Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Monday, 8th September 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Front line of the fight against global warming



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 20 March 2008
SCIENTISTS from Scotland's six main research institutes briefed ministers yesterday on climate change research, showcasing how to tackle the problem.
The conference was organised to update the ministers responsible for climate change and environment on some of the projects being carried out at Scotland's leading environmental, agricultural and biological research institutes. The projects include
:

• Developing measures to slow down the release of carbon from soils – an important source of greenhouse gases

• Using anaerobic bacteria to ferment waste plant material and create the fuels of the future – ethanol and butanol – to reduce the burning of fossil fuels

• Developing new crops and plants that are more resilient to heat and drought

Scientists have also identified a new way to cut greenhouse gases – by reducing flatulence in sheep and cattle.

Researchers at the Rowett Research Institute near Aberdeen are developing a feed additive that can inhibit the production of methane that occurs naturally as part of the animal's digestive process.

Yesterday, the academics warned that as our climate changes, Scotland is expected to experience warmer, drier summers and milder, wetter winters.

THREAT TO PLANT LIFE

CLIMATE change is threatening the giant panda. There are fears that the bamboo on which the panda depends may be at risk from global warming. Botanists at the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh (RBGE) are collaborating with colleagues in China in a project to help secure the long-term survival of the giant panda. They are identifying and surveying bamboo species in the mountains of China. Climate data will then be used to predict how these areas will be affected by climate change. The RBGE is also involved in research to predict and monitor the impact of climate change on Scotland's native plants. Plants such as mosses, lichens and ferns are often extremely sensitive to climatic conditions.

BACTERIA BONUS

BURNING fossil fuels is a major contributor to climate change. Scientists at the Rowett Research Institute are trying to develop an alternative power source. They are investigating the potential of using anaerobic bacteria to ferment waste plant material. This would produce organic compounds such as ethanol and butanol, or hydrogen, for use as fuels. The use of anaerobic bacteria means is not produced as a by-product of the fermentation. There is potential to extract the genes that engineer the enzymes responsible for these processes from the anaerobic bacteria. Micro-organisms such as yeasts, which are simple to grow, might then be used on an industrial scale to produce organic fuels.

CROP SOLUTIONS

THE Scottish Crop Research Institute is involved in identifying threats from new plant pests and pathogens. Information will be used to research cost-effective control measures that are environmentally benign. SCRI has already deployed solutions to combat root rot in soft fruit and late blight on potatoes. These techniques will be used to combat new and emerging disease threats. Another area of research is developing new crops and plants that can survive heat or drought. Based at Invergowrie, the SCRI is also analysing long-term climate records for the local area. The analysis will examine crop yields and outbreaks of diseases to provide a detailed assessment of the impact of climate change.

WATER WATCH

THE Macaulay Institute has a number of sites around Scotland that are collecting long-term data on how climate change is affecting our water cycle.

Scientists are assessing the impact of future temperature and moisture changes on the release of dissolved organic carbon into rivers and streams. This can significantly increase water treatment costs. Increases in erosion due to climate change can potentially damage salmon spawning areas and other sensitive freshwater species such as pearl mussels. The Macaulay Institute is working closely with SCRI and the RBGE in a project examining the diversity in species in Scotland's Caledonian pinewoods.

DISEASE RESEARCH

SCIENTISTS at the Moredun Research Institute are investigating a range of sheep and cattle diseases many of which are caused by internal and external parasites. The numbers of these parasites are increasing due to milder winters and warmer summers.

Moredun scientists are leading research into parasitic roundworm infections in sheep. This will allow a picture to be built up of which parasite species are present in the UK and how they are changing over time. They are also investigating resistance to anti-parasitic drugs.

Two human infections – Lyme's disease and West Nile virus – may also become a greater risk in Scotland due to climate change.

LEARNING TO ADAPT

THE Scottish Agricultural College offers education and training to help industries adapt to the impact of climate change.

It is measuring carbon footprints on farms and identifying ways of improving energy management. International summer schools are held at the college, which has campuses in Aberdeen, Ayr and Edinburgh to train scientists across Europe.

The college is also involved in monitoring disease in domestic and wild animals. It was one of its laboratories that discovered that a dead swan found in Fife in 2006 was infected with the H5N1 bird flu virus – the first case of its kind in the UK. The college also monitors the occurrence of weeds, pests and diseases of plants.





The full article contains 860 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Ard Righ,

The Rock Of Edinburgh 20/03/2008 00:26:09
Long term observation can only be a good thing, hold on, thats what oral traditions are all about and who ignores them?

If you have river pearls, you have a clean river, if you have hairy lichen on trees, you have good air if you have wild-life at your door, you live in the real world.


More should be made of direct cessation of methods that immediately and indirectly pollute rivers. These are the veins of our landscape and should be revered and respected.
2

,

20/03/2008 03:43:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
3

Mark Renton,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 06:12:27
Fact: By far the most substantial "green" contribution anyone can make is also the simplest. Simply have fewer children. Any other contribution pales by comparison. Having one child creates a legacy of consumption that completely obliterates any and all "green" efforts that you could ever make in your own lifetime. This truth is self-evident and yet it appears to be too painful to say out loud. Instead we are left with the guilt-inducing nonsense that is printed day-after-day in this wretched publication.
4

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 20/03/2008 06:52:19
Well said #3. Far too many humans. Two per couple will do it as long as many couples have none. Our social policies pay numpty couples to breed rather than work. Daft.
5

,

20/03/2008 07:20:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

Gdgy,

dundy 20/03/2008 07:46:12
#4 this opinion is often heard from those who have alredy bred...where your ofspring such a disappointment that you would deny the opportunity to others.....
As a nation we are laready having less children....
7

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 20/03/2008 07:55:25
#% Dave.

