Anti Climate Policies Secret Funding, What’s Wrong

The Climate change and Green House Gases evoke a lot of controversy.

On the one hand a  group claims the world is becoming warmer and we are rushing into disaster because of green house Effects  the other Group claims that the data on Climate change is debatable , neutral scientific papers are not allowed to do the rounds and that Scientists advocating greenhouse Effects  do not allow external verification of their Data.

http://ramanan50.wordpress.com/2011/09/17/global-warming-falsenobel-winner-resigns/

I belong to the minority who believes  that climate change is a fraud perpetrated on the gullible, solely with the intention of funding the NGO Industry.

Recent news item that the Earth,in fact, is inching towards an Ice Age and the fact that the Data by the pro Green Houses are inaccurate and doctored.

http://ramanan50.wordpress.com/2013/01/04/alaska-moves-to-ice-age-global-warming-wrong/

Now Documents released by The Guardian Uk indicate that the anti Green House Lobby has secret funds to thwart Governmental Policy on Green House effects.

If one does not listen to reason, what else can one do?

My complaint is that they  need not have been  secretive in raising funds for it attributes criminality and nefarious intentions while it is not.

(that is raising funds to fight democratically)

Story:

The main lobby group for suchsceptics in the UK is the Global Warming Policy Foundation, established by Lord Lawson. Photograph: Micha Theiner/Rex Features

The spectacular exposé by the Guardian of the hidden funding network for US climate change sceptics reveals a set-up that also exists in the UK, where wealthy rightwing donors secretly finance a highly professional campaign against policies to reduce greenhouse gases.

The main lobby group for suchsceptics in the UK is the Global Warming Policy Foundation, established by Lord Lawson, a Conservative peer. The foundation was officially launched with an article by Lawson in the Times on 22 November 2009, just three days after emails that had been hacked from the University of East Anglia were posted on the web in a bid to scupper the United Nations climate change negotiations in Copenhagen that December.

Lawson used the article to accuse climate scientists of “manipulating” records of global temperature and of refusing external scrutiny of their raw data, while also calling for a “an open and reasoned debate” about domestic and international climate change policies.

But despite his apparent enthusiasm for greater transparency by climate researchers, Lawson has been less than forthcoming about how the foundation is funded. According to its latest annual accounts, the foundation received £12,161 from membership fees in the year ending 31 July 2012.

As the annual membership fee is “at least £100″, it appears that the foundation has 120 members at most.

The identity of the donors is shrouded in secrecy. The foundation’s website states that it is “funded overwhelmingly by voluntary donations from a number of private individuals and charitable trusts”, and that it “does not accept gifts from either energy companies or anyone with a significant interest in an energy company”.

Lord Lawson has consistently refused to disclose the name of the donors. When interviewed by BBC Radio 4 last October, he said that he relied on his friends who “tend to be richer than the average person and much more intelligent than the average person”.

However, membership fees are only a minor source of revenue for the foundation. Accounts show that it has received more than £1m in donations over the past three years.

The Guardian managed to uncover evidence last March that one of the foundation’s secret donors is Michael Hintze, a wealthy businessman who also gives large sums to the Conservative party.

So what does Lord Lawson do with all this money? Although the foundation is registered as an educational charity, its primary purpose seems to be to campaign against policies to tackle climate change by reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.

After the UK general election in May 2010, the foundation started to lobby the new Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition governmentto stop subsidies for alternatives to fossil fuels and to abandon the UK’s emissions reductions targets.

The foundation has also paid for the publication and dissemination of pamphlets by prominent climate change sceptics. For instance, it has distributed a leaflet extolling the virtues of shale gas by Matt Ridley, the former chairman of Northern Rock who earlier this month was voted into the House of Lords by 24 Conservative hereditary peers. And last October, the foundation issued a pamphlet by Conservative MP Peter Lilley which attacked the 2006 review of the economics of climate changecarried out by Prof Lord Stern, currently chair of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

The foundation’s lobbying activities are also assisted by the services of Bell Pottinger, headed by Margaret Thatcher’s favourite advertising expert, Tim Bell. A register maintained by the Public Relations Consultants Association shows that the foundation was a client of Bell Pottinger between December 2010 and February 2011.

The public relations company has attracted controversy because of its claims of influence over senior members of the government. In December 2011, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism uncovered evidence that senior executives of Bell Pottinger boast of their contacts with the prime minister and the chancellor.

http://www.reddit.com/tb/18n7uo

China India Air Pollution Photos Essay

 

Crass commercialism, conspicuous consumption,Wasting Natural Resources and Poor Air Safety Standard are the main causes.

 

 

 

China Air Pollution -Quality

China Air Pollution

 

 

Air Pollution China Beijing.

