Billionaire Oilman T. Boone Pickens Backs Wind Power

(CNN) -- Billionaire oilman T. Boone Pickens is sinking billions of dollars into a new wind farm in Texas. It is likely to become the biggest in the world, producing enough power for the equivalent of 1.3 million homes. CNN's Ali Velshi asked the oil legend why he thinks wind could be the answer to this country's energy problems:

Ali Velshi: Tell me about the wind. Now, you are buying, for a start, more than 600 wind turbines from General Electric. You're going to put them on this big tract of land in Texas, and you're going to generate a lot of electricity.

What happens to that electricity? Tell me where you think you're going to make your money and how this is going to help the situation in America.

T. Boone Pickens: Well, that's the first step to a 4,000-megawatt wind farm. This is 1,000 megawatts.

We start receiving those turbines in mid 2010. We will have the total 4,000 megawatts finished by the end of 2015. That power will go into a transmission line that will tie into the Electric Reliability Council of Texas system in the state of Texas, and it will be transmitted downstate.

Velshi: What's your view of wind power? It's one of several things that we should be looking at in terms of powering our homes, electrical power? We get most of it from coal and natural gas, and some from nuclear. Are you thinking it's one of the formats of power we should be thinking about, or is this going to be bigger than we all thought?

Pickens: The Department of Energy came out with a study in April of '07 that said we could generate 20 percent of our electricity from wind. And the wind power is -- you know, it's clean, it's renewable. It's -- you know, it's everything you want. And it's a stable supply of energy.

It will be located in [the] central part of the United States, which will be the best from a safety standpoint to be located. You have a wind corridor that goes from Pampa, Texas, to the Canadian border. And it has -- the wind, it's unbelievable that we have not done more with wind. Look at Germany and Spain. They have developed their wind way beyond what we have, and they don't have as much wind as we do. It's not unlike the French have done with their nuclear. They're 80 percent power generated off of nuclear, we're 20 percent.

Velshi: I'm fascinated by wind power. I love going by a field of these turbines. And I think they're fascinating.

You don't happen to think they're attractive, and you're not really putting them on your land. You're going to be using other people's land to put these things on.

Pickens: That's right. And it's very clear, these are my neighbors. And they want them. It generates income for them.

A turbine will generate somewhere around 20,000 [dollars] a year in royalty income. And on a 640-acre tract, you can put five to 10 of these on the tract. And you don't have to have them if you don't want them.

Velshi: And it's quite common that people who maybe have a piece of land, they might be farmers or something like that, this is extra income to them by making a deal with somebody like you who is going put these things up, if they don't mind having them on the land. Do they get the electricity from it or do they just get a royalty check?

Pickens: A royalty check. But look at Sweetwater, Texas. That town was 12,000 people, then went down below 10,000. The wind came in, it's above 12,000 in population now. The local economy is booming.

That can be repeated over and over and over again all the way to the Canadian border. Then you have a solar corridor that goes from Sweetwater, Texas, west to the West coast, and that solar corridor can also be developed.

But we are going to have to do something different in America. You can't keep paying out $600 billion a year for oil.

Elements that point to a tipping climate system

Anthropogenic forcing could push the Earth’s climate system past critical thresholds, so that important components may “tip” into qualitatively different modes of operation. In the magazine “Proceedings of the National Academy of sciences” an international team of researchers describes, where small changes can have large long-term consequences on human and ecological systems.

“Society may be lulled into a false sense of security by smooth projections of global change,“ the researchers around Timothy Lenton from the British University of East Anglia in Norwich and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research report. Global change may appear to be a slow and gradual process on human scales. However, in some regions anthropogenic forcing on the climate system could kick start abrupt and potentially irreversible changes. For these sub-systems of the Earth system the researchers introduce the term “tipping element”.

Drawing on a workshop of 36 leading climate scientists in October 2005 at the British Embassy, Berlin, Germany, a further elicitation of 52 experts in the field, and a review of the pertinent literature, the authors compiled a short-list of nine potential tipping elements. These tipping elements are ranked as the most policy-relevant and require consideration in international climate politics.

Arctic sea-ice and the Greenland Ice Sheet are regarded as the most sensitive tipping elements with the smallest uncertainty. Scientists expect ice cover to dwindle due to global warming. The West Antarctic Ice Sheet is probably less sensitive as a tipping element, but projections of its future behavior have large uncertainty. This also applies to the Amazon rainforest and Boreal forests, the El Niño phenomenon, and the West African monsoon. “These tipping elements are candidates for surprising society by exhibiting a nearby tipping point,” the authors state in the article that is published in PNAS Online Early Edition. The archetypal example of a tipping element, the Atlantic thermohaline circulation, could undergo a large abrupt transition with up to ten percent probability within this century, according to the UN climate report from 2007.