Your piles hurting this morning?
8

,

20/03/2008 08:05:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
9

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 20/03/2008 08:11:10
The global population is increasing by about 70 million every year, which is obviously unsustainable and contributing to resource depletion and pollution, including CO2 emissions.

Mark Renton is correct to point out that simply having fewer children is a substantial contribution to addressing this situation. But he is not correct to imply that other measures are insignificant or unnecessary. One only has to consider that the CO2 emissions of the average Chinese is about 3 tons per year, whereas an average American is about 20 tons per year to see that lifestyle is also important. Not wasting energy, using public transport, reducing flying and meat consumption etc. are all parts of the required changes that individuals can make as well.
10

Upandunder,

20/03/2008 08:12:24
The whole climate change thing is nothing but a left-wing plot in order to:

*Allow the state to exert even more control over how people live their lives

*Allow the statists like Brown and Darling etc to tax, tax, tax to the hilt in order to fund their trendy public spending follies.

Government officials have access to the most up-to-date and most accurate scientific data. So, if we are on the verge of "global catastrophe" how is it that:

*Heathrow's 5th terminal was permitted?
*Stansted hasn't yet been told a flat 'no' to a second runway?
*Brown hasn't put £100 tax and not £10 on flights? (£10 won't put people off their flight to Spain - but it does mean an easy extra tenner for Brown's incompetent government).

I could go on. Brown is an economically illiterate fool (eg: he sold half Britain's gold for a pittance) and despite being Chancellor at the time didn't see the Northern Rock crisis coming. How "finger on the pulse" is that? I wouldn't trust him with £1 to buy a paper from the corner shop.
11

bogmon,

20/03/2008 08:18:12
3: Mark Renton - Good point.

I would add that Religious leaders who continue to condone mindless breeding also need a damn good talking to about this. It certainly is not 'Gods will' to strangle the planet, squandering natural resources brought about by uncontrolled breeding.


12

drew 33,

20/03/2008 08:24:56
No doubt about it spring comes earlier every year. Indeed with snow forecast for east of Scotland this weekend it seems winter has arrived 6 months early this year.
13

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 20/03/2008 08:25:24
It is a pity that the conference report did not expand on the issue of "Developing measures to slow down the release of carbon from soils – an important source of greenhouse gases".

Particularly in upland areas with peaty soils, there would appear to be enormous scope to reduce CO2 emissions, indeed to enable these areas to become significant carbon sinks. If this potential is to be realised it would require substantial land-use changes. Where is the research to determine what the potential is for carbon sequestration in these areas, whilst also considering changes in albedo?
14

Unimpressed one,

20/03/2008 08:25:59
These areas of 'research' have been thoroughly demolished as valid problems likely to be caused by 'climate change' For one thing an increase in CO2 levels will increase plant growth globally. The experts on epidemiology on the IPCC panel resigned after there input was ignored because it played down any likelihood of increased epidemics due to proposed warming. How much is all this research into "the world is ending" tripe costing the taxpayer? Scottish science at its worst.
15

drew 33,

20/03/2008 08:30:39
10 Upandunder
If you look at government revenue forecasts despite the increases in tax they still expect proportionately more revenue. Obviously the increased tax is not expected to reduce flights but only to increase the tax take.
16

Upandunder,

20/03/2008 08:36:06
In any case so what if the world is warming? The Earth is a living thing after all.

And it's up to us and the rest of nature to adapt. The dinosaurs were wiped out by the ice age. Vineyards of red grapes grew happily in southern England in the Middle Ages, etc.

There have always been floods (look at Tewkesbury Priory in England - always escapes the worst of that town's flooding today, the original was built in the 1100s on a small spot of land which avoided floods!) History has the answers!

Disasters like floods and hurricanes sound worse today because more people are there to get in the way! Let's face it, Bangladesh and New Orleans are two very badly located places for millions of people to live...
17

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 20/03/2008 08:49:57
#16 Upandunder

"The dinosaurs were wiped out by the ice age." Really? Well I never!

If you believe that "History has the answers", Upanunder, might it not be a good idea to demonstrate that you have some understanding of the causes of past great extinction events? After all, the present concern with climate change is prompted in part by knowledge of the current extinctions, for which climate change is a contributory factor.
18

E300,

tomich 20/03/2008 08:55:27
Is anyone daft enough to think that any if the following will not continue to increase pretty much as they have done for the past 100years.
1)Flight miles.
2)Car production.
3)Coal production and use.
4)Oil production and consumption.
5)Population
6)Production of cement and associated construction.
7)Mining and use of metals.
8)Bus, rail and shipping.
There is not a major company in the world engaged in any of these operation that doesn't have expansion both planned and under way.
Time for those climate change dreamers to wake up to reality.
19

Alexander,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 09:10:59
#18
"There is not a major company in the world engaged in any of these operation that doesn't have expansion both planned and under way."
Nor a government that doesn't support them, in addition to their own expansion plans. Except Zimbabwe of course and all the global warmers are trying to get citizenship there!
20

Alan Reid,

NZ 20/03/2008 09:17:41
Dave fae Barra, Please read this, with, if you can an open mind.http://www.durangobill.com/Swindle_Swindle.html
Oh! and what group do you belong to?
21

nabodican,

Rural Scotland 20/03/2008 09:20:09
Clearly they are all looking after their funding, they need to be told that the alleged global warming stopped 10 years ago.
As for stopping animals farting !!!!
I seem to remember a BBC article not so long ago that stated all humans fart at least one litre of methane every day - my wife reckons on a good day I can do that in an hour.
I wonder how these fund seeking academics would sort that out.
22

Alan Reid,

NZ 20/03/2008 09:21:09
18 E300,tomich
"There is not a major company in the world engaged in any of these operation that doesn't have expansion both planned and under way"
That does not make that right, or sustainable.
23

E300,

tomich 20/03/2008 09:33:08
22
Who decides it isn't right? There is no political will to reduce living standards in any country. The 2% of the population who make the conscience salving, but wholly irrelevant, carbon offsetting of their flights ain't going to change anything.
24

Lord of All Mordor,

On The Shores Of The Nokia River 20/03/2008 10:27:49
Record snowfalls in North America - 70 cm around Toronto in two weeks in February: previous record 66 cm in the entire month of February 1966.

Heavy snowfalls in China well down into the temperate zone

Arctic ice back 10 - 20 cm thicker than last year

Sunspot activity now down to levels last seen during the Little Ice Age.


NASA revising its temeprature figures for the 20th Century - 1930s were the hottest decade of the 20th Century; static temepratures for the 90s.

BTW grapes were grown well north of the south coast of England - Yorkshire as I recall.

Dinosaurs were extinct by about 70 million years ago. This ice age began 40 million years ago.
25

Guthrie,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 10:37:46
Upanunder #16- England has been producing more wine than during the middle ages for a decade or two, and there are commercial wineries in Yorkshire.

E300- with the use of modern technology, there is no need for anyones standard of living to drop by much, unless your idea of high standard of living is buying new clothes every week and driving 20,000 miles a year in an SUV.

#24- what is the difference between one year old and six year old sea ice?
Plus you are completely wrong regarding NASA and temperature in the 30's. Please go and read up on it. Also do you have any idea of how long the solar cycle lasts?
26

JayTee,

Costa Clyde 20/03/2008 10:39:32
"...the academics warned that as our climate changes, Scotland is expected to experience warmer, drier summers and milder, wetter winters."
Right now, as Wemyss Bay is experiencing its usual spring weather (aka the rain is p***ing down), I can hardly wait. Bring it on!
27

Lord of All Mordor,

On The Shores Of The Nokia River 20/03/2008 10:43:38
I think you'll find that you are wrong. The revision is relatively recent.

I am also aware of the solar cycles but the activity level has plummeted - as pointed out, they have not been this since the Little Ice Age
28

PJ,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 10:48:34
It they want to do something for their so called fight against global warming. Stop Al Gore his global warming religion the elite of the scientific community and the well-to-do of the social set flying round the world, telling other people not to do it!

Stop having jollies whoops climate change conferences in places like Bali! Where 15,000 politicians, civil servants, green campaigners and television crews flew into Indonesia and generated the equivalent of 100,000 tonnes of extra CO2. Which was similar to the entire annual emission of the African state of Chad.

By the way Mars is being hit by rapid climate change and it is happening so fast that the red planet could lose its southern ice cap and the only two SUV’s that have been there are solar powered!

29

Memyself&I,

20/03/2008 11:08:33
Yawn,...heard enough about this now.
Starting to annoy.
30

Lord of All Mordor,

On The Shores Of The Nokia River 20/03/2008 11:29:35
#27
"I am also aware of the solar cycles but the activity level has plummeted - as pointed out, they have not been this since the Little Ice Age"

should read

I am also aware of the solar cycles but the activity level has plummeted - as pointed out, they have not been this low since the Little Ice Age.

31

E300,

tomich 20/03/2008 12:10:11
25 Guthrie,
"E300- with the use of modern technology, there is no need for anyones standard of living to drop by much, unless your idea of high standard of living is buying new clothes every week and driving 20,000 miles a year in an SUV."
A high standard of living for much of the world would be having enough to eat, shelter and heat.
Californians know all about how modern technology would mean that they didn't need to build new power stations or oil refineries, especially with their smoke stack industries closing down.
Result? California was forced to buy electricity from neighbouring states at exorbitant cost and they still have the highest gas prices in USA.
32

Guthrie,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 12:16:27
E300- by that definition we can live at the standard of 1940's Britain, since people had enough to eat, although the housing stock was a bit damaged.
As for the California electricity scam, that was a deliberate piece of chicanery involving the electricity suppliers, who scheduled station maintenance to drive prices up, and carried out various other ways of fiddling the market.
33

Guthrie,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 12:21:00
PJ #28- Martian climate change is not happening for the same reasons ours is. On Mars, changes in dust coverage, as well as the seasonal changes, are actually to blame:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192

As for Bali, it would indeed be much better to carry out such things by teleconference or e-mail, so lets see if we can encourage that in the future.

