Partisan divide over climate change starts to close

[billvon 3,070]

Good news. From Forbes:
====================
1/18/2015
Tom Zeller
The End of the Partisan Divide Over Climate Change

The revelation late last week that global average temperatures set a new record in 2014 seemed to underscore a political and cultural shift on climate change that, by many accounts, was already well underway. From the stock markets and Wall Street to the boardrooms of Big Oil — and even the living rooms of Republican voters — the era of reflexive skepticism and denial of basic climate science appears to be coming to a close.

That won’t likely mean an end to partisan bickering, of course. But as the adage goes, the first step to solving a problem is admitting that you have one.

That’s precisely what the American Petroleum Institute did when it released its annual State of American Energy Report two weeks ago. Amid its bullish assessment of the nation’s ongoing boom in shale oil and gas, the leading fossil fuel trade group clearly and unequivocally acknowledged the threat of global warming, and highlighted — at some length — the steady rise of solar power as an encouraging sign.

“Few things threaten America’s future prosperity more than climate change,” the report declared. “But there is growing hope: Every 2.5 minutes of every single day, the U.S. solar industry is helping to fight this battle by flipping the switch on another completed solar project.” The report goes on to note that the solar power sector has shaved installation costs and enjoyed over 40 percent growth over the last year.

Simply put, when looking at America’s energy future, solar can be a real game changer, providing more and more homes, businesses, schools and government entities across the United States with clean, reliable and affordable electricity while also helping states to meet proposed new obligations under … the Clean Air Act.

Sure, the same lobbying group has spent a good deal of money over the years combating tougher pollution rules and stoking skepticism about climate change. The same report, in fact, savages the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan, which seeks to cut carbon pollution from existing power plants, arguing that it will kill the coal industry and cause significant harm to the nation’s economy (not everyone agrees).

And as Travis Hoium noted over at the investing advice site The Motley Fool, the big oil giants have mostly shuttered their efforts at researching and developing clean energy technologies. This includes BP , which folded its solar business three years ago, and Chevron , which finalized the sale of its renewable energy division in September.

And yet, there it was: The nation’s largest and most powerful oil lobby stating in no uncertain terms that climate change is real, that it’s a threat to American prosperity, and that clean energy technologies promise a solution. Along those lines, Hoium notes that France’s Total oil company is bucking the trend, buying up large stakes in solar firms like SunPower and biofuel maker Amyris . And it’s worth noting that the clean tech sector as a whole saw a substantial rebound in 2014, with investments jumping 16 percent, topping $310 billion, according to new data from Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

Such trends would not be surprising to the many Republican voters who participated in a recent poll conducted by Yale University’s Project on Climate Change Communication. Despite promises by a Republican-controlled Congress to aggressively fight and roll-back a whole host of environmental protections, including curbs on carbon dioxide emissions, more than half of GOP poll participants said they supported regulation of carbon dioxide as a pollutant. This was true even among those who identified themselves as part of the party’s conservative wing.

Among the GOP’s liberal and moderate wings, roughly two-thirds were convinced that global warming is real — a fact that has even Republican pollsters arguing that the GOP risks its future by continuing to deny basic climate science on Capitol Hill. That message appears to be sinking in. As Michael Shank noted in The Week on Thursday, beneath the bluster of leading Republicans’ war on the EPA, the reality on the ground is slowly but steadily driving a new era of bipartisanship on a variety of climate-friendly initiatives at the federal and state levels.

To be sure, the partisan fights over climate change are far from over, and there are legitimate debates to be had over how best to address the problem while keeping the lights on, the cars moving, and the economy more or less healthy.

But with another year now proving to have been the warmest since record keeping began — and with a proliferation of record-setting years happening in relative succession — the paralyzing debate over the reality of global warming would seem to be over.

After all, a record-setting year every now and again is no big deal. Anomalies happen. But the fact is that all 15 years since the year 2000 have been among the top 20 warmest years ever recorded. The odds of this happening randomly, or as a part of natural variability? About 1.5 quadrillion to one.

[turtlespeed 226]

If you tell a lie enough times . . .

