Posted on 06/08/2008 9:15:40 PM PDT by Danlaws
Thank you for contacting me regarding climate change. I appreciate hearing from you.
I believe that we must address the causes of climate change immediately. The global average surface temperature is rising, glaciers and sea ice are melting, and the overwhelming majority of scientists agree that our accelerating use of fossil fuels is a significant part of the problem.
As you know, the Senate is considering climate change legislation. I believe a cap-and-trade system is the best and most flexible way of guaranteeing that the lowest cost measures for reducing greenhouse gas emissions are adopted first. We must also be careful to design this policy so as not to place our industries at a competitive disadvantage in the global marketplace while encouraging other countries to reduce their carbon emissions.
While there is no single solution to this crisis, there are many options available that will contribute to a solution. Currently available technologies, like fuel-efficient cars and energy efficient appliances, reduce energy consumption. Cellulosic biofuels are nearly ready for the marketplace; they have the potential to replace billions of gallons of gasoline and diesel while, according to DOE scientists, reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 86 percent compared to petroleum. I also believe that renewable energy will be instrumental in America's fight against climate change, and that Colorados diverse world-class renewable energy resources position our state to be the nation's renewable energy capitol. Clean, low-carbon energy can be an economic engine for our nation, and I am hopeful that a cap-and-trade system and the right tax policies will stoke our burgeoning transformation into a world-leader in cost-effective solutions to the climate challenge.
In addition, the development of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) will also play a central role in our quest to reduce our carbon emissions. You may be interested to learn that among other efforts to accelerate the path towards CCS, I wrote the provision in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 that calls for a comprehensive assessment of the Nation's carbon dioxide geologic storage capacity.
Please be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind as I continue to work hard on these important issues to help mitigate damage to our earths climate. We owe our best efforts to solve this crisis to future generations. This is a pivotal moment in the debate over federal climate policy, and I am hopeful that momentum is building towards a carefully-crafted policy.
Again, thank you for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Ken Salazar United States Senator
ABSTRACT:
"Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the product of oceanic respiration due to the well-known but under-appreciated solubility pump. Carbon dioxide rises out of warm ocean waters where it is added to the atmosphere. There it is mixed with residual and accidental CO2, and circulated, to be absorbed into the sink of the cold ocean waters. Next the thermohaline circulation carries the CO2-rich sea water deep into the ocean. A millennium later it appears at the surface in warm waters, saturated by lower pressure and higher temperature, to be exhausted back into the atmosphere. Throughout the past 420 millennia, comprising four interglacial periods, the Vostok record of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is imprinted with, and fully characterized by, the physics of the solubility of CO2 in water, along with the lag in the deep ocean circulation.
Notwithstanding that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, atmospheric carbon dioxide has neither caused nor amplified global temperature increases. Increased carbon dioxide has been an effect of global warming, not a cause. Technically, carbon dioxide is a lagging proxy for ocean temperatures. When global temperature, and along with it, ocean temperature rises, the physics of solubility causes atmospheric CO2 to increase.
If increases in carbon dioxide, or any other greenhouse gas, could have in turn raised global temperatures, the positive feedback would have been catastrophic. While the conditions for such a catastrophe were present in the Vostok record from natural causes, the runaway event did not occur. Carbon dioxide does not accumulate in the atmosphere."
http://www.rocketscientistsjournal.com/2006/10/co2_acquittal.html
_______________________________________________________________
The graph above represents temperature and CO2 levels over the past 400,000 years. It is the same exact data Al Gore and the rest of the man-made global warmers refer to. The blue line is temps, the red CO2 levels. The deep valleys represent 4 separate glaciation periods. Now look very carefully at this relationship between temps and CO2 levels and keep in mind that Gore claims this data is the 'proof' that CO2 has warmed the earth in the past. But does the graph indeed show this? Nope. In fact, rising CO2 levels all throughout this 400,000 year period actually lagged behind temperature increases ...by an average of 800 years! So it couldn't have been CO2 that got Earth out of these 4 past glaciations. Yet Gore dishonestly and continually claims otherwise.-ETL
_______________________________________________________________
"The above chart shows the range of global temperature through the last 500 million years. There is no statistical correlation between the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through the last 500 million years and the temperature record in this interval. In fact, one of the highest levels of carbon dioxide concentration occurred during a major ice age that occurred about 450 million years ago. Carbon dioxide concentrations at that time were about 15 times higher than at present.":
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=010405M
_______________________________________________________________
FWD:
So, greenhouse [effect] is all about carbon dioxide, right?
Wrong. The most important players on the greenhouse stage are water vapor and clouds. Carbon dioxide has been increased to about 0.038% of the atmosphere (possibly from about 0.028% pre-Industrial Revolution) while water in its various forms ranges from 0% to 4% of the atmosphere and its properties vary by what form it is in and even at what altitude it is found in the atmosphere.
In simple terms the bulk of Earth's greenhouse effect is due to water vapor by virtue of its abundance. Water accounts for about 90% of the Earth's greenhouse effect -- perhaps 70% is due to water vapor and about 20% due to clouds (mostly water droplets), some estimates put water as high as 95% of Earth's total tropospheric greenhouse effect (e.g., Freidenreich and Ramaswamy, 'Solar Radiation Absorption by Carbon Dioxide, Overlap with Water, and a Parameterization for General Circulation Models,' Journal of Geophysical Research 98 (1993):7255-7264).
The remaining portion comes from carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, ozone and miscellaneous other 'minor greenhouse gases.' As an example of the relative importance of water it should be noted that changes in the relative humidity on the order of 1.3-4% are equivalent to the effect of doubling CO2.
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/
_______________________________________________________________
FWD:
Water Vapor Rules the Greenhouse System
Water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect (4). Interestingly, many 'facts and figures' regarding global warming completely ignore the powerful effects of water vapor in the greenhouse system, carelessly (perhaps, deliberately) overstating human impacts as much as 20-fold.
Water vapor is 99.999% of natural origin. Other atmospheric greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and miscellaneous other gases (CFC's, etc.), are also mostly of natural origin (except for the latter, which is mostly anthropogenic).
Human activites contribute slightly to greenhouse gas concentrations through farming, manufacturing, power generation, and transportation. However, these emissions are so dwarfed in comparison to emissions from natural sources we can do nothing about, that even the most costly efforts to limit human emissions would have a very small-- perhaps undetectable-- effect on global climate.
I know as a human being I tend to prefer it when it's a few degrees warmer outside. And how Salazar became your state's junior Senator instead of Pete Coors is beyond me.
(On the other hand, your Senator didn't tap a toe in an airport bathroom stall like mine did.)
Problem is, water vapor can’t be used to scare the public into supporting that other party...
$5 gas? To some, it’s not impossible
(Hey Pelosi, where’s the lower gas cost you promised?)
San Francisco Chronicle | 6/8/2008 | David R. Baker, Chronicle Staff Writer
Posted on 06/08/2008 6:15:32 PM PDT by tobyhill
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2028114/posts
New Transmission Tech Doubles MPG, Reduces CO2
Good Clean Tech | Thursday June 5, 2008 | staff
Posted on 06/08/2008 4:18:25 PM PDT by saganite
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2028065/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.