 

The image right above shows extensive haze, low clouds and fog over the region. The brightest areas tend to be clouds or fog, which have a tinge of gray or yellow from the air pollution. Other cloud-free areas have a pall of gray and brown smog that mostly blots out the cities below.

“

The environmental crisis stems largely from China’s rampant and unique economic growth, with the rapid pace of industrialization, the reliance on coal power and the huge growth in car ownership all playing a role.

A chart by the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR) from the European Commission estimates that in 2011 China produced 9.7 million kilotons of carbon dioxide, nearly double the U.S.’ 5.42 million kilotons.

If the Chinese cement industry alone was a country, it would be the sixth biggest emitter of carbon dioxide in the world, producing 820,00 kilotons, according to EDGAR.

While Beijing has made some progress in recent years in controlling emissions within the city limits, whatever happens in all of the neighboring provinces affects the capital.

These provinces — including Tianjin, Hebei, Inner Mongolia and Shanxi — are still developing rapidly, with more factories, more power pants, more vehicles and more coal burning, and it’s making the government’s efforts to clean up that much harder.”

 

“Over the past weekend, poor meteorological conditions contributed to a severe accumulation of air pollution in Beijing and hundreds of other cities in northern and eastern China. The extreme pollution was the worst in recent memory, yielding hundreds of media reports both within China and around the world. In addition, tens of millions took to Twitter and China’s Twitter-like service, Weibo, to post their thoughts and complaints. Unfortunately, such extreme pollution accumulation episodes are common in Beijing. And even when meteorological conditions are good, average pollution levels in Beijing are still unacceptably high. Until China takes critical steps towards reducing emissions, poor average air quality and occasional “crazy bad” episodes will continue.

Vehicles are a critical source to control. Vehicles are typically by far the largest source of human exposure to air pollution in densely packed urban areas. Plus, the contribution of vehicle emissions to air pollution in China is increasing as the population of motor vehicles in Beijing and around China continues to grow rapidly. Implementing stringent controls to mitigate the pollution impacts of China’s motor vehicles must be a key priority in parallel with controlling other sources such as factories and power plants.

Moreover, such action needs to take place at the national level. Because vehicles (especially trucks and long-distance buses) travel in and out of cities, only stringent national-level regulations can ensure that all vehicles are controlled effectively no matter where they travel. In recent years, Beijing has made a series of impressive steps towards controlling pollution within its own boundaries (e.g. the most stringent vehicle standards in the country, the cleanest fuel quality standards in the country, scrapping >500,000 old polluting vehicles over the past two years, and more). However, the city still struggles to improve air quality because perhaps 34%-70% of Beijing’s pollution is regional, coming from dirty vehicles and industrial sources polluting in the surrounding provinces.

(Washington Post)

Short-term actions to control motor vehicle emissions in China. Two simple steps could make a huge and near-term difference in improving air quality in Beijing and throughout China, while simultaneously demonstrating the new Chinese government’s commitment to reducing pollution emissions:

1. Immediately issue new fuel quality standards with supporting fiscal policies to reduce nationwide diesel sulfur levels to below 10 parts-per-million (ppm). Because high sulfur levels in fuel can poison advanced emission control technologies, improving fuel quality, especially reducing sulfur levels, is a critical prerequisite to introducing more stringent vehicle tailpipe emission standards. In 2011, China’s State Council announced that preferential fiscal policies would be utilized to encourage the supply of higher quality fuels nationwide. However, these fiscal policies have not yet been issued; a new fuel quality standard is stalled in the review phase; and nationwide diesel fuel sulfur levelscontinue to stagnate at unacceptable levels of 350ppm or higher. Resolving the fuel quality issue is a critical step to facilitate continued progress in vehicle emission control in China.
2. Ensure that the China IV truck and bus emission standards are implemented this year without further delays. China’s next stage nationwide tailpipe emission standard for trucks and buses, called “China IV” (equivalent to “Euro IV“), aims to cut emissions of PM and NOx from diesel vehicles by 30% and 80%, respectively. However, because these vehicles need to be fueled with higher quality fuel which is not yet supplied nationwide, MEP has twice delayed the introduction of these standards across China. The current implementation date is July 1, 2013. In parallel with resolving the fuel quality issue, China should commit to introducing these standards without any additional delays….

http://www.theicct.org/blogs/staff/turning-conversation-about-beijings-air-pollution-toward-solutions

 

 

India Air Pollution.

Air Pollution Risk India

 

“The rapid growth in coal use in China and India, where pollution controls are minimal, is adding to local and long-distance pollution. More than 80 percent of Chinese cities in a recent World Bank survey had sulfur dioxide or nitrogen dioxide emissions above the World Health Organization’s threshold.

