Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

National Academy of Sciences urges strong action to cut greenhouse gases

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Lionel Mandrake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-20-10 11:52 AM
Original message
National Academy of Sciences urges strong action to cut greenhouse gases
Source: Los Angeles Times

By Thomas H. Maugh II, Los Angeles Times May 19, 2010.
The academy, calling it 'the most comprehensive report ever on climate change,' suggests taxing carbon emissions. The papers also raise the possibility that global warming might make it necessary to shift vulnerable populations away from coasts.

In a sharp change from its cautious approach in the past, the National Academy of Sciences on Wednesday called for taxes on carbon emissions, a cap-and-trade program for such emissions or some other strong action to curb runaway global warming. Such actions, which would increase the cost of using coal and petroleum — at least in the immediate future — are necessary because "climate change is occurring, the Earth is warming ... concentrations of carbon dioxide are increasing, and there are very clear fingerprints that link to humans," said Pamela A. Matson of Stanford University, who chaired one of five panels organized by the academy at the request of Congress to look at the science of climate change and how the nation should respond.

The three reports issued Wednesday, totaling more than 860 pages, provide the broad outlines for a U.S. response to the threat; two more reports are to come. "This is the most comprehensive report ever on climate change," said atmospheric scientist Ralph J. Cicerone, the president of the academy. They outline "why the U.S. should act now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and why we should have a national strategy to adapt to the inevitable." The reports are available online at http://www.nationalacademies.org Among other things, the reports recommend that a central agency be in charge of the response, possibly a greatly strengthened U.S. Global Change Research Program. They also lay out a series of potential ways to adapt to inevitable changes, such as shifting vulnerable populations away from coasts and finding ways to protect the limited water supplies in the Southwest.

The conclusions of the new reports generally reflect those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released in 2007, but reflect a greater urgency because committee members had an additional five years of research to draw on, Matson said. As a consequence, for example, the academy panels concluded that ocean levels could rise by as much as 5 feet by the end of the century, compared to the IPCC estimate of a foot and a half increase. Earlier this week, both the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA reported that 2009 was the warmest year worldwide in human history, reflecting the belief of most scientists that the situation will continue to worsen.

Read more: http://articles.latimes.com/2010/may/19/science/la-sci-climate-change-20100520



These NAS reports show that the great majority of scientists who have studied climate change now agree that global warming is real and that it is caused by human activities. Unwarranted skepticism by a small minority of scientists, amplified by special interests, has delayed the necessary political action too long. Senators, Representatives, and the President should read these reports and act on their recommendations very soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FirstLight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-20-10 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
1. very soon...?
more like YESTERDAY

If anything comes from all this drilling debaucle, i hope it is a huge movement AWAY from fossil fuel in all forms.

We could have been YEARS ahead of the curve on new technology and sustainability... now it may just be an exercise in futility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lionel Mandrake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-20-10 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Yesterday would have been nice.
Trying to stop global warming may be an exercise in futility, but slowing it down and learning to live with it are better than ignoring it.

The biggest problem is that without geo-engineering (which may be impractical) the permafrost will all melt. This will release a lot of methane. Some of the methane will drift up into the stratosphere, where it will act as a greenhouse gas. Methane is a much more effective greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Even if we stopped burning fossil fuels entirely, the methane released from the permafrost would produce much more global warming than we have seen up to now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedEarth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-20-10 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. These damn scientists causing trouble again
...maybe dubya can straighten these trouble-makers out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lionel Mandrake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-20-10 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. W sez them nukular scientists is just another special interest group,
so he doesn't have to listen to them. Besides, he talks to God every day. Who needs advice from mere mortals?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLPanhandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-20-10 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
5. Something I'm not entirely comfortable with is...
"the National Academy of Sciences on Wednesday called for taxes on carbon emissions, a cap-and-trade program for such emissions"

Where I think they overstep is proposing economic solutions to this problem. Frankly, scientists have shown us the issue, proven it, and recommended levels of greenhouse gas emissions the Earth can sustain.

Recommending non scientific solutions (meaning the political, economic, and social changes) risks turning scientists into politicans and IMHO isn't an area that they are experts in.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lionel Mandrake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-20-10 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I'm not comfortable with it, either.
The reports lose credibility to the extent that recommendations go beyond the authors' area of expertise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 07:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC