In 2010 (the latest year for which we had data) New York City added 54 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (equivalent) to the atmosphere, but that number means little to most people because few of us have a sense of scale for atmospheric pollution.
Carbon Visuals (carbonvisuals.com) and the Environmental Defense Fund wanted to make those emissions feel a bit more real - the total emissions and the rate of emission. Designed to engage the ‘person on the street’, this version is exploratory and still work in progress.
NYC carbon footprint:
54,349,650 million tons a year = 148,903 tons a day = 6,204 tons an hour = 1.72 tons a second
At standard pressure and 59 °F a metric ton of carbon dioxide gas would fill a sphere 33 feet across (density of CO₂ = 1.87 kg/m³: bit.ly If this is how New York’s emissions actually emerged we would see one of these spheres emerge every 0.58 seconds.
Emissions in 2010 were 12% less than 2005 emissions. The City of New York is on track to reduce emissions by 30% by 2017 - an ambitious target.
For a set of stills from this movie, see: flickr.com
For more information see:
If you have a youtube account you might want to click out and subscribe to “Yaleclimateforum”.
Uploaded by yaleclimateforum on Mar 6, 2012
A Peter Sinclair original video focuses on climate scientist Michael Mann … on and his first-hand view of his hockey stick and ‘climate wars’ experiences. greenmanstudio.com
Science & Technology
climate climate change greenhouse greenhouse effect this is not cool yale Peter Sinclair climate denial carbon dioxide co2 science climate science atmosphere hockey stick michael mann mann hockey climate wars Barton joe barton wegman edward wegman plagiarism
Now that France’s Total and China’s Sinopec have invested $4.5 billion in two of this country’s premier natural gas developers, common wisdom is suggesting that the fate of shale-gas here will outshine all competing energy forms. But is that logic well considered?
Estimates are that at least a century’s worth of shale-gas is now recoverable from underneath America’s feet. Some are betting that such volume will drive down the cost of that fuel, making the alternatives unattractive.
“With the new abundance and lower prices, lower-carbon gas seems likely to play a much larger role in the generation of electric power,” writes Daniel Yergin, in his new book “The Quest.” By comparison, nuclear would seem expensive while coal would appear to be more carbon intensive. Meantime, it creates “a more difficult competitive environment for wind projects.”
Yergin, however, is admonishing policymakers not to rely exclusively on shale-gas. That’s because too many factors can disrupt markets and include everything from politics to environmental and natural disasters.
Shale will not just become a U.S. phenomenon. But it will also have a great impact around the globe. Global proven reserves are estimated to be at 6,600 trillion cubic feet, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. China and the United States have the most supplies at 1,275 and 862 trillion cubic feet, respectively. In this country, for example, shale gas has grown 48 percent a year from 2006 to 2010. It now makes up a third of all natural gas supplies.
Israeli-designed GrainPro Cocoons provide a surprisingly simple and cheap way for African and Asian farmers to keep their grain market-fresh.
As much as 50 percent of every grain harvest and 100% of every pulse harvest is lost to pests and mold, Navarro tells ISRAEL21c. Subsistence farmers in developing countries, who consume a large part of what they produce, tend to store their crops in primitive baskets or bags, which are not effective in keeping hungry bugs and micro-contaminants out.
“We are trying to help them save crops for the near future, not 50 years later. But perhaps our solution can help educate people too,” he says.
“People put their crops in baskets assuming that nothing will happen. They come to the market with them and see a large part is consumed by insects or mold. There are many losses; the 50 percent figure is a normal loss for cereal and pulses. And when the insects enter, they make it unfit for human consumption.”
From an environmental point of view, producing food with high losses is extremely wasteful and carbon intensive as well. Adding volatile chemical compounds to the problem doesn’t make sense. They are expensive and they can have disastrous health consequences for people eating the produce and living near the growing fields.
The straightforward, cost-effective solution developed by Navarro more than two decades ago gives farmers crop security with no harmful side effects. Provided that the harvest is dried properly before getting hermetically sealed in the large storage bags, it’s safe for the future in extreme conditions aside from massive flooding or hurricanes.
And now in Kenya, when individual farmers do not have enough crops to fill their own Cocoons, they can bring their grain to a seed bank to be stored together with their neighbors’ crops in a collective Cocoon. When they need them, the contributors get their grain returned to them intact.