Given the scale of potentially dramatic impacts from tipping elements the researchers anticipate stronger mitigation. Concepts for adaptation that go beyond current incremental approaches are also necessary. In addition, “a rigorous study of potential tipping elements in human socio-economic systems would also be welcome,” the researchers write. Some models suggest there are tipping points to be passed for the transition to a low carbon society.

Highly sensitive tipping elements, smallest uncertainty:

Greenland Ice Sheet - Warming over the ice sheet accelerates ice loss from outlet glaciers and lowers ice altitude at the periphery, which further increases surface temperature and ablation. The exact tipping point for disintegration of the ice sheet is unknown, since current models cannot capture the observed dynamic deglaciation processes accurately. But in a worst case scenario local warming of more than three degrees Celsius could cause the ice sheet to disappear within 300 years. This would result in a rise of sea level of up to seven meters.

Arctic sea-ice - As sea-ice melts, it exposes a much darker ocean surface, which absorbs more radiation than white sea-ice so that the warming is amplified. This causes more rapid melting in summer and decreases ice formation in winter. Over the last 16 years ice cover during summer declined markedly. The critical threshold global mean warming may be between 0.5 to 2 degrees Celsius, but could already have been passed. One model shows a nonlinear transition to a potential new stable state with no arctic sea-ice during summer within a few decades.

Intermediately sensitive tipping elements, large uncertainty:

West Antarctic Ice Sheet - Recent gravity measurements suggest that the ice sheet is losing mass. Since most of the ice sheet is grounded below sea level the intrusion of ocean water could destabilize it. The tipping point could be reached with a local warming of five to eight degrees Celsius in summer. A worst case scenario shows the ice sheet could collapse within 300 years, possibly raising sea level by as much as five meters.

Boreal forest - The northern forests exhibit a complex interplay between tree physiology, permafrost and fire. A global mean warming of three to five degrees Celsius could lead to large-scale dieback of the boreal forests within 50 years. Under climate change the trees would be exposed to increasing water stress and peak summer heat and would be more vulnerable to diseases. Temperate tree species will remain excluded due to frost damage in still very cold winters.

Amazon rainforest - Global warming and deforestation will probably reduce rainfall in the region by up to 30 percent. Lengthening of the dry season, and increases in summer temperatures would make it difficult for the forest to re-establish. Models project dieback of the Amazon rainforest to occur under three to four degrees Celsius global warming within fifty years. Even land-use change alone could potentially bring forest cover to a critical threshold.

El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) – The variability of this ocean-atmosphere mode is controlled by the layering of water of different temperatures in the Pacific Ocean and the temperature gradient across the equator. During the globally three degrees Celsius warmer early Pliocene ENSO may have been suppressed in favor of persistent El Niño or La Niña conditions. In response to a warmer stabilized climate, the most realistic models simulate increased El Niño amplitude with no clear change in frequency.

Sahara/Sahel- and West African monsoon - The amount of rainfall is closely related to vegetation climate feedback and sea surface temperatures of the Atlantic Ocean. Greenhouse gas forcing is expected to increase Sahel rainfall. But a global mean warming of three to five degrees Celsius could cause a collapse of the West African monsoon. This could lead either to drying of the Sahel or to wetting due to increased inflow from the West. A third scenario shows a possible doubling of anomalously dry years by the end of the century.

Indian summer monsoon - The monsoon circulation is driven by a land-to-ocean pressure gradient. Greenhouse warming tends to strengthen the monsoon since warmer air can carry more water. Air pollution and land-use that increases the reflection of sunlight tend to weaken it. The Indian summer monsoon could become erratic and in the worst case start to chaotically change between an active and a weak phase within a few years.

Lowly sensitive tipping elements, intermediate uncertainty:

Atlantic thermohaline circulation - The circulation of sea currents in the Atlantic Ocean is driven by seawater that flows to the North Atlantic, cools and sinks at high latitudes. If the inflow of freshwater increases, e.g. from rivers or melting glaciers, or the seawater is warmed, its density would decrease. A global mean warming of three to five degrees Celsius could push the element past the tipping point so that deep water formation stops. Under these conditions the North Atlantic current would be disrupted, sea level in the North Atlantic region would rise and the tropical rain belt would be shifted.

