tagged w/ Carbon
-
Week one of the Copenhagen climate conference is coming to a close. What's happened so far? Here's a quick round-up for you. (Climate conference enthusiasts - I'm sure I'm leaving a bit out - feel free to add in the comments.)
We covered the walk-out over the so-called "Danish text". (Despite folks who seemed to think we were censoring "Danish text" by not letting people use it as a tag. Site bug, people! Read all about it in the comments! Tag away!) Walkouts have continued among smaller and developing nations, leading to fears that the conference will produce two rival documents.
Answering calls for developed countries to pony up the cash, the European Union came through with a pledge of over $10 billion (over 7 billion euros), but leaders from developing nations said the figure wasn't high enough.
And what about the US? Well President Obama was busy this week on the other side of the North Sea from Denmark accepting his Nobel Prize. Back home, his loving and supportive nation was doing it's best to constructively add to the conference with the "climategate controversy" (and I was inspired to launch a new series called "-Gates that are not -gates"). And America's official delegation to Copenhagen? Well the Interior Secretary checked out a wind farm. We've got video!
U.S. Visits Danish Wind Farm: Raw Video
Meanwhile Leah Lamb has been crazy-busy over on Current Green with her live daily Copenhagen check-in. (Tune in at 9:15 am PT!) We've also got video of that!
Calling in From Copenhagen: Joshua Kahn Russell (Video)
Leah also weighed in on climate change skeptic Lord Monckton's comparing activists to Hitler Youth. Her take: Totally a publicity stunt.
That's it for today's round-up - we'll be ramping up to even more Copenhagen coverage next week as the negotiations intensify.
Recently on the Current News Blog:
- Uganda's new laws: Anti-gay and FGM
- The Beast of Kandahar and conducting war via remote
- Spiral light over Oslo, Norway - Mystery SOLVED!
- Climategate: Gates that are not gates (a new series)
- It's Vanguard Day on Current News!Week one of the Copenhagen climate conference is coming to a close. What's... more
-
-
There are few things that make me more catatonically depressed than the partisan shouting match we call news today. I get it, controversial partisan statements mean more viewers which means more money which in turn means more controversial partisan rejoinders. I understand the financial imperative here, I'm no news-biz-hayseed. But I have to say, it sucks and it's dangerous. It sucks because it's boring (blah blah HuffPo blah blah Fox News...everybody just STFU and focus on the news, please). It's dangerous because it distorts anything a few people disagree with into an equal-time-required rancorous partisan debate.
Case in point: Today the Washington Post let Sarah Palin publish an Op-Ed in its newspaper. I'm not going to do them the courtesy of linking to it. (Here's a good point-by-point rejoinder from the Atlantic though.) In it, Ms. Palin calls on Obama to boycott Copenhagen because of the "climategate" leaked emails. Despite plenty of explanations in non-partisan press that the emails, though embarrassing in tone, do not represent any sort of actual shift in the science around climate change - the Post was so click/viewer-hungry as to let this climategate thing roll on in its pages.
Hence our new series:
-Gates that are not -gates!
(Credit due to Josh who coined "FAILs that are not FAILs".)
Now I already missed Kanyegate this year, but I think climategate is a good one to start with. I'm calling it, it's not a -gate!
Why? Let me let Time magazine explain it to you. (I mean c'mon, Time is about the safest down-the-middle reporting you can get.)
4. Do the e-mails weaken the scientific case for global warming? Put it this way: when it comes to climate-science analysis from the representative of the world's biggest oil-producing state [Saudi Arabia], it's wise to be suspicious. In the weeks since the e-mails first became public, many climate scientists and policy experts have looked through them, and they report that the correspondence does not contradict the overwhelming scientific consensus on global warming, which has been decades in the making. "The content of the stolen e-mails has no impact whatsoever on our overall understanding that human activity is driving dangerous levels of global warming," wrote 25 leading U.S. scientists in a letter to Congress on Dec. 4. "The body of evidence that underlies our understanding of human-caused global warming remains robust."
