Bush to commit $US2bn to climate change

Reuters via www.news.com.au ^ | Jan. 29, 2008 | Staff

[jdm]

THE US will commit $US2 billion ($2.27 billion) over the next three years for a new international fund to promote clean energy technologies and fight climate change, President George W. Bush will tell Congress today in his annual State of the Union speech.

[cogitator]

If you want to support rainforest conservation, then you would be wise to oppose the global ethanol scam. Right now, certain Pacific nations are cutting down forest (which could include rainforest) to accomodate the growing of crops to be turned into something that has roughly 2/3 of the energy content of gasoline. This is being done for decadent Europeans.

I know, and the push to eliminate trans fats will probably cause more rain forests to get cut in favor of palm plantations to provide palm oil (which is still a saturated fat, isn't it?) I would hope that advocacy of switchgrass and biomass ethanol in the U.S. and more nuclear power (so that we can drive more plug-in hybrids) isn't buying into the global ethanol scam.

And in response to another reply of yours, after the windy winter’s day I’ve had today, I would like spring to come even earlier. The blustery winter wind almost rolled my shopping cart into someone else’s car, and it also caused my car door to hit my Mom’s SUV. So, yes, I wish this would end sooner.

I know. Despite my concerns for the rapid change of polar climates, I am aware that winter weather can be arduous. We're fighting freezing rain this morning, which is more dangerous than snow, so I wish it was colder if we had to have winter precipitation. It's a pain to take the garbage cans to the curb when it's really cold at night.

But I was just reading about how slightly lower water levels in the Great Lakes are wreaking havoc on transport and commerce and beaches and recreation. This is related, according to what I've read, to regional changes in temperature and precipitation. One of the main cited reasons is less input and more output due to evaporation, and one of the main reasons for more evaporation is less winter ice cover -- cold dry windy days evaporate a lot of water ("lake-effect" snow when the evaporated water hits colder air over land).

Later freezes, earlier thaws wave of future

Quote: "Other studies have found similar trends on the Great Lakes: Less ice cover, with ice forming later each winter and melting earlier. The lack of ice cover has major implications for water levels -- ice cover prevents water from evaporating. ... Reduced ice cover in 2006 contributed to dramatically lower water levels in 2007, according to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Lake Superior hit a record low last year and Lake Michigan is approaching the record low set in 1964, according to government data. ... "There is no doubt we have seen major changes in the Great Lakes: Warmer water temperatures, reduced ice cover and increased evaporation," said Gary Fahnenstiel, senior ecologist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Lake Michigan Field Station in Muskegon."

But the next paragraph says there could be more beach days after Labor Day! So what's more important -- a few more days at the beach or inland shipping?

This is what I read in the Sunday Post (yes, I get the Sunday WashPost, I'm sorry):

Great Lakes' Lower Water Levels Propel a Cascade of Hardships (WashPost)

So apparently cold winters are important, and not just for polar bears.