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 3,070]

>If you tell a lie enough times . . .

. . . people apparently start to ignore it.

"the paralyzing debate over the reality of global warming would seem to be over."

[turtlespeed 226]

billvon

>If you tell a lie enough times . . .

. . . people apparently start to ignore it.

"the paralyzing debate over the reality of global warming would seem to be over."

At 38% I guess the science is settled.

What exactly is the main cause?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[lawrocket 3]

The Senate resolution, cosponsored by Inhofe, passed 98-1, acknowledging that climate change is real and not a hoax.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

lawrocket

The Senate resolution, cosponsored by Inhofe, passed 98-1, acknowledging that climate change is real and not a hoax.

So 98% of Senators think that it's real?

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Anvilbrother 0]

Quote

The vote came on an amendment to legislation that aims to force approval of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, which would carry oil from the Canadian oil sands to the United States.

This is why they all voted yes but one. It was to keep the keystone going along, and was only put on there to put them on record as saying they think it's real for future debates.

Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along,

[lawrocket 3]

wolfriverjoe

***The Senate resolution, cosponsored by Inhofe, passed 98-1, acknowledging that climate change is real and not a hoax.

So 98% of Senators think that it's real?



And I've had the chance to look at the blogosphere. The alarmists are absolutely horrified and think Inhofe is a disgrace. For voting with them.

Because for the first time in I don't know how long the GOP outpoliticked the Democrats. Alarmists are absolutely horrified that Inhofe cosponsored the statement and then got the GOP to vote for it. They wanted the GOP to vote against it and ridicule the GOP.

GOP voted for it. Now the GOP is being ridiculed for voting for it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[marks2065 0]

I personally don't think that humans are causing changes in the climate, I personally feel that the earths climate is directly related to the changing orbit of the earth around the sun and the solar flares off the sun just like it has been since the beginning of the planet. But even if we are causing changes to the climate we will never be around long enough to see it become an issue. The greatest issue we face is food. At this point we are consuming more then this planet is producing. if you continue the population growth over the next 200 years that we have seen over the last 200 years the oceans will be void of large animals and starvation will become the number 1 cause of death. If people want to do something that would really make a difference for the people of earth they would spend the money learning how to increase the animal life in the oceans and how to slow the population growth of the world.
If we are changing the climate of the planet it will correct itself when the population starves itself until the proper balance has been achieved.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

marks2065

I personally don't think that humans are causing changes in the climate, I personally feel that the earths climate is directly related to the changing orbit of the earth around the sun and the solar flares off the sun just like it has been since the beginning of the planet. But even if we are causing changes to the climate we will never be around long enough to see it become an issue. The greatest issue we face is food. At this point we are consuming more then this planet is producing. if you continue the population growth over the next 200 years that we have seen over the last 200 years the oceans will be void of large animals and starvation will become the number 1 cause of death. If people want to do something that would really make a difference for the people of earth they would spend the money learning how to increase the animal life in the oceans and how to slow the population growth of the world.
If we are changing the climate of the planet it will correct itself when the population starves itself until the proper balance has been achieved.

Might be shocking, but some people think about not only themselves.

[billvon 3,070]

> I personally don't think that humans are causing changes in the climate, I personally
>feel that the earths climate is directly related to the changing orbit of the earth around
>the sun . . .

In what way? Is the Earth getting closer to the Sun?

> But even if we are causing changes to the climate we will never be around long
>enough to see it become an issue.

That's quite likely true depending on where you live. If you live in Boulder, climate change might never significantly affect you. If, however, you have children or grandchildren, they may see more of the effects since the effects are increasing with time.

>If we are changing the climate of the planet it will correct itself when the population
>starves itself until the proper balance has been achieved.

Agreed, although I'd think mass starvation would count as "an issue."

[marks2065 0]

billvon

> I personally don't think that humans are causing changes in the climate, I personally
>feel that the earths climate is directly related to the changing orbit of the earth around
>the sun . . .

In what way? Is the Earth getting closer to the Sun?

> But even if we are causing changes to the climate we will never be around long
>enough to see it become an issue.