I'm taking a stand. It's not about climate change and it's not about left vs right. It's about -gates. I'm asking my fellow Americans to carefully consider what we grant "-gate" status to. Watergate was a big honkin' controversy that deserved the barrels of ink spilled over its progression. And it was even partisan. It was an IMPORTANT partisan scandal. But not every disagreement that happens across the screens of cable news deserves this holiest of suffixes.
I hate to break it to everyone, but I think Climategate falls short of -gate status.
Okay, rant concluded. Thanks.
PS - If you're going to disagree in the comments, read through the TIME article first.
Recently on the Current News Blog:
- It's Vanguard Day on Current News!
- Who will pay for climate change? - Copenhagen
- Obama lays out plan for jobs; Meeting lawmakers tomorrow
- Photography in conflict: Jeff Antebi covers the Afghanistan election
- Iran students' day of protestThere are few things that make me more catatonically depressed than the partisan... more
-
-
That's reportedly the big question at Copenhagen right now. Yesterday there was the leak of the "Danish text" - purportedly an early draft of what could be the final climate agreement at Copenhagen as prepared by unnamed representatives from rich countries. The text was so unacceptable to delegates from developing countries that they took to the streets. (And, they weren't the only ones that were mad: it also cost Leah an interview!) But why?
It comes down to rich vs. poor (developed vs. developing). Big, rich countries like the US emit lots of carbon and, importantly, have done so for a very long time. But, they're also leading the charge into reducing emissions. Less wealthy developing countries, like many of those in the African delegation, are just getting to the point of economic productivity where they're going to start needing more and more electricity. But they're not yet to the point where they have whole industries dedicated to reducing emissions. Additionally, when the climate change s**t hits the climate change fan - developing countries expect they'll be the worse off with the least resources to deal with it.
Back to the "Danish text". What made this so offensive to developing countries was that it treated rich and poor countries equally. Or at least more equally than was palatable. And we're all about equality right? No, not at Copenhagen we're not. A group of 123 developing countries calling themselves the "G77 plus China"(...I don't know how the math works) want developed countries to make bigger cuts in emissions and to pledge a sizable chunk of money to help them out in the aforementioned s**t/fan scenario. How much money? The "Danish text" offered $10 billion. The NYTimes reports the number is probably in the hundreds of billions.
All of this to say - the debate about how to tackle climate change seems to have quickly become about footing the bill.
Recently on the Current News Blog:
- Obama lays out plan for jobs; Meeting lawmakers tomorrow
- Photography in conflict: Jeff Antebi covers the Afghanistan election
- Iran students' day of protest
- Copenhagen backgrounder - A roundup of pre-conference reading
- Will TARP cuts mean a jobs program? - Real RecoveryThat's reportedly the big question at Copenhagen right now. Yesterday there was... more
-
-
Copenhagen kicks off this week and I still can't figure out whether or not it's going to matter. It seems like we're not going to get any sort of binding agreement out of it though their should be a fair amount of attention paid to the climate change issue. We'll be covering Copenhagen here at Current both on the Current Green Blog and here on the Current News Blog. I'll be focusing more on the policy side of things.
So, on that, what do you need to know going into Copenhagen? Here's some background reading for you.
Newsweek offers a good overview on the threat posed by political inaction going into the conference. Power Failure: Politicians are fiddling while the world burns. What's a voter to do? Its author, James Hansen, says even Obama may not be able to bring about the change in climate change policy we're looking for.
Our planet, with its remarkable array of life, is in imminent danger of crashing. Yet our politicians are not dashing forward. They hesitate; they hang back. Therefore it is up to you. As in other struggles for justice against powerful forces, it may be necessary to take to the streets to draw attention to injustice. Civil resistance may be our best hope. It is crucial for all of us, especially young people, to get involved. This will be the most urgent fight of our lives.