###

Source - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)

Shell Oil Exec Ponders Impending Energy Crossroads

By Jeroen van der Veer

By 2100, the world’s energy system will be radically different from today’s. Renewable energy like solar, wind, hydroelectricity, and biofuels will make up a large share of the energy mix, and nuclear energy, too, will have a place.

Humans will have found ways of dealing with air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. New technologies will have reduced the amount of energy needed to power buildings and vehicles.

Indeed, the distant future looks bright, but much depends on how we get there. There are two possible routes. Let’s call the first scenario Scramble. Like an off-road rally through a mountainous desert, it promises excitement and fierce competition. However, the unintended consequence of “more haste” will often be “less speed,” and many will crash along the way.

The alternative scenario can be called Blueprints, which resembles a cautious ride, with some false starts, on a road that is still under construction. Whether we arrive safely at our destination depends on the discipline of the drivers and the ingenuity of all those involved in the construction effort. Technological innovation provides the excitement.

Regardless of which route we choose, the world’s current predicament limits our room to maneuver. We are experiencing a step-change in the growth rate of energy demand due to rising population and economic development. After 2015, easily accessible supplies of oil and gas probably will no longer keep up with demand.

As a result, we will have no choice but to add other sources of energy – renewables, yes, but also more nuclear power and unconventional fossil fuels such as oil sands. Using more energy inevitably means emitting more CO2 at a time when climate change has become a critical global issue.

In the Scramble scenario, nations rush to secure energy resources for themselves, fearing that energy security is a zero-sum game, with clear winners and losers. The use of local coal and homegrown biofuels increases fast. Taking the path of least resistance, policymakers pay little attention to curbing energy consumption – until supplies run short. Likewise, despite much rhetoric, greenhouse gas emissions are not seriously addressed until major shocks trigger political reactions. Since these responses are overdue, they are severe and lead to energy price spikes and volatility.

The Blueprints scenario is less painful, even if the start is more disorderly. Numerous coalitions emerge to take on the challenges of economic development, energy security, and environmental pollution through cross-border cooperation. Much innovation occurs at the local level, as major cities develop links with industry to reduce local emissions. National governments introduce efficiency standards, taxes, and other policy instruments to improve the environmental performance of buildings, vehicles, and transport fuels.

Moreover, as calls for harmonization increase, policies converge across the globe. Cap-and-trade mechanisms that put a price on industrial CO2 emissions gain international acceptance. Rising CO2 prices in turn accelerate innovation, spawning breakthroughs. A growing number of cars are powered by electricity and hydrogen, while industrial facilities are fitted with technology to capture CO2 and store it underground.

Against the backdrop of these two equally plausible scenarios, we will know only in a few years whether December’s Bali declaration on climate change was just rhetoric or the start of a global effort to counter it. Much will depend on how attitudes evolve in China, the European Union, India, and the United States.

Shell traditionally uses its scenarios to prepare for the future without expressing a preference for one over another. But, faced with the need to manage climate risk for our investors and our descendants, we believe the Blueprints outcomes provide the best balance between economy, energy, and environment. For a second opinion, we appealed to climate change calculations made at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. These calculations indicate that a Blueprints world with CO2 capture and storage results in the least amount of climate change, provided emissions of other major manmade greenhouse gases are similarly reduced.

But the Blueprints scenario will be realized only if policymakers agree on a global approach to emissions trading and actively promote energy efficiency and new technology in four sectors: heat and power generation, industry, transport, and buildings.

This will require hard work, and time is short. For example, Blueprints assumes CO2 is captured at 90% of all coal- and gas-fired power plants in developed countries by 2050, plus at least 50% of those in non-OECD countries. Today, none capture CO2. Because CO2 capture and storage adds costs and yields no revenues, government support is needed to make it happen quickly on a scale large enough to affect global emissions. At the least, companies should earn carbon credits for the CO2 they capture and store.

Blueprints will not be easy. But it offers the world the best chance of reaching a sustainable energy future unscathed, so we should explore this route with the same ingenuity and persistence that put humans on the moon and created the digital age.

The world faces a long voyage before it reaches a low-carbon energy system. Companies can suggest possible routes to get there, but governments are in the driver’s seat. And governments will determine whether we should prepare for bitter competition or a true team effort.

* Jeroen van der Veer, Chief Executive of Royal Dutch Shell plc, is Energy Community leader of the World Economic Forum energy industry partnership in 2007-2008 and chaired this year’s Energy Summit in Davos. He also chairs the Energy and Climate Change working group of the European Round Table of Industrialists.

Tempers Rise as Climate Talks Stall; UN Official Sheds Tears

Dec. 15 (Bloomberg) -- The head of the United Nations' climate unit walked out of global warming talks in Bali, Indonesia in tears, as tempers flared among nations wrangling over the terms of a new climate change treaty.