Mordor #27- what on earth are you on about? Please provide a reference.
34

eyeswider,

work again 20/03/2008 12:23:43
You show your core beliefs when you claim there are "too many humans". Earth is more than capable of sustaining 10 billion humans, but only caring, sharing, responsible ones. Not greedy rapists who think the world revolves around them and that they need two large portions of everything.

The stuff of life is attacked and the agents of death are promoted in this present darkness. CO2 and warmth = bad. Cellphones and their associated junk, fabric conditioner, air freshener, shampoo, cold = good. Tax our very lifeblood but let the poisons run freely. This is the agenda. The UN is being used to corral the herd and prepare it for slavery. The Bilderbergers, Carlisle Group, Rothschilds/Rockefellers/bankers, Fabians/Tavistock NWO (there I have said it) do not care for anyone having fun while they work hard and diligently at mass control. Nothing pisses off the rich more than poor people smiling. They tolerate us while we build their pyramids but as soon as they have machines that can make machines and have codified DNA and mastered medicine, by their continuous experimentation with the plebescite, they will cull us. Preparations are already underway. They do not wish to "cure" or "change" anyhing.

Don't believe me or consider me a ranting paranoiac, fine, but consider just this one of many grand ironies.
We have had the lungs of the world ripped out to gain the privilege of reading propaganda, downright lies and advertising for more of the same on paper made from trees, yet the people who brought you the first "newspapers" fought, successfully, to destroy a plant that produces vastly superior paper far more cheaply and easily than killing trees ever could and at 4x the amount per acre(over 20 years) using zero dioxins and it can be recycled 2.5x more. This plant produces more biomass per acre than any other almost anywhere on the planet with zero maintenance and no fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides or fungicides. Just plant it and sit back.
Its seeds have an oi
35

eyeswider,

20/03/2008 12:24:07
cont...

Its seeds have an oil content of 34% (more than any other seed) and, after that oil is extracted, to make fuel(at a mind boggling 95% ratio) or foodstuffs, the remaining cake is only beaten by the perilous soya bean in protein content. It provides the world's strongest natural fiber that, when made into fabric, lasts the longest of all the soft fibers, is warmer than cotton, more absorbent and produces 3x as much per acre.
It is massively efficient as a rotated crop, with corn and legumes for instance. It has a 3 to 4 month growing season even at altitude or in high latitudes. When dried in the field it returns over 50% of the nutrients it took from the soil during growth and this, coupled with the deep nutrients it draws up with its root system and then sheds in its leaves, makes it easier on the soil and of more benefit to subsequent crops than any other. Makes one wonder what else this plant is capable of that strikes so much fear into the black hearts of the chemical company owners that they continue to suppress it and any investigation into it.

Oh yeah, for those of you who believe we should limit our production of plant food(CO2), this marvel of nature can sequester over 20 tons of carbon dioxide per hectare per crop and if its mass, after extracting the good stuff, is then made into its own extremely viable version of concrete you have the perfect double whammy. But that is the last thing that is going to happen because of point one above.
The plant is hemp.

"War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength."
36

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 12:25:52
24:

The arctic ice story is more complicated than you think:

'NASA data shows thickest and oldest Arctic ice is melting'

http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKN1822988120080318
37

Lord of All Mordor,

20/03/2008 12:33:42
For interested readers

www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=b93c1368-27b7-4f55-a60e-5b5d1b1ff38b

/www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/NationalPost.htm
38

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 20/03/2008 12:37:12
#24&27 Lord of All Mordor

You state: "NASA revising its temeprature figures for the 20th Century - 1930s were the hottest decade of the 20th Century; static temepratures for the 90s."

You are wrong. Neither of those statements is true.

You have clearly been deceived by the numerous disinformers who continue to profit by churning out this sort of misleading garbage. For example, Christopher Booker in the (UK)Daily Telegraph, (4th Nov 2007) stated, whilst launching his book, "the hottest year of the 20th century was not 1998 but 1934, and that four of the 10 warmest years in the past 100 were in the 1930s" without explaining that those figures only referred to the USA.

The truth of the matter is this:

The 1934 temperature, to which you refer, refers only to the continental USA, and the revised temperatures are:

1934 1.25ºC above the 1951-1980 average.
1998 1.23ºC above the 1951-1980 average.

The average USA temperature over 5 year periods are:

1998-2002 0.79ºC
2002-2006 0.66ºC
1930-1934 0.63ºC The 1930-1934 five year period is the warmest in the early part of the century in the USA.

Globally, (which is the important figure when considering global warming!) the figures are as follows:

1934 was 0.05C above the 1951-1980 average
1998 was 0.71C above the 1951-1980 average
2007 was 0.73C above the 1951-1980 average.

You have been totally mislead by the denialists and disinformers, but don't feel too bad about it - millions of other people have as well.
39

George.,

20/03/2008 12:59:47
Today, the GISS admitted that McIntyre was correct, and has started to republish its data with the bug fixed. And the numbers are changing a lot. Before today, GISS would have said 1998 was the hottest year on record (Mann, remember, said with up to 99% certainty it was the hottest year in 1000 years) and that 2006 was the second hottest. Well, no more. Here are the new rankings for the 10 hottest years in the US, starting with #1:

1934, 1998, 1921, 2006, 1931, 1999, 1953, 1990, 1938, 1939

Three of the top 10 are in the last decade. Four of the top ten are in the 1930’s, before either the IPCC or the GISS really think man had any discernible impact on temperatures. Here is the chart for all the years in the data base.