The Economist's backgrounder is locked behind a paywall, so I can't link you to that one. I can however offer you their handy chart of how much different countries residents would be willing to pay to fix climate change.
Foreign Policy magazine has a feature called "Who Killed Copenhagen? An FP Whodunit." It features a list of folks who've made the official results of the conference possibly moot, including Harry Reid, Wen Jiabao, and Obama.
Obama's role in delivering the bad news was a sad spectacle, but not really a surprise. It marked the culmination of a year in which climate has all but slipped off the president's agenda. While a host of European leaders, from Gordon Brown to Angela Merkel, have publicly stated their intention to attend Copenhagen and committed to carbon reductions, Obama has stonewalled.
One of my favorite blogs, Crooked Timber, has a more optimistic take, pointing to signs that might mean a possible good outcome from Copenhagen and the year to follow.
# Obama’s commitment to a 17 per cent (rel 2005) target, which essentially puts the Administration’s credibility behind Waxman-Markey
# China’s acceptance of a quantitative emissions target, based on emissions/GDP ratios, but implying a substantial cut relative to business as usual
# The change of government in Japan, from do-little LDP to activist DPJ
# EU consensus on the need for stronger action
# Acceptance of the principle of compensation for developing countries, and acceptance by countries like India that they should take part in a global agreement and argue for compensation
Oh, and what is "Climategate", the conveniently-timed news story eating up the precious oxygen in the news cycle? Newsweek's got that covered too.
Few of us would escape with reputations intact if our e-mail were made public, and the scientists ensnared in "climategate" are no exception. Writing "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years … to hide the decline" makes Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia, who typed that in 1999, look as if he is pulling a fast one to conceal a trend toward global cooling. And when another scientist wrote that "I can't see either of these papers being in the next I.P.C.C. report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow—even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" it looks like a blatant attempt to censor opposing views.
That's about all I've got - though if you see any other good ones out there let us know. Leah at Current Green has posted a list of sources to follow during Copenhagen, so make sure to check that out. She'll be doing a fifteen live webcast on Current Green at 9:15 PST every day rounding up what's happening in Denmark.
Oh wait, I lied, one more link. From FP Passport: Copenhagen prostitutes offer freebies to climate change delegates.
Recently on the Current News Blog:
- Will TARP cuts mean a jobs program? - Real Recovery
- Obama loses fans in Turkey over Afghanistan
- Meet Zouhair al Jezairy, my new Iraqi journalist friend
- Bhopal: 25 years later
- What's news in Turkey?Copenhagen kicks off this week and I still can't figure out whether or not... more
-
-
Planet Forward host, Frank Sesno, poses questions from the Planet Forward community to Robert Kenner, producer/director of the film Food, Inc.
Food, Inc. premieres as a part of the P.O.V. independent film series April 21 on local PBS stations around the country.Planet Forward host, Frank Sesno, poses questions from the Planet Forward community to... more
-
-
The American Military, in the name of keep us 'safe', has committed years of atrocities. Some of the soldiers go awry and become savage immoral killers. Some of the soldiers go crazy when they return home after witnessing such atrocities. We don't fight in the name of PEACE. We don't fight in the name of FREEDOM. We fight in the name of HALLIBURTON, RAYTHEON, KELLOGG, PFIZER and the rest.
How dare we claim the high moral ground when the wars we are in are for profit and lies and have nothing to do with freedom or saving anyone? Did you know that an 'insurgent' is someone who doesn't like having a foreign military stomping around on their backyards? I'd be willing to bet most of you would be insurgents if the roles were reversed. An estimated 90% of the foreigners killed in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have been civilians...innocent. We call them collateral damage. They call them brother, sister, father and mother.