This is one of many projects that GrainPro has developed, with the help of Navarro’s Cocoon.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The global output of heat-trapping carbon dioxide jumped by the biggest amount on record, the U.S. Department of Energy calculated, a sign of how feeble the world’s efforts are at slowing man-made global warming.
The new figures for 2010 mean that levels of greenhouse gases are higher than the worst case scenario outlined by climate experts just four years ago.
“The more we talk about the need to control emissions, the more they are growing,” said John Reilly, co-director of MIT’s Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change.
The world pumped about 564 million more tons (512 million metric tons) of carbon into the air in 2010 than it did in 2009. That’s an increase of 6 percent. That amount of extra pollution eclipses the individual emissions of all but three countries — China, the United States and India, the world’s top producers of greenhouse gases.
It is a “monster” increase that is unheard of, said Gregg Marland, a professor of geology at Appalachian State University, who has helped calculate Department of Energy figures in the past.
The following 4 episodes are linked from here.
The carbon molecule known as a buckyball, a member of the fullerene family, can act as a cage for a variety of other chemicals. And now researchers have used one to trap a single molecule of water. The work appears in the journal Science. [Kei Kurotobi and Yasujiro Murata, A Single Molecule of Water Encapsulated in Fullerene C60]
Placing a molecule that’s essential to life within a spherically symmetrical one could let researchers learn more about each.
Water molecules stick together, because they carry a slight charge on each end. As the positive pole of one H2O attracts the negative pole of another, the molecules cling tightly together. You can’t separate a single water molecule from its fellows with a tiny pair of tweezers, so isolating it in a carbon cage may reveal new secrets about the intrinsic nature of a lone H2O.
What about the cage itself? Researchers already know that buckyballs refuse to dissolve in water, sometimes even floating like miniature beach balls. But what happens when the water is within? Putting polar molecules inside buckyballs may influence the chemical behavior of their outsides, and create new molecules with unique properties. Not to mention making our understanding even…fuller.
In New Hampshire, to an audience question about the EPA, Romney tries yet again to have it both ways but to move away from his own former stance about greenhouse gases:
“Do I support the EPA? In much of its mission yes, but in some of its mission no. The EPA getting into carbon footprints, and… [APPLAUSE] I think we may have made a mistake, we have made a mistake is what I believe, in saying that the EPA should regulate carbon emissions. I don’t think that was the intent of the original legislation, and I don’t think carbon is a pollutant in the sense of harming our bodies.”
In the sense of harming our bodies? So what does that mean, Mitt? That is truly some new height of weasel.
Mr. Gore’s mea culpa underscores the degree to which ethanol has become a purely political machine: It serves no purpose other than re-electing incumbents and transferring wealth to farm states and ethanol producers. Nothing proves this better than the coincident trajectories of ethanol and Mr. Gore’s career.
I’ve hesitated to link this for some time, because Gore is a lightning rod and the point of the article is much more about ethanol and the distortion of energy subsidies and our political process. If there is a criticism about Gore here, it’s no greater criticism than we could and ought to make about nearly any other politician: their principles, even those purportedly nearest to their hearts, are all too easily sacrificed on the altar of re-election (e.g. McCain, John).
The main point i’m trying to reinforce here is what i believe to be the consensus economists’ opinion.
1. AGW is happening, and significantly taxing fossil fuels will create a powerful incentive to move towards cleaner energy.
2. Fossil fuel taxes should be applied to the general treasury and offset with lower taxes across the board, so that we depress fossil fuel consumption without punishing the economy.
3. Alternative energy should NOT be subsidized. The expense of fossil fuels, after taxes, will drive the market (with appropriate regulations, of course) towards the more efficient solutions and away from the less efficient solutions.
Subsidies, as we can see with the ethanol debacle, flow towards the technology in the most powerful politicians’ districts, not the technology with the most promise.
This is what i mean, as a republican, when i speak of ‘less government interference’. I do not mean that government should do nothing. I mean that government should do what plainly lies within its purview and ability, which is to create a smart tax policy. It should then stop trying to pretend that it knows which solution is the best. That’s why we fund research at universities and facilitate entrepreneurship.