40

Guthrie,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 13:04:36
George- repeat after me "The USA is not the world. The USA is not the world".
41

George.,

20/03/2008 13:07:47
Anything that grows 'can convert into oil'
Company finds natural solution that turns plants into gasoline
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=59402

Also
http://www.tiftongazette.com/local/local_story_075215425.html
42

George.,

20/03/2008 13:14:50
The USA is not the world however check where most of the ground based weather stations are that have records going back to the 30's.
43

George.,

20/03/2008 13:15:14
The US Historical Climate Network (USHCN) reports about a 0.6C temperature increase in the lower 48 states since about 1940. There are two steps to reporting these historic temperature numbers. First, actual measurements are taken. Second, adjustments are made after the fact by scientists to the data. Would you like to guess how much of the 0.6C temperature rise is from actual measured temperature increases and how much is due to adjustments of various levels of arbitrariness? Here it is, for the period from 1940 to present in the US:

Actual Measured Temperature Increase: 0.1C
Adjustments and Fudge Factors: 0.5C
Total Reported Warming: 0.6C
44

George.,

20/03/2008 13:22:21
There are four most frequently cited academic rollups of world-wide temperature anomaly. They are: GISS (surface), HadCrut3 (surface), RSS (satellite) and UAH (satellite). So, does the NY Times (and other catastrophists) take the average? The median value? No, silly. They take the outlier which shows far more warming than the other three, which is the GISS.
45

George.,

20/03/2008 13:23:57
The GISS surface measurement system is rife with errors. But the one I want to mention here is that, outside of the US, the temperature measurement points are very spotty. Some points in the ocean are over 1000 miles from a thermometer.
46

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 13:33:09
Those who want the true figures rather than Georgies pork pies can take a look at the latest GISS Press Release:

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20080116/
47

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 13:36:26
I am sick to death of hearong about this daft myth---global warming, climate change or whatever you want to call it.

IT IS NOT DOWN TO MAN'S ACTIVITIES. Is that clear? If not, what language would you like me to translate it into so that you can understand?

I am also sick to death of hearing phrase like:

"• Developing measures to slow down the release of carbon from soils – an important source of greenhouse gases"

CARBON IS NOT A GAS. CARBON IS A SOLID. CARBON IS A BLACK SOLID THAT IS MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS BLACK SMOKE WHEN IT IS GIVEN OFF DURING COMBUSTION. THERE IS NO CARBON IN CARBON DIOXIDE. THERE IS NO CARBON IN METHANE. THERE IS NO CARBON IN PETROL AND THERE IS NO CARBON IN DIESEL EITHER.

The substances in question contain carbon IONS that are bonded to IONS of other elements. Ions are not carbon atoms, therefore they are not "carbon".

It is a great pity that those who should be in the know are clouding the vitally important issue of the need to find alternative fuels with unadulterated rubbish and meaningless jargon. If I hear one more person talk about carbon emissions, I'm going to scream!

Whatever your thoughts about climate change or whatever, put them aside NOW because it is NOT HAPPENING due to anything Man is doing. concentrate on the REAL issue otherwise your grandchildren WILL suffer.
48

PJ,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 13:53:18
33

So Mars isn’t going through climate change, well it won’t be if your head doesn’t get out of the real climate change web site or sand! And you listen to the IPCC.

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/01-dec-06.html

Some ice has melted on Mars, and we know that no people live there and the earth has warmed in the past too when there were fewer people, therefore it is conclusive that planet warming can happen without people. High-resolution images of Mars' south pole showed dramatic erosion, a two year survey by the orbiting Mars Global Surveyor showed changes in ice cover and Doctor Michael Malin, of Malin Space Science Systems said “The climate is really dynamic and changing with time!”

Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun. "Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance,"
49

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 13:57:14
47. gas brains: you are an ignoramus in denial.

Global warming caused by man is real and the consequences will be dire if something isn't done soon:

'Global climate is near critical tipping points that could lead to loss of all summer sea ice in the
Arctic with detrimental effects on wildlife, initiation of ice sheet disintegration in West
Antarctica and Greenland with progressive, unstoppable global sea level rise, shifting of climatic
zones with extermination of many animal and plant species, reduction of freshwater supplies for
hundreds of millions of people, and a more intense hydrologic cycle with stronger droughts and
forest fires, but also heavier rains and floods, and stronger storms driven by latent heat, including
tropical storms, tornados and thunderstorms.'

James Hansen, Director, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies/
50

George.,

20/03/2008 14:03:31
All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to wipe out most of the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year's time. For all four sources, it's the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.

http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Worldwide+Global+Cooling/article10866.htm
51

Guthrie,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 14:04:46
petrol head #47- CO2 bonding is covalent, last time I checked. There is lots of carbon in hydrocarbon fuels, the clue is in the name. Then it burns with oxygen to form the gas CO2. That many newspapers and journalists are confused is entirely to be expected. Also it has been common for years to describe releases from places like Peat bogs as carbon, for some reason I cannot just now recall.

PJ #48- to aid your reading comprehension, I quote the relevant parts below:

Me- "Martian climate change is not happening for the same reasons ours is."

PJ- "So Mars isn’t going through climate change, well it won’t be if your head doesn’t get out of the real climate change web site or sand!"