Take a good look at this video and hear the testimonies. Then, think about all of your complaints, fears, demands, petty arguments that you take for granted every day. Think about everyone asking for money, jobs, cutting back on carbon emissions. Now, answer this. How dare we complain about what we lack when we've taken so much from so many? How dare we complain about carbon emissions when our death machine is creating the majority of it? How dare we argue between Democrat and Republican when so many in our own streets are fighting for a meal? How dare we judge anyone for hating us when we've destroyed their lives, their land, their water and their future?
There will never be peace anywhere on this planet until we learn that the 'Justice' that we preach must be the 'Justice' we deliver.
No Justice, No Peace.
No Justice, No Peace!
Christopher Hignite Monkey Press 2010The American Military, in the name of keep us 'safe', has committed years of... more
-
-
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.6a237570be4660439e371341ae8452d5.a41&show_article=1
Europe's system for industrial carbon quotas has enriched the continent's biggest polluters, with ten firms together reaping permits for 2008 alone worth 500 million euros, a new report revealed.
Dominated by steel and cement makers, the same "carbon fat cats" stand to collect surplus CO2 permits that -- at current market rates -- could be worth 3.2 billion euros (4.3 billion dollars) by 2012, it said.
This is roughly equivalent to the entire EU investment in renewable energy and clean technology under its economic recovery plan, according to Sandbag, a non-profit group in Britain that analyses carbon market policy.
more at link...
Check out my Climate Gate and Eugenics groups, exposing the NWO's agenda. Its not our fault, they jacked the country almost a century ago exactly. Their latest scam, Global Warming, is just a fraud to install a carbon tax, global government and then ramp up the genocide of humanity (except their bloodline, of course).http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.6a237570be4660439e371341ae8452d5.a41&sh... more
-
-
Europe's system for industrial carbon quotas has enriched the continent's biggest polluters, with ten firms together reaping permits for 2008 alone worth 500 million euros, a new report revealed.
Dominated by steel and cement makers, the same "carbon fat cats" stand to collect surplus CO2 permits that -- at current market rates -- could be worth 3.2 billion euros (4.3 billion dollars) by 2012, it said.
This is roughly equivalent to the entire EU investment in renewable energy and clean technology under its economic recovery plan, according to Sandbag, a non-profit group in Britain that analyses carbon market policy.
"Emissions trading is meant to be the central policy for cutting CO2 levels," said Anna Pearson, Sandbag's top policy analyst.
"The fact that companies are able to make large sums of money for doing nothing highlights that the trading scheme must be reformed and EU climate change target strengthened."
Under the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), the European Union allocates carbon polluting allowances to member states to meet obligations laid out in the UN's Kyoto Protocol, for which the first commitment period runs through 2012.
The states then assign quotas to the industries that belch the most CO2 into the atmosphere.
Companies that emit less than their allowance can sell the difference on the market to companies that exceed their limits, thus providing -- in theory -- a financial carrot to everyone to become greener.
But the energy, steel and cement sectors that dominate the system, hit by the global crunch, are emitting less CO2 than forecast, which means surplus carbon permits are flooding the market.
Among the top ten beneficiaries, steelmaker ArcelorMittal collected more than 40 percent of the 2008 excess permits, reported Sandbag.
French cement giant Lafarge got about 12 percent, with Tata steel group subsidiary Corus and Swedish steel maker SSAB-Svenskt Stal each claiming about 10 percent.
Even if the permits are not directly resold for profit, the value will still remain on the companies' books, rising or falling with the market.
Most of the permits were generated simply because the companies were allocated more free permits than they wound up using, according to the report.
"Little or no actual 'effort' toward emissions reductions need have taken place, yet these companies will be able to literally bank the profits," it said.
The price of a tonne of carbon dioxide (CO2) or its equivalent has fallen sharply over the last 18 months.
After peaking at nearly 30 euros (38 dollars) in mid-2008, CO2 is currently trading at about 13 euros, according to BlueNext, one of several European carbon exchanges.
Viewed narrowly, the recession-driven drop in CO2 emissions helps the environment.
