Denying Climate Change Is Like Denying Gravity

Global Warming Driving Extreme Weather

When people, organizations and corporations oppose efforts to reduce global warming and climate change, what are they actually fighting for? An energy policy that depends on hostile, foreign regimes? Energy policies that promote waste and inefficiency? Dirty energy and air pollution? Domestic exploration and development that contaminates dwindling water supplies? Short-sighted energy and transportation policies that grease the wheels of corporate greed?

air pollution China

If we let deadly carbon dioxide build up in our homes, it kills us. If we let carbon dioxide build up in our atmosphere it’s just as toxic, but slightly more diluted–with the compounding effects of trapping heat in the limited confines of our atmosphere.

air pollution in China

We should fight deadly carbon gases just because of their toxic nature, let alone the potential to add to global warming and the more visible effects of climate change.

Unfortunately, some scientists have erred in their methodology and their politics. Just like the experts on the other side of the debate, they are not above stupidity. Extreme weather events and trends may not be conclusive proof for some people, but who can deny that air pollution, carbon buildup and deforestation are bad ideas for multiple reasons.

Indeed, the evidence of climate change is piling up in the form of extreme weather events in different places, extreme temperatures, droughts, floods and rising tides–depending where you might reside. The toxins in our air, water and bodies are piling up, too.

sustainable cities network

If we can’t rally to fight society’s contribution to climate change trends, then fight air and water pollution, deforestation, waste, greed, corruption and ignorance. The result will be a healthier and more sustainable future for all of god’s creations–especially your children and grandchildren.

public relations firm and public affairs firm Denver and Phoenix

Crossbow Communications specializes in issue management and public affairs. It’s also promoting sustainable, resilient and livable cities. Please contact Gary Chandler at gary@crossbow1.com to join our network.

U.S. and Britain Team Up For Geo-Engineering Program

If you have ever wondered what chem trails are all about, take a look at this report from the United Kingdom. It discusses a joint plan with the United States to help mitigate the effects of human activity on climate change.

Chem-Trail Confessions About Geo-Engineering

Geo-engineering describes activities specifically and deliberately designed to effect a change in the global climate with the aim of minimizing or reversing anthropogenic (that is human caused) climate change. Geo-engineering covers many techniques and technologies but splits into two broad categories: those that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere such as sequestering and locking carbon dioxide in geological formations; and those that reflect solar radiation.

chemtrails

Techniques in this category include the injection of sulphate aerosols into the stratosphere to mimic the cooling effect caused by large volcanic eruptions.The technologies and techniques vary so much that any regulatory framework forgeo engineering cannot be uniform. Instead, those techniques, particularly carbon removal,that are closely related to familiar existing technologies, could be regulated by developing the international regulation of the existing regimes to encompass geo-engineering. For other technologies, especially solar refection, new regulatory arrangements will have to be developed.

There are three reasons why, we believe, regulation is needed. First, in the future some geo-engineering techniques may allow a single country unilaterally to affect the climate. Second, some—albeit very small scale—geo-engineering testing is already underway. Third,we may need geo-engineering as a “Plan B” if, in the event of the failure of “Plan A”—the reduction of greenhouse gases—we are faced with highly disruptive climate change. If we start work now it will provide the opportunity to explore fully the technological,environmental, political and regulatory issues.

We are not calling for an international treaty but for the groundwork for regulatory arrangements to begin. Geoengineering techniques should be graded with consideration to factors such as trans-boundary effect, the dispersal of potentially hazardous materials in the environment and the direct effect on ecosystems. The regulatory regimes for geoengineering should then be tailored accordingly. The controls should be based on a set of principles that command widespread agreement—for example, the disclosure of geo-engineering research and open publication of results and the development of governance arrangements before the deployment of geo-engineering techniques.

The UN is the route by which, eventually, we envisage the regulatory framework operating but first the UK and other governments need to push geo-engineering up the international agenda and get processes moving.This inquiry was innovative in that we worked collaboratively with the US House of Representatives Science and Technology Committee, the first international joint working of this kind for a House of Commons select committee. We found the experience constructive and rewarding and, we hope, successful. We are enthusiastic supporters of collaborative working between national legislatures on topics such as geo-engineering with international reach.

Our Report covering the regulation of geo-engineering will now dovetail into a wider inquiry that the House of Representatives Committee is carrying out on geo-engineering. Science, technology and engineering are key to solving global challenges and we commend to our successor committee international collaboration as an innovative way to meet these challenges.

Read More> http://www.scribd.com/doc/98820858/Geo-Engineering-Regulation-House-of-Commons