You just attributed to me something I didn't say. This is not a good way to win an argument...

As for Abdussamatov, he has produced no data to back up his view.
52

Guthrie,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 14:06:03
George #42- your point is?
Tell you what, instead of spamming this page with stuff we already know, why not make a reasoned argument?
53

Vincent-W,

20/03/2008 14:09:17
Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head - thanks for the chemistry lesson! I take it you know more than the highly educated, knowledgeable and intelligent scientists?

My money is with them - your nom de plume suugests you have an alternative agenda.
54

George.,

20/03/2008 14:20:57
52. If I am posting information you already know and accept why do I need to make a reasoned argument with you.
51. Please explain the following.
Sun: More activity since 1940 than in previous 1150 years, combined
Mercury: Unexpected polar ice discovered, along with a surprisingly strong intrinsic magnetic field … for a supposedly “dead” planet
Venus: 2500% increase in auroral brightness, and substantive global atmospheric changes in less than 30 years
Earth: Substantial and obvious world-wide weather and geophysical changes
Mars: “Global Warming,” huge storms, disappearance of polar icecaps
Jupiter: Over 200% increase in brightness of surrounding plasma clouds
Saturn: Major decrease in equatorial jet stream velocities in only 20 years, accompanied by surprising surge of X-rays from equator
Uranus: “Really big, big changes” in brightness, increased global cloud activity
Neptune: 40% increase in atmospheric brightness
Pluto: 300% increase in atmospheric pressure, even as Pluto recedes farther from the Sun

55

George.,

20/03/2008 14:23:01
53. "highly educated, knowledgeable and intelligent scientists?"

You owe me one keyboard and monitor.
56

Grandma Moses,

Earth 20/03/2008 14:24:05
Praises to #34 and 35, takes Big Huevos to tell the truth, truth becomes the fabric of our consciousness, lies float. Purhaps there will be a unified effort, someday to live in truth....one can only hope... keepgiving...Grandma Moses
57

nabodican,

Rural Scotland 20/03/2008 14:25:56
#49 Fred Bloggs - Isn't this the same Hansen who had a major input to the infamous "Hockey Stick" curve which proved to be a lie.
58

Guthrie,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 14:31:48
George #54- I don't need to explain them, you're the one postulating a link.
As for Pluto-
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2002/pluto.html

Basically, you are misleading again.

Nabiodican #57- Yes, that'll be the same Hansen whose findings were substantially validated by various other studies. For all the moaning about the hockey stick, the denialists have yet to come up with anything else, and no, sargasso sea temperatures don't count.
59

phocus,

Prescott, AZ, USA 20/03/2008 14:33:37
Most posts to this site can be summarized in a few words...mainly ba ba ba. Seldom have so many sheep written so much about things they can not prove. Keyword here is prove. Please, will someone prove that climate change is in any way caused by man's activity. Proof...not consensus or use of the term "it appears"...proof. It can't be done because it is false. Temps go up...then temps go down. More snow this year than in the past 60 years. Australia is having the coolest summer in recent history. Sun activity down, suggesting cooling...which lasted over 100 years the last time this happened in the 16th century. Demand proof before accepting things about which you personally know nothing about. Otherwise, you will sound like sheep...ba ba ba. Those who think it best if THEY tell YOU how to live your life are counting on you being stupid or uneducated enough to buy into their ‘sky is falling’ lunatic raging rhetoric and then look to them to save your day. Rubbish! Wake up, read, think, and then pray for those who still leave the thinking to someone else.
60

PJ,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 14:37:16
I have no problem reading! I find it all laughable and not since the Atkins Diet gripped the world with its low-carbohydrate, high-fat fad, has everyone get so excited. And needless to say Hollywood complete with its million-dollar salaries heaped upon 10th-grade educated star caught the environmental bug worse than any of us.

Stars responded to “celebriticians” like Gore and Kerry by ditching their gas-guzzling Hummers in exchange for more fuel-efficient hybrid cars. They started replacing their Evian plastic water bottles with glass-bottled Voss, and even installed energy-efficient windows throughout their 10,000-square-foot Beverly Hills mansions.

An abundance of new peer-reviewed studies, analyses, and data error discoveries in the last several months has prompted scientists to declare that fear of catastrophic man-made global warming “bites the dust” and the scientific underpinnings for alarm may be “falling apart.” The latest study to cast doubt on climate fears finds that even a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide would not have the previously predicted dire impacts on global temperatures. This new study is not unique, as a host of recent peer-reviewed studies have cast a chill on global warming fears.

If the environmentalists are pleased with their documented evidence, why are they offering $100,000 to back up claims asserted in the Inconvenient Truth. I am sure for that amount of money, anyone would say the world is flat. A few months ago, a study came out that demonstrated global temperatures have levelled off. But instead of possibly admitting that this whole global warming thing is a farce, a group of British scientists concluded that the real global warming won’t start until 2009...
61

PJ,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 14:37:43
Cont…June 2007 when Dr. Jim Renwick, a top UN IPCC scientist, admitted that climate models do not account for half the variability in nature and thus are not reliable. "Half of the variability in the climate system is not predictable, so we don’t expect to do terrifically well.!” Renwick conceded.
62

Guthrie,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 14:46:08
Amusingly enough, George's post #54 is substantially the same as can be found halfway down this web page:
http://earthstar.tripod.com/TSB_dir/JKoven1006.html

Now, it looks to me like that website ripped it off from somewhere, so the question is, where did George get his paragraph from? Or did he alter a few words?

