Earth’s mass induced by global warming disturbs the relative equilibrium of its crust, monumental forces in the form of increasing earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanic activity could be unleashed. And the forecasts from some quarters are dramatic – – not only will the earth shake, it will spit fire (Bueckert, 2006).

I don’t believe in Global Warming, come and sing with me, Oooooo! Video Rating: 4 / 5

I used to joke that the government issues so much information every day, it can’t help but let the truth slip out every once in a while. The Bush Administration’s recent report on global warming is a classic example. Though far from perfect, it contains some crucial but awkward truths that neither George W. Bush nor his environmentalist critics want to confront. Which may explain why the Administration has sought to bury the report, while critics have misrepresented its most ominous conclusion.

The US Climate Action Report made headlines because it contradicted so much of what the Administration has said about global warming. Not only is global warming real, according to the report, but its consequences – heat waves, water shortages, rising sea levels, loss of beaches and marshes, more frequent and violent weather – will be punishing for Americans.

The report’s biggest surprise was its admission that human activities, especially the burning of oil and other fossil fuels, are the primary cause of climate change. Of course, the rest of the world has known since 1995 that human actions have “a discernible impact” on the global climate, to quote a landmark report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But the White House has resisted this conclusion. After all, if burning fossil fuels is to blame for global warming, it makes sense to burn less of them.

To a lifelong oilman like Bush, who continues to rely on his former industry colleagues for campaign contributions as well as senior staff, such a view is nothing less than heresy. No wonder, then, that Bush and his high command have virtually repudiated the report. Although their staffs helped write it, both EPA Administrators claimed they were unaware of the report until the New York Times disclosed its existence on June 3. Bush himself dismissed it as a mere product of “the bureaucracy,” that oft-vilified boogeyman of right-wing ideology.

But he could equally have blamed his own father. The only reason U.S. Climate Action Report 2002 was compiled in the first place is that George Bush the First signed a global warming treaty at the 1992 Earth Summit that obligates the United States to periodically furnish such reports to the UN (one more reason, it seems, to despise treaties). But somebody in the Administration must have seen trouble coming, because the report could not have been released with less fanfare: It was simply posted on the EPA’s website, three unguided links in from the homepage. If you weren’t looking for it, you’d never find it.

The Administration has been hammered for issuing a report that on one hand admits that global warming threatens catastrophe but on the other maintains there is no need to reduce consumption of fossil fuels. The report squares this circle by arguing that global warming has now become inevitable, so we should focus less on preventing it than on adapting to it. To deal with water scarcity, for example, the report advocates building more dams and raising the price of water to encourage conservation. Critics see such recommendations as proof that the Administration is doing nothing about global warming. Unfortunately, it’s not that simple.

The worst thing about the new global warming report is that it is absolutely correct about a fundamental but often unmentioned aspect of the problem: the lag effect. Most greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere for approximately 100 years. The upshot of this undeniable chemical fact is that no matter what remedial steps are taken today, humanity is doomed to experience however much global warming the past 100 years of human activities will generate.

That does not mean we should make matters worse by continuing to burn fossil fuels, as Bush foolishly urges; our children and grandchildren deserve better than that. It does mean, however, that we as a civilization must not only shift to green energy sources immediately but also begin planning how we will adapt to a world that is bound to be a hotter, drier, more disaster-punctuated place in the twenty-first century.

Many environmentalists know it is too late to prevent global warming; the best we can do is minimize its scope. They don’t like to admit this truth, because they fear it will discourage people from making, and demanding, the personal and institutional changes needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. There is that risk. But a truth does not disappear simply because it is inconvenient. Besides, a green energy future would mean more, not less, economic well-being for most Americans, while also increasing our chances of avoiding the most extreme global warming scenarios. Sometimes the truth hurts. But avoiding it will hurt even more.

Image by Changhua Coast Conservation Action via Flickr

• Global warming ‘is happening faster’
• Warming underestimated, study finds