That's quite likely true depending on where you live. If you live in Boulder, climate change might never significantly affect you. If, however, you have children or grandchildren, they may see more of the effects since the effects are increasing with time.

>If we are changing the climate of the planet it will correct itself when the population
>starves itself until the proper balance has been achieved.

Agreed, although I'd think mass starvation would count as "an issue."

This is how the earth orbits the sun and the orbit is related to the ice ages that have been recorded. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles there is a direct relationship with planet temps and the orbit around the sun with variables based on other planets.

[lawrocket 3]

I am fairly convinced that humans have an effect on the climate. One need only look at weather reports. Look at how much warmer it is in the city in winter versus the rural areas. Human effect on climate.

I am convinced that, all things being equal, more CO2 in the atmosphere will increase the temperature. The evidence supports this. The evidence also shows, fairly convincingly to me, that all things are not equal.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,070]

[billvon 3,070]

>This is how the earth orbits the sun and the orbit is related to the ice ages that have
>been recorded. http://en.wikipedia.org/.../Milankovitch_cycles there is a direct
>relationship with planet temps and the orbit around the sun with variables based on
>other planets.

Agreed - and Milankovitch cycles do indeed cause warming that is obvious in the ice core data, about a degree every 1000 years. We're warming a degree every 100 years. So you could certainly say that AGW contributes only ~90% of the warming we see.

[rushmc 23]

billvon

We're warming a degree every 100 years. So you could certainly say that AGW contributes only ~90% of the warming we see.

the data from the last 20 years does not support this claim

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,070]

>the data from the last 20 years does not support this claim

The data from the last 150 does. And it's good to see even Republicans acknowledging that now.

[marks2065 0]

lawrocket

I am fairly convinced that humans have an effect on the climate. One need only look at weather reports. Look at how much warmer it is in the city in winter versus the rural areas. Human effect on climate.

I am convinced that, all things being equal, more CO2 in the atmosphere will increase the temperature. The evidence supports this. The evidence also shows, fairly convincingly to me, that all things are not equal.

But the warmer temps in the urban areas has nothing to do with carbon emissions, it has to do about structures and paving absorbing the heat.

[billvon 3,070]

>But the warmer temps in the urban areas has nothing to do with carbon emissions, it
>has to do about structures and paving absorbing the heat.

That's why such temperatures are adjusted downwards. Once adjusted, urban and rural measurements show the same increase.

(Note that 42% of urban temperatures are actually COOLER than the baseline temperatures measured outside the urban areas - because sensors are often in parks and the like, and parks are artificially irrigated.)

[turtlespeed 226]

billvon

>the data from the last 20 years does not support this claim

The data from the last 150 does. And it's good to see even Republicans acknowledging that now.

I believe it has more to do with the degradation of the magnetic field.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[lawrocket 3]

marks2065

***I am fairly convinced that humans have an effect on the climate. One need only look at weather reports. Look at how much warmer it is in the city in winter versus the rural areas. Human effect on climate.

I am convinced that, all things being equal, more CO2 in the atmosphere will increase the temperature. The evidence supports this. The evidence also shows, fairly convincingly to me, that all things are not equal.

But the warmer temps in the urban areas has nothing to do with carbon emissions, it has to do about structures and paving absorbing the heat.

I'm not talking about carbon emissions. I'm talking about humans having an effect on the climate. Structures and paving abosrbing and emitting the heat are a human effect of climate.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,070]

>I believe it has more to do with the degradation of the magnetic field.

Or maybe gamma rays. Or the decline of pirates, who make the world a cold, cold place. Or maybe it's the commies. There's no consensus!

[turtlespeed 226]

billvon

>I believe it has more to do with the degradation of the magnetic field.

Or maybe gamma rays. Or the decline of pirates, who make the world a cold, cold place. Or maybe it's the commies. There's no consensus!

Yet the left clings to it just like a religious belief.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 3,070]

>Yet the left clings to it just like a religious belief.

Hmm. I haven't heard the left cling to the idea that the magnetic field, or pirates, or gamma rays, or commies are causing global warming.

Perhaps you've lost track of the conversation?