Phocus- science is no use at giving you "proof". However if you want the evidence, have a look at the IPCC report.
63

George.,

20/03/2008 14:48:06
58. "Yes, that'll be the same Hansen whose findings were substantially validated by various other studies."
That would be:
P.D. Jones, K.R. Briffa, T.P. Barnett, and S.F.B. Tett (1998). High-resolution Palaeoclimatic Records for the last Millennium: Interpretation, Integration and Comparison with General Circulation Model Control-run Temperatures, The Holocene, 8: 455-471.
M.E. Mann, R.S. Bradley, and M.K. Hughes (1999). Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations, Geophysical Research Letters, 26(6): 759-762.
Crowley and Lowery (2000). Northern Hemisphere Temperature Reconstruction, Ambio, 29: 51-54. Modified as published in Crowley (2000). Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years, Science, 289: 270-277.
K.R. Briffa, T.J. Osborn, F.H. Schweingruber, I.C. Harris, P.D. Jones, S.G. Shiyatov, S.G. and E.A. Vaganov (2001). Low-frequency temperature variations from a northern tree-ring density network, J. Geophys. Res., 106: 2929-2941.
J. Esper, E.R. Cook, and F.H. Schweingruber (2002). Low-Frequency Signals in Long Tree-Ring Chronologies for Reconstructing Past Temperature Variability, Science, 295(5563): 2250-2253.
M.E. Mann and P.D. Jones (2003). Global Surface Temperatures over the Past Two Millennia, Geophysical Research Letters, 30(15): 1820. DOI:10.1029/2003GL017814.
P.D. Jones and M.E. Mann (2004). Climate Over Past Millennia, Reviews of Geophysics, 42: RG2002. DOI:10.1029/2003RG000143
S. Huang (2004). Merging Information from Different Resources for New Insights into Climate Change in the Past and Future, Geophys. Res Lett., 31: L13205. DOI:10.1029/2004GL019781
64

Guthrie,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 14:48:06
PJ- thanks for playing. You lose.
65

Colin Midlem,

Belmont, MA, USA 20/03/2008 14:53:49
The ignorance of your journalist [Tanya Thompson, Social Affairs Correspondent] is only matched by that of some commentators.

It would seem that five of the six initiatives described are 'monitoring' activities. The sixth 'Anaerobic Digestion,' has been under close study since the sixties to the best of my knowledge. It is the normal mechanism for human waste management on offshore installations.

The production of methane by ruminant animals is not due to flatulence but oral emissions.

Generally this article is poor in explanation of current scientific activities - don't you have a journalist on your books who understands the subject and keeps current?

The reader's comments are equally poor and ill-informed in many cases but we must remember that half the population are below average intelligence...........
66

George.,

20/03/2008 14:54:39
64. Fantastic comeback to PJ's "Dr. Jim Renwick, a top UN IPCC scientist, admitted that climate models do not account for half the variability in nature and thus are not reliable."

67

Guthrie,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 15:06:38
George- no reply needed. If you can't work out why, you shouldn't be posting on here...

Colin Midlem- the scotsman generally has a poor track record with science stories.
68

Rampant,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 15:17:56
Yes Yes....all very interesting but the big question is. Do I buy a BMW X5 or a Range Rover Sport?

Oh and I know that Temps are going down as I seperate my cans from my papers...FACT
69

George.,

20/03/2008 15:39:56
58. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2002/pluto.html
From the above
Jay Pasachoff, an astronomy professor at Williams College, said that Pluto's global warming was "likely not connected with that of the Earth." He has no evidence what so ever to back up this statement. He does say "The major way they could be connected is if the warming was caused by a large increase in sunlight. But the solar constant--the amount of sunlight received each second--is carefully monitored by spacecraft, and we know the sun's output is much too steady to be changing the temperature of Pluto."
Visible light is only one form of energy from the Sun. We have just started to learn how the energy from the Sun interacts with the Earth far less an object as distant as Pluto.
70

Geoff,

sa 20/03/2008 15:41:15
3 Mark renton,4 Rulesbutnot..The core problem is..Too many people!!! Absolutely! The solution to the vast majority of our problems on this planet lies with accepting this simple truth. Given a finite space with finite resources, as you increase the demands on these things you will eventually reach collapse. An average eight year old understands this-why cant we all see this obvious link??
Basically mankind sucks. We are stupid,ignorant,arrogant,self centred creatures bent on commiting mass hari-kari.
Feel better now.
To continue,on a balance of probabilities-no,beyond reasonable doubt,industrial mankind is the prime cause of global warming which is BAD BAD BAD.
The fact that Australia has had a cold winter or you are wearing two sets of woolies in glasgow today is MEANINGLESS. The things you must look at are the TRENDS. They are unequivocally UP UP UP. Even setting aside the opinions of the VAST MAJORITY of top scientists,as laymen can you guys not observe and make some simple deductions about what havoc we are wreaking on this tiny planet??
Yissus-sometimes I wonder about you guys!!
71

George.,

20/03/2008 15:42:07
68. Rampant depends. Is it for the school run or are you going to play off road?
72

Rampant,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 15:43:55
George - oh no the wife uses the Hummer to take the kids to school.
73

Geoff,

sa 20/03/2008 15:44:06
68 Rampant-no question-the BMW X5! When considering the Range rover you gotta factor in-would you buy a car made by Tata??
74

George.,

20/03/2008 15:48:27
72. In that case neither get a Toyota Amazon.
75

PJ,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 15:53:05
#64

Guthrie...you are the weakest link, good-bye!