Talks aimed at setting a negotiating agenda leading to a new international treaty on fighting global warming to replace the Kyoto Protocol were suspended twice after China and India objected to some of the language in the draft document.

Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, left the auditorium in tears after China's delegation demanded to know why the session had twice been started while separate talks were ongoing elsewhere.

``The secretariat was not aware that meetings were going on elsewhere,'' de Boer said, before closing the book in front of him and walking off stage. He returned about 15 minutes later.

Tempers rose during an earlier session when Sun Guoshun, a member of the Chinese negotiating team, told the plenary meeting: ``I'm not sure whether the secretariat is our secretariat, and I would like to ask for an apology.''

De Boer was then heard to say ``I have been offended now,'' before Witoelar suspended the session a second time.

Talks overran yesterday's deadline and carried on into the early hours as delegates tried to reach a compromise. The European Union and developing nations clashed with the U.S. over language outlining greenhouse-gas emissions reduction targets for industrialized countries and possible commitments by developing nations such as China and India.

`Game of Chicken'

``It's a big game of chicken right now,'' said Andrew Deutz, senior policy adviser for UN affairs at the Nature Conservancy. ``The U.S. doesn't want to move unless they know India and China are going to move, and India and China of course don't want to move until the U.S. does.''

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon canceled a speech in Jakarta today to stay in Bali and push for a compromise.

``This has been a tough set of negotiations,'' said Australian Climate Change Minister Penny Wong, the co-chair of the Bali negotiations. ``We were cautiously optimistic last night about the progress that was being made, unfortunately that progress has not continued this morning. But we are still attempting to proceed to a negotiated resolution.''

Delegates resumed today for a plenary session designed to adopt all decisions made during the two-week conference and set a deadline for a new climate accord. When he came to the contentious document, Witoelar, the president of the conference, urged delegates to ``exercise leadership'' and accept the text.

EU Agrees

Portugal, speaking for the EU, agreed to the document, before India, speaking on behalf of the G77 group of developing nations, and then China, objected to language describing efforts developing nations should take, forcing the session into recess. The meeting resumed after a 100-minute pause, and the fractious exchange led to a second halt.

``When the ministers broke up last night there were two options'' for the disputed text, Prodipto Ghosh, an adviser to the Indian delegation, told reporters after the meeting was suspended for the second time. ``Our understanding was both would be available for discussion in the plenary. The president in his wisdom chose one option,'' he said, referring to Witoelar.

``Our minister would prefer the second option.''

At issue are two paragraphs in the so-called Bali Roadmap for a new climate treaty that calls for ``commitments or actions'' from all developed countries to reduce emissions blamed for global warming. Developing countries should take ``appropriate mitigation actions,'' according to the text.

``The Americans would like the two paragraphs to look as much alike as possible and the Indians want them to look as different as possible,'' said David Doniger, former head of climate policy at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and now climate policy director at the Natural Resources Defense Council. He spoke in an interview in Bali.

`Not Good Enough'

The U.S. succeeded in its aim to have removed from the preamble of the text a statement that developed nations should slash emissions by 25 to 40 percent by 2020. Instead, a footnote was placed, referencing passages in reports by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that call for emissions cuts of as low as 10 percent in the same period. That left some delegates unhappy.

``An ordinary person picking up the text will then have to follow the reference and find it on page seven hundred and whatever it is,'' Grenadian Ambassador Angus Friday, a spokesman for 39 small island states, told reporters early today in Bali. ``That's not good enough.''

To contact the reporters on this story: Alex Morales in Nusa Dua at amorales2@bloomberg.net ; Kim Chipman in Nusa Dua, Indonesia, at kchipman@bloomberg.net .

Report: Global warming a threat to U.S.

WASHINGTON, Sept. 28 (UPI) -- Global climate change presents a serious national security threat to the United States, heightening tensions and instabilities worldwide, lawmakers were told.

The Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee of the House Committee on Science and Technology heard testimony Thursday from several experts, principally retired Gen. Gordon Sullivan, the former chief of staff of the U.S. Army and now chairman of a blue-ribbon commission of a dozen retired U.S. admirals and generals.

The commission, set up by the CNA Corp., recently reported on “National Security and the Threat of Climate Change” over the next 30-40 years -- the timeframe for developing new military capabilities.

The effects of global warming, Sullivan said “include reduced access to fresh water; impaired food production, health catastrophes -- especially from vector- and food-borne diseases; and land loss, flooding and the displacement of major populations.”