But low carbon prices give businesses little incentive to develop and install new technologies to slash future emissions.Europe's system for industrial carbon quotas has enriched the continent's... more
-
-
Mike Adams, The Health Major
www.naturalnews.com
March 1, 2010
Weapons of Mass Prescription
What if a nation wanted to reduce its own civilian population but do it covertly? The way to accomplish that would be to slowly poison the civilian population through exposure to toxic chemicals, heavy metals, hormone-disrupting molecules and nerve toxins.
And as any terrorist can tell you, the most covert way to accomplish that would be to inject such chemicals into the everyday products that people routinely consume: Water, food, personal care products and medicines.
Here’s another interesting fact: If you examine what’s in the water, food, products and medicines sold across North America, you’ll discover a dangerous assortment of chemicals that, taken together, could quite reasonably be considered weapons of mass destruction.
Interestingly, the fluoride dumped into public water supplies was originally an offshoot of the enrichment processing facilities for uranium to be used in nuclear weapons. These days, however, fluoride is usually just the toxic waste from fertilizer manufacturing factories or the waste from smokestack scrubbers of coal-fired power plants. Either way, it’s not good for your teeth: The entire fluoride agenda largely a convenient, low-cost way to dispose of industrial waste chemicals while calling it a public health program.
Antibacterial soaps derive their antibacterial properties from chemicals that are molecularly quite similar to the infamous Agent Orange used in the Vietnam War. And yet these products are openly marketed for use by children.
more sections at article, including links...very powerful articleMike Adams, The Health Major
www.naturalnews.com
March 1, 2010
Weapons of Mass... more
-
-
A great video from our collaborating school, Roger William's University. A team from their Planet Forward program went out to explore how Portsmouth, RI is trying to reduce its carbon footprint (and municipal expenses) through an investment in wind energy.A great video from our collaborating school, Roger William's University. A team... more
-
-
-
…is the power to destroy globally.
It seems that the United Nations’ World Health Organization has just published a new “study” that proposes a global tax on certain consumer products to help pay for the One World Government/New World Order agenda. Oops, I mean:
“The following fund-raising options have been put forward on the basis of the likelihood that they can generate new funds for health research and development [emphasis mine] in a sustainable way.” [“...for health research and development...” How “caring” of the New World Order monsters.]
Here is a telling excerpt (page 46 of the document/page 57 of the pdf):
5.3.1 A new indirect tax
Indirect taxes are small taxes imposed on specified products or transactions. Typically, the tax is paid by the consumer or user of the product or transaction, collected by the retailer and forwarded to the taxation authority. Once in place, they are compulsory. The objective is to raise revenue or, in the cases of taxes on arms and excise duties on tobacco and alcohol, to discourage (excess) consumption of a particular product. [Can you say, "Taxes on soda, candy, and fast food"?] In the latter cases, there are likely to be positive effects in terms of health. Taxes such as those for airline travel can contribute to addressing communicable diseases. All these, and others such as a digital tax, can be considered humanitarian contributions which can together provide significant resources for the health needs of the world. The digital tax involves a charge on traffic over the Internet. It was first discussed in the 1990s, and various proponents have suggested different versions. Examples include a tax of 1 US cent on every 100 e-mails of 10 KB sent, a charge per number of e-mail messages (e.g. 10 cents per 1000 messages).
Today, the proposed global taxes are for health research and development. Tomorrow, the proposed global taxes will be for a global army.…is the power to destroy globally.
It seems that the United Nations’... more
-
-
Critics who think that the U.S. dollar will be replaced by some new global currency are perhaps thinking too small.
On the world horizon looms a new global currency that could replace all paper currencies and the economic system upon which they are based.
The new currency, simply called Carbon Currency, is designed to support a revolutionary new economic system based on energy (production, and consumption), instead of price. Our current price-based economic system and its related currencies that have supported capitalism, socialism, fascism and communism, is being herded to the slaughterhouse in order to make way for a new carbon-based world.