A typical reply from someone who has been sucked into the Al Gore world, with his global warming religion the elite of the scientific community and the well-to-do of the social set. Where the sceptics are ridiculed, denounced, and pointed at as they were the idiots.

The only interest seems to be to discredit the people they call "deniers" and to pressure government into adopting the policies that will ultimately prevent the use of fossil fuels.

Al Gore himself used tons of fossil fuel to jet his entourage to Singapore as part of his global tour, where he scoffs at the "deniers" who had the audacity to disagree with the in-crowd even though their disagreement is based on a mountain of scientific evidence.

The global warming hysteria isn't so much about the dangers humanity faces from climate change as it is about controlling humanity's behavior through a universal government body, namely the UN.

76

Guthrie,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 15:55:56
George #69- or in other words, you have no evidence!
Sheesh, the scientific illiteracy of people on here gets silly. Put it another way, George, how exactly do you transfer energy to Pluto if not by radiation from the sun?

PJ #75- rant on all you like, it doesn't change the fact you have no argument.
77

Guthrie,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 16:26:22
Before I finish up for the day, let me explain why Georges quote mining of Dr Renwick is irrelevant. For starters, he offers no context for the quote. this is contrary to good science practise, and sensible debating technique.
So, when you try and look at it in context, the quote makes perfect sense and cannot be used to bash climatology in general. I found this:
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/SC0706/S00026.htm

quote:
"Yesterday the coalition published an analysis of seasonal climate predictions by NIWA over the past five years which found that the overall accuracy of the predictions was just 48 per cent.

Defending the Niwa record, Dr Renwick said his organisation was doing as well as any other weather forecaster around the world. He was quoted by the country's leading newspaper, the New Zealand Herald as saying: "Climate prediction is hard, half of the variability in the climate system is not predictable, so we don't expect to do terrifically well." Later on New Zealand radio, Dr Renwick said: "The weather is not predictable beyond a week or two.""

Or in other words, the quote refers only to trying to predict what the yearly results will be, the year in advance. This is somewhat different to the long term scenarios given in the IPCC reports. The IPCC scenarios do not take into account yearly ups and downs, because you cannot model them properly, rather they are the expected increase in the mean due to the known phsyical science. I don't expect some of the posters here to understand what I am talking about, but anyway...
So here we have a scientist saying that there is a great deal of indeterminacy in forecasts, which is entirely correct. That people pick it out of context and warp it for their own agenda is not his fault.
78

voltaire's janny,

20/03/2008 16:34:47
Climate change is normal, happens continuously and always has. There is no authoratatively established link between emissions and climate change. There is an established connection between global temperatures and C02 levels but this is a lag; temperature rises and SUBSEQUENTLY we see increased C02. This was big lie number 1 in Al Gore's movie.

This is not to say pollution is good or that all the efforts to reduce our effects on the environment should not continue.

However the news media and politicians are already repeating the faith-based fantasies surrounding the issue and we need a new religion like we need a nuclear war.



79

Neil,

Glasgow 20/03/2008 16:38:42
I am sure they will have as much success as the Luddites did in their previous campaign against the coming ice age. Doubtless in a few years the Luddites will be demanding money with menaces from us for the second round of the fight against the ice age, which will involve opposing technological progress & air travel as both previous campaigns did.
80

PJ,

Edinburgh 20/03/2008 16:42:30
#77 You don’t have a B side do you! Like Heather Mills, you don’t have a leg to stand on!

IPCC reviewer and climate researcher Dr Vincent Gray, of New Zealand, an expert reviewer on every single draft of the IPCC reports going back to 1990 and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of "Climate Change 2001,"

“All UN IPCC does is make ‘projections’ and ‘estimates’. No climate model has ever been properly tested, which is what ‘validation’ means, and their ‘projections’ are nothing more than the opinions of ‘experts’ with a conflict of interest, because they are paid to produce the models. There is no actual scientific evidence for all these ‘projections’ and ‘estimates,'” Gray noted.

In addition, meteorologist Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, a scientific pioneer in the development of numerical weather prediction and former director of research at The Netherlands' Royal National Meteorological Institute, recently compared scientists who promote computer models predicting future climate doom to unlicensed “software engineers."

New peer-reviewed study counters global warming theory, finds carbon dioxide did not end the last Ice Age. Excerpt: Deep-sea temperatures rose 1,300 years before atmospheric CO2, ruling out the greenhouse gas as driver of meltdown, says study in Science. Carbon dioxide did not cause the end of the last ice age, a new study in Science suggests, contrary to past inferences from ice core records. “There has been this continual reference to the correspondence between CO2 and climate change as reflected in ice core records as justification for the role of CO2 in climate change,” said USC geologist Lowell Stott, lead author of the study, slated for advance online publication Sept. 27 in Science Express. “You can no longer argue that CO2 alone caused the end of the ice ages.” Deep-sea temperatures warmed about 1,300 years before the tropical surface ocean and well before the rise in atmospheric CO2, the study found. The finding suggests the ri