These “destabilizing effects” will “increase the potential for failed states and the growth of terrorism; mass migrations will lead to greater regional and global tensions; and conflicts over resources are almost certain to escalate,” he concluded.

Sullivan said he had gone into the project a skeptic about global warming, but “after listening to leaders of the scientific, business, and governmental communities, my colleagues and I came to agree that global climate change is and will be a significant threat to our national security and in a larger sense to life on Earth as we know it to be.”

“The possibility of a world transformed by climate change is not a science fiction image of a post-apocalyptic society," said Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Brad Miller, D-N.C. “It is not a road-warrior movie, it is happening now.”Aides said the committee would hold further hearings on the subject later in the session.

View "National Security and the Threat of Climate Change" video clip

Whitehouse Response to Energize Now Initiative's Climate Change Policy Concerns

"Thank you for contacting us with your concerns on climate change. Climate change is a global issue that President Bush takes very seriously.

In May, President Bush announced a major new international initiative to develop an energy security and climate change framework. The first meeting, including leaders from thirteen of the world’s major economies, will take place this week in Washington, D.C. Leaders will discuss ways to address energy security and climate change after the Kyoto protocol expires in 2012. As part of the ultimate process, the group will seek to develop a long-term global goal to reduce greenhouse gases, set near-term nationally-defined strategies to promote energy security and reduce greenhouse gases, and construct work programs in key sectors, such as advanced coal and transportation. The President’s approach has wide support and was endorsed by the G-8 leaders this summer.

President Bush has committed the United States to continued leadership on the issue, and since 2001 has dedicated $37 billion to advance climate-related science, technology, international assistance, and incentive programs. Since 2002, the Administration has spent more than $9 billion of this amount on climate change research and, under his direction; agencies developed a 10-year strategic research plan for climate science that was endorsed by the National Academy of Sciences. In addition, under President Bush’s continued leadership in ozone layer protection, the Montreal Protocol Parties recently agreed to the United States’ proposal to accelerate by ten years the remaining phase-out of certain ozone depleting substances. This action will not only speed up recovery of the ozone layer, but also represents one of the most significant new global actions to confront climate change by reducing the greenhouse gas profile of the phased-out substances.

The President is firmly committed to taking sensible action on climate change that fosters economic growth, engages developed and developing nations, and results in emissions reductions through the advancement of new technologies. He also has set bold goals. In 2002, he announced plans to cut our Nation's greenhouse gas intensity -- how much we emit per unit of economic activity -- by 18 percent by 2012. This administration is carrying out dozens of federal programs, including partnerships, consumer information campaigns, incentives, and mandatory regulations. These programs are directed at developing and deploying cleaner, more efficient energy technologies, conservation, biological sequestration, geological sequestration and adaptation. In his 2007 State of the Union address, the President announced his “20 in 10” energy plan, to replace 20% of our gasoline in ten years through increased vehicle fuel efficiency and a 35 billion gallon alternative fuel mandate.

The Administration’s financial commitment and responsible policies are working, and we are on track to meet, if not exceed, the President’s goal. Initial estimates show in 2006, the U.S. reduced greenhouse gas intensity an astounding 4.1%. Even more promising, absolute emissions declined 1.3% while the economy grew 2.9%."

"Thank you again for sharing your views with us."

Office of Strategic Initiatives
The White House

GLOBAL WARMING making profound changes in animals’ habitats, risking extinctions

What has gone missing here in Maryland’s Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge is almost as spectacular as the 8,000 acres of swampy wilderness that remain. And that makes it Chesapeake Bay’s best place to watch climate change in action.

Visitors can see ospreys gliding overhead, egrets wading in the channels and Delmarva fox squirrels making their unhurried commutes between pine trees.

Then the road turns a corner, and Blackwater’s marsh yields to a vast expanse of open water. This is what’s missing: There used to be thousands more acres of wetland here, providing crucial habitat for creatures including blue crabs and blue herons but, thanks in part to rising sea levels, it has drowned and become a large, salty lake. “If people want to see the effects” of Earth’s increasing temperature, said refuge biologist Roger Stone, “it’s happening here first.”

Not just here. Around the world, scientists have found that climate change is altering natural ecosystems, making profound changes in the ways that animals live, migrate, eat and grow. Some species have benefited from the shift. Others have been left disastrously out of sync with their food supply. Two are known to have simply disappeared.