It is plainly evident that the world is laboring under a dying system of price-based economics as evidenced by the rapid decline of paper currencies. The era of fiat (irredeemable paper currency) was introduced in 1971 when President Richard Nixon decoupled the U.S. dollar from gold. Because the dollar-turned-fiat was the world’s primary reserve asset, all other currencies eventually followed suit, leaving us today with a global sea of paper that is increasingly undesired, unstable, unusable.
The deathly economic state of today’s world is a direct reflection of the sum of its sick and dying currencies, but this could soon change.
Forces are already at work to position a new Carbon Currency as the ultimate solution to global calls for poverty reduction, population control, environmental control, global warming, energy allocation and blanket distribution of economic wealth.
Unfortunately for individual people living in this new system, it will also require authoritarian and centralized control over all aspects of life, from cradle to grave.
What is Carbon Currency and how does it work? In a nutshell, Carbon Currency will be based on the regular allocation of available energy to the people of the world. If not used within a period of time, the Currency will expire (like monthly minutes on your cell phone plan) so that the same people can receive a new allocation based on new energy production quotas for the next period.
Because the energy supply chain is already dominated by the global elite, setting energy production quotas will limit the amount of Carbon Currency in circulation at any one time. It will also naturally limit manufacturing, food production and people movement.
Local currencies could remain in play for a time, but they would eventually wither and be fully replaced by the Carbon Currency, much the same way that the Euro displaced individual European currencies over a period of time.
Sounds very modern in concept, doesn’t it? In fact, these ideas date back to the 1930’s when hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens were embracing a new political ideology called Technocracy and the promise it held for a better life. Even now-classic literature was heavily influenced by Technocracy: George Orwell’s 1984, H.G. Well’s The Shape of Things to Come and Huxley’s “scientific dictatorship” in Brave New World.
This paper investigates the rebirth of Technocracy and its potential to recast the New World Order into something truly “new” and also totally unexpected by the vast majority of modern critics.
Background
Philosophically, Technocracy found it roots in the scientific autocracy of Henri de Saint-Simon (1760-1825) and in the positivism of Auguste Comte (1798- 1857), the father of the social sciences. Positivism elevated science and the scientific method above metaphysical revelation. Technocrats embraced positivism because they believed that social progress was possible only through science and technology. [Schunk, Learning Theories: An Educational Perspective, 5th, 315]
The social movement of Technocracy, with its energy-based accounting system, can be traced back to the 1930’s when an obscure group of engineers and scientists offered it as a solution to the Great Depression.
More at the link:Critics who think that the U.S. dollar will be replaced by some new global currency... more
-
-
"As you freeze your butt off in a winter whose severity the politicised weather forecasters of the Met Office utterly failed to predict, and as you wonder how you can afford gas and electricity bills which have been grotesquely inflated by taxes and legislation designed to “combat global warming”, spare a thought for a fellow victim of eco-fascism who’s even worse off than you. In a week or so this poor man could be dead.
His name is Peter Spencer, he’s a farmer in New South Wales, and his livelihood has been stolen by the Australian government in the name of – you guessed it – “combatting climate change.” That’s why he is now sitting atop that windblown tower you see in the photograph, on sheep farmland rendered useless by eco-legislation, starving himself to death in protest at his government’s callous disregard for his property rights. This is his 46th day on hunger strike.
Peter Spencer is an example to us all. I’m not suggesting we all go on hunger strike but we ought surely to emulate his clear-eyed courage in facing up to the greatest menace of our age. That menace is not, of course, the illusory threat of AGW which our governments so cheerfully use to fleece us and impose control of over us. That menace is eco-fascism. It’s real, it’s terrifying and it’s time we fought back.
I agree with Gerald Warner. The only way to get our message across that we’re sick to the craw of Green lies, Green taxes, and Green tyranny is to punish all the mainstream parties – and that very much includes Cameron’s Green Conservatives – at the polls."