Scientists have concluded that growing up in a city with polluted air is about as harmful to a person’s health as growing up with a parent who smokes. Although air pollution is concentrated in cities, it can move well beyond them: for example, acidic lakes in Scandinavia have been linked to pollution from factories in the United States. The World Bank projected that on average 1.8 million people would die prematurely each year between 2001 and 2020 because of air pollution.”

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/3862

 

 

Astounding Earth Infographic

Earth Infographics

http://www.ouramazingplanet.com/66-infographic-tallest-mountain-to-deepest-ocean-trench.html

Alaska Moves To Ice Age, Global Warming Wrong

 

Despite protests by Honest Physicists’s assertion that Global warming is a Myth, a ,lobby ,mainly to garner money from the gullible,stuck on to the Theory of Global Warming,Green House effect etc non sense.(pleased my posts under Environment)

 

Alaska is now inching towards The Ice Age, with temperatures dropping by about 2.4 Fahrenheit  since 2000!

 

Would the gullible stop donating to the fat cat NGOs.?

Data: Scientists reviewed weather reports from 20 climate stations operated by NOAA across the state to determine that it is in fact getting colder in the Last Frontier

Story:

Since 2000, temperatures in Alaska have dropped by 2.4 degrees Fahrenheit
Scientists reviewed weather reports from 20 climate stations operated by the National Weather Service located across Alaska
19 of the 20 weather stations reported falling temperatures
An ocean phenomenon has disrupted a storm regulating system thus allowing cold winter storms to linger longer and bring a deep chill
Local residents have noticed the colder temps but say its no big deal since they are already bundled up for 20-below zero temperatures.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2256188/What-global-warming-Alaska-headed-ice-age-scientists-report-states-steady-temperature-decline.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

 

Related:

The subject of Global warming is mired in abstruse analysis and interpretation.

There have been cries of Global Warming and the reason cited is Carbon Emission.

Rise in temperatures have been attributed to increased CO2 levels.

This Theory has two parts.

1.There has been a rise in Global temperature.

2.CO2 is the cause for rise in temperature.

Let’s see what this is all about.

Two authorities provide us with analysis of long-term surface temperature trends. Both agree on the global temperature trend until 1998, at which time a sharp divergence occurred. The UK Meteorological Office‘s Hadley Center for Climate Studies Had-Crut datashows worldwide temperatures declining since 1998. According to Hadley’s data, the earth is not much warmer now than it was than it was in 1878 or 1941.

 http://ramanan50.wordpress.com/2011/06/01/geo-physicist-rejects-global-warming-theory-he-is-right/

 

Sweden To Import Garbage From Norway,Why Not from Bangalore?

The problem being faced by Sweden is unique.

 

While rest of the world,especially Bangalore is piling up uncleared Garbage ,Sweden which is the beat Recycling nation is planning to import Garbage from Norway.

 

Why not from Bangalore?

 

This would help our poor politicians to make some money!

Swedish Recycling.

Sweden, a recycling-happy land where a quarter of a million homes are powered by the incineration of waste, is facing a unique dilemma: The nation has run out of much-needed fuel.

Sweden, birthplace of the Smörgåsbord, Eric Northman, and the world’s preferredsolar-powered purveyor of flat-pack home furnishings, is in a bit of a pickle: the squeaky clean Scandinavian nation of more than 9.5 million has run out of garbage. The landfills have been tapped dry; the rubbish reserves depleted. And although this may seem like a positive — even enviable — predicament for a country to be facing, Sweden has been forced to import trash from neighboring countries, namely Norway. Yep, Sweden is so trash-strapped that officials are shipping it in — 80,000 tons of refuse annually, to be exact — from elsewhere.

You see, Swedes are big on recycling. So big in fact that only 4 percent of all waste generated in the country is landfilled.

Good for them! However, the population’s remarkably pertinacious recycling habits are also a bit of a problem given that the country relies on waste to heat and to provide electricity to hundreds of thousands of homes through a longstandingwaste-to-energy incineration program. So with citizens simply not generating enough burnable waste to power the incinerators, the country has been forced to look elsewhere for fuel. Says Catarina Ostlund, a senior advisor for the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency: “We have more capacity than the production of waste in Sweden and that is usable for incineration.”

Public Radio International has the whole story (hat tip to Ariel Schwartz atCo.Exist), a story that may seem implausible in a country like garbage-bloated America where overflowing landfills are anything but scarce.

As mentioned, the solution — a short-term one, according to Ostlund — has been to import (well, kind of import) waste from Norway. It’s kind of a great deal for the Swedes: Norway pays Sweden to take its excess waste, Sweden burns it for heat and electricity, and the ashes remaining from the incineration process, filled with highly polluting dioxins, are returned back to Norway and land filled.

http://www.mnn.com/lifestyle/recycling/blogs/sweden-runs-out-of-garbage-forced-to-import-from-norway