If warming continues as predicted, scientists say, 20 percent or more of the planet’s plant and animal species could be at increased risk of extinction. As the shrinking habitat at Blackwater shows, the bad news isn’t all in the out years: Some changes have already begun. “This is actually something we see from pole to pole, and from sea level to the highest mountains in the world,” said Lara Hansen, chief climate change scientist at the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), a private research and advocacy group. “It is not something we’re going to see in the future. It’s something we see right now.”

The temperature increase behind these changes sounds slight. The world has been getting warmer by 0.2 degrees Fahrenheit every decade, a United Nations panel found this year, in part because of carbon dioxide and other human-generated gases that trap heat in Earth’s atmosphere.

By nature’s clock, the warming has come in an instant. The mechanisms that helped animals adapt during previous warming spells - evolution or long-range migration - often aren’t able to keep up. Scientists say that effects are beginning to show from the Arctic to the Appalachian Mountains. One study, which examined 1,598 plant and animal species, found that nearly 60 percent appeared to have changed in some way.

“Even when animals don’t go extinct, we’re affecting them. They’re going to be different than they were before,” said David Skelly, a Yale University professor who has tracked frogs’ ability to react to increasing warmth. “The fact that we’re doing a giant evolutionary experiment should not be comforting,” he said.

Some of the best-known changes are happening near the poles, where the air and the water are warming especially quickly. As they do, sea ice is receding. For some animals, this has meant literally the loss of the ground beneath their feet.

Polar bears, for instance, spend much of their life on the Arctic ice and use it as a hunting ground for seals. When ice on Canada’s western Hudson Bay began to break up earlier - three weeks earlier in 2004 than in 1974 - the effect was devastating. The bear population fell by 21 percent in 17 years. Shrinking ice has also been blamed for cannibalism among polar bears in the waters off Alaska, something scientists had not seen before 2004. This month, a U.S. Geological Survey report predicted that two-thirds of the world’s polar bears could die out in 50 years.

Walruses, too, rely on the ice; mothers stash their calves on it, then dive down to feed on the ocean floor. When ice recedes from prime feeding areas, mothers and calves can get separated.

In 2004, University of Tennessee professor Lee W. Cooper was off the north Alaskan coast when he saw about a dozen calves swimming toward his boat. His theory: The calves, alone and desperate without ice nearby, thought the boat might be a large iceberg.

There was nothing the scientists could do to help, said Cooper. “I think they were doomed.”

Other changes have been less deadly, but they show centuries-old patterns shifting. Scientists have noticed changes in the timing of seasonal migrations, presumably caused by the earlier onset of warm weather.

In some cases, migrating animals suddenly find themselves out of rhythm, missing the weather conditions or the food they need. In parts of the Rocky Mountains, American robins arrive two weeks earlier than they used to - and often discover the ground snow-covered and little food to be found.

In other cases, an animal’s entire territory that shifts, as old habitats become too warm. In many cases, this means a move north. In others, it means a move up.

The American pika, a small rodent that lives on the slopes of mountains in the western United States, can overheat when temperatures hit 80 degrees. Over the past century, these creatures have kept climbing, reaching new ranges that can be 1,300 feet up the slope.

In some cases, there is no escape. In Costa Rica’s Monteverde Cloud Forest, a famous region that is kept damp by fog and mist, climate change has brought more variable weather and less of the clouds that some animals need.

Two amphibian species - the golden toad and the Monteverde harlequin frog - have not been seen since the late 1980s. These may be some of the first extinctions linked to climate change, said cloud forest researcher Alan Pounds. “It’s been an interesting puzzle to work on,” said Pounds. “But, at the same time, very alarming and frightening.”

At the Blackwater refuge, it is rising waters, not rising temperatures, that are eliminating habitat. A quirk of geology means that water rises especially fast here: Paradoxically, the land in this area is sinking as North America slowly unbends from the weight of glaciers during the last ice age.

Add that to the effect of melting polar ice, and scientists expect that most of the marsh will become open water by 2030. When it goes, there could be a shortage of habitat for the Eastern Shore’s marsh animals and migratory birds, said Stone, the refuge biologist.

“Birds will return for spring migration, and they’ll be looking for territory, and there just won’t be enough territory to go around,” he said.

So what happens then?

“They’ll …” he paused, looking for the right word, “… die. They’ll disappear.”

Not all animals, of course, will suffer. There are examples of creatures that are thriving in a warmer world. Fish such as pollock and pink salmon have begun moving into now-warmer Arctic waters. In the northern woods of North America, some tick species are making it through the winter in record numbers.

Livestock herds might increase in a warmer world, an analysis by the Agriculture Department found. That’s because food crops such as corn and rice could become harder to grow if the fields dry out, leaving more land for grazing. Researchers say that, even if all greenhouse-gas emissions were shut off today, the gases already in the atmosphere will cause Earth to warm for years to come but, many say, it’s still imperative to reduce these emissions to head off even more warming.