I wonder if these eco-fascists ever think about the millions who died from starvation after their bio-diesel scam raised world food prices and cut off food aid to the poorest of the poor: third world children, which is a shame b/c they could have done the same thing with industrial hemp and created thousands of jobs in the process. Unfortunately, the leaders of the green movement are not only eco-fascists, but they're eugenicists as well, hell bent on reducing the world's population by 80% at least."As you freeze your butt off in a winter whose severity the politicised weather... more
-
-
Two researchers from Victoria University found that, "The eco-pawprint of a pet dog is twice that of a 4.6-litre Land Cruiser driven 10,000 kilometres a year," New Zealand's Dominion Post reported.
The researchers, are professors Brenda and Robert Vale, and they've authored a provocatively titled book called, "Time to Eat the Dog: The real guide to sustainable living."
Firstly, I think it's great to consider the environmental impact of everything we do. But I'm not quite ready to kiss Buffalo goodbye. And here's why.Two researchers from Victoria University found that, "The eco-pawprint of a pet... more
-
-
He's an international musician known for topping the charts three decades in a row, but in recent years, the spotlight has been on Bono's efforts to make the world a better place...not through impactful lyrics, but via multiple charities that attempt to alleviate global poverty and illness. Should his efforts be rendered moot due to his allegedly massive carbon footprint?
http://www.greenwala.com/profiles/2096-Bob-Kurz/blog/4045-U2-Frontman-BONO-fied-Eco-Champion-Or-CO2-HogHe's an international musician known for topping the charts three decades in a... more
-
-
"There's an igneous rock called peridotite that can sponge carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and store it in mineral form. Weirdly, almost no one is talking about it.
Peridotite isn't one of the better-known rocks, but it's got a number of properties that could place it right at the center of the climate-change conversation. Some quick facts:
1) Peridotite is one of the most abundant rocks in the Earth's mantle, and exists in surface deposits all over the world.
2) When peridotite reacts with carbon dioxide, it forms a solid mineral not unlike limestone, trapping the carbon in the molecular structure of the rock.
3) Geologists believe there's enough peridotite in Oman alone to absorb four billion tons of carbon each year.
4) Columbia University recently received a modest federal grant to study peridotitic reactions. Aside from that, practically no one has expressed any interest in the rock's potential."
More at link."There's an igneous rock called peridotite that can sponge carbon dioxide... more
-
-
Ruth Potts talks with Evan Kopelson at COP15 inside the Bella Center in Copenhagen, about the One Hundred Months campaign. Ruth says we had 100 months from August of 2008 to stabilize the greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, and the clock is ticking fast...
Evan Kopelson is president of Green Media Consulting Inc and founder of http://greenmedianews.com - Green Media News is Evan's blog about climate change, sustainability, corporate and personal responsibility. Evan recently gave up a life of luxury to move into a pod made from reclaimed materials, in a communal living environment in Venice, CA focused on sustainability and permaculture.Ruth Potts talks with Evan Kopelson at COP15 inside the Bella Center in Copenhagen,... more
-
-
Evan Kopelson looks at the incentives to drive America to a low carbon economy, including a cap and trade system, and subsidies of clean energy investments. He looks at the pros and cons of each, and issues recommendations. Evan is president of Green Media Consulting Inc, and founder of Green Media News. He advises on issues of climate change, sustainability, corporate and personal responsibility.Evan Kopelson looks at the incentives to drive America to a low carbon economy,... more
-
-
Evan Kopelson answers one of the most basic questions about sustainability: What is a Carbon Footprint? A carbon footprint is the total of all 6 greenhouse gasses or GHGs identified by the Kyoto Protocol, expressed as a carbon equivalent. Evan is the founder and president of Green Media Consulting, Inc. and the creator of Green Media News. He advises on issues of climate change, sustainability, corporate and personal responsibility.Evan Kopelson answers one of the most basic questions about sustainability: What is a... more
-