“Unfortunately, it takes a generation or two to turn this supertanker around,” said Stephen Schneider, a professor at Stanford University,talking about the climate change already in progress. But still, he said, it is important to start trying. “What we’re looking at is a planetary environmental train wreck if we don’t start some compromising here.”

Already, some are trying to make it easier for wild animals to adjust. In Australia, conservationists are trying to set aside a north-south cordon of open land so animals can move if they need to. In the western United States and Canada, environmentalists are trying to create a similar corridor between Yellowstone National Park and the Yukon Territory.

Overall, scientists say, the news of climate change will not be bad for all animals but, they say, that’s cold comfort for the rest - and for humans, as well, if it means that we watch some of the planet’s most beloved species decline or disappear.

“Yeah, the earth will recover,” said Scott Wing, who studies the biology of previous eras at the Smithsonian Institution. But, he said, “would you have wanted to be one of the dinosaurs when the asteroid hit? No.”

Original Source

Glacier National Park Rapidly Losing Its Glaciers

National parks in the United States are revered for their natural beauty and wildlife. They are fragile ecosystems that are cared for and preserved for future generations. Because of their fragile nature, they are also places where scientists are beginning to see the effects of climate change or global warming. VOA's Jeff Swicord reports from Glacier National Park in the Western state of Montana.

Watch Glacier National Park / Windows Broadband

Since the early 20th century, Montana's Glacier National Park has attracted visitors to the majestic beauty of its peaks and valleys. But today's visitor is witnessing a rapidly changing landscape.

Dan Fagre is an ecologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, the government's earth and biological science organization. "The namesake glaciers for Glacier National Park are disappearing rapidly," he said. "Especially in the last several decades. These glaciers that numbered 150 when the park was first formed are now less than 27."

More than 7,000 years ago, glaciers 900 to 1,500 meters thick covered this landscape. The constant ice flow carved out these jagged peaks and deep valleys.

Now, Dan Fagre says the remaining glaciers are melting at an alarming rate. He blames global warming. "One glacier by itself can not invoke climate change. But, when you have all the glaciers in almost all of the mountain ranges of the entire globe responding the same way, then you know you have global phenomena. And in this case, the glaciers are responding to warming."

Fagre says if the current melting trend continues all of the glaciers will be gone within 20 years.

"Just below the clouds is Salamander Glacier," he said. "It is a long thin dirty glacier with a waterfall pouring off it. And that use to be joined to Grinnell Glacier, which is much larger. And it came all the way down to the top of the double waterfalls. It was a thousand feet high when it was discovered in 1887."

This is grizzly bear country. Surprising one along the trail can be a fatal mistake. Hikers often make noise to let the bears know they are in the area. Today, Glacier National Park is a stunningly rich ecosystem with a myriad of unique plants and animals. That could change if the glaciers and dense winter snow pack disappear.

"Climate change affects a lot more than just glaciers," said Fagre. "It also affects our forests. And in the back here you can see a large swath where snow avalanches have carved out large gaps in the forest. And what grows in those gaps all the forbs [flowering plants] and everything are what bears eat, and what other organisms eat, birds and a whole host of organisms that would not be able to forage in the dense forest."

The water supply that feeds this mountain ecosystem is drying up, which is what happened to this dry creek bed. Some of these high altitude lakes are rich with Bull Trout, a hearty species that can only survive in the cold glacial waters. Their habitat is also in danger.

Scientists say change has always been a part of life on Earth and many species have survived dramatic change over thousands of years. But Dan Fagre says this time will be different.

NOAA Blames Hot Year on Greenhouse Gases

by RANDOLPH E. SCHMID -AP Science Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- "We have met the enemy, and he is us," the comic-strip character Pogo said decades ago. A new analysis of last year's near-record temperatures in the United States suggests he was right.

Warming caused by human activity was the biggest factor in the high temperatures recorded in 2006, according to a report by researchers at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The analysis, released Tuesday, is being published in the September issue of Geophysical Research Letters, published by the American Geophysical Union.

In January, NOAA's National Climatic Data Center reported that 2006 was the warmest year on record over the 48 contiguous states with an average temperature 2.1 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than normal and 0.07 degree warmer than 1998, the previous warmest year on record.

In May, however, NOAA revised the 2006 ranking to the second warmest year after updated statistics showed the year was actually .08 F cooler than 1998.

At the time the agency said it was not clear how much of the warming was a result of greenhouse-gas induced climate change and how much resulted from the El Nino warming of the tropical Pacific Ocean that was under way.

"We wanted to find out whether it was pure coincidence that the two warmest years on record both coincided with El Nino events," Martin Hoerling of NOAA's Earth System Research Laboratory in Boulder, Colo., said in a statement.

His study looked at the effects of El Nino in the past as well as the effects of the release of gases such as carbon dioxide into the atmosphere by human industrial activities.

The analysis of past El Nino events in the 20th century found that the result was a slightly colder than normal annual average temperature over the 48 contiguous states.

To double check that, the researchers conducted two sets of 50-year computer simulations of U.S. climate, with and without the influence of El Nino. They again found a slight cooling across the nation when El Nino was present.

Then they looked at the effect of the increased greenhouse gases - which are given that name because they can help trap heat from the sun somewhat like a greenhouse traps heat.

They ran 42 different tests using complex computer models to simulate changes in the atmosphere under various conditions and concluded that the "2006 warmth was primarily due to human influences."

While Hoerling's study focused on the United States, NOAA also tracks world climate.

Worldwide, 2005 was the warmest year on record, topping 1998, according to the agency.

The research was supported by NOAA's office of Global Programs.

Bush changes tack on global warming

United States President George W Bush is under increasing pressure to tackle global warming, and has initiated an international summit on cutting emissions.

Climate change has been singled out as a key point for discussion at the APEC conference, due to start in Sydney in a little over two weeks.

But without the agreement of the world's biggest polluter, the United States, any consensus would be meaningless.

Recently Mr Bush invited the European Union and 15 other countries, including Australia, to take part in a summit at the end of next month to develop long-term voluntary goals to cut greenhouse emissions.

The United States is the world's biggest greenhouse gas emitter, responsible for almost 7.5 billion tonnes of greenhouse emissions a year. Yet the US has been dragging its feet on tackling the threat of global warming.

But Elliot Diringer from the Pew Centre on Global Climate Change says there are signs of change.

"I'd say it's possible that we could see comprehensive climate legislation signed while President Bush is in office. [But] I think it's more likely that that will come after the 2008 election," he said.

The Bush Administration has long opposed mandatory caps on carbon dioxide emissions - the major contributor to global warming - but its position is shifting.

Mr Bush recently made a surprise pledge to seek international agreement on long-term greenhouse gas reductions, inviting the world's biggest polluters, including Australia, to a meeting in Washington next month.

David Hawkins heads the Climate Centre at the Natural Resources Defence Council. He is urging the President to back legislation to curb global warming and to set up a carbon trading system before the conference.

"We have to be sceptical, unfortunately, because the President has taken his whole two terms of office talking about global warming but unfortunately not doing very much about it," he said.

Mr Hawkins says Australia should only attend the Washington conference if Mr Bush acts.

"From our standpoint, the countries that he's invited to come to this meeting should basically say... to our President, 'If you want us to come to this meeting we have to know that it's worth coming to'," he said.

Mr Diringer says action from the US is crucial to the global effort.

"The global effort really is at a standstill at the moment and that's primarily because the US has stood off to the side," he said.

"What we need now is for the US to adopt some mandatory limits on its emissions here at home and then to re-engage internationally and lead the effort to establish a really strong global agreement."

Mr Bush insists he is following commonsense policies when it comes to energy and the environment. He wants regulations to cut gasoline consumption by 20 per cent over 10 years, in part by producing 35 billion gallons of alternative fuels.

Energy legislation

The US Congress is a step ahead. This month the House of Representatives passed legislation requiring most utilities to produce 15 per cent of their electricity from renewable sources.

But the 786 Bill did not include an increase in fuel efficiency standards for cars and light trucks, which supporters call the most effective way of cutting oil consumption and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The Senate passed its own energy legislation in June. It does require better fuel mileage for vehicles as well as making sure half of all the new cars made by 2015 are capable of running on either 85 per cent ethanol or on biodiesel.

But so far, only individual politicians have been touting a cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gas emissions, and none of their proposals have been passed.

The House and Senate now have to sort out their differences before passing the revised legislation to the President.

Mr Diringer says the legislation signifies a major shift in political focus.

"The difference today from just six or seven months ago is really quite profound," he said.

"Congress is at this stage deeply engaged in the climate debate, focused very heavily on designing domestic legislation to set those mandatory limits."

Many US business leaders sense that carbon constraints are inevitable and are voluntarily reducing emissions. Seventeen US states have also vowed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

It seems that the American political climate is beginning to favour action on climate change.

ABC News

By North America correspondent Kim Landers