Here in the Philippines, the early onset of rains in mid-April (vs. June or July in earlier years) should also be a record. Today we're in 7 days straight of thick clouds and daily rains, though it was a bit sunny for a few days before that.
Russian scientist issues global cooling warning
ST. PETERSBURG, August 25 (RIA Novosti)- Global cooling could develop on Earth in 50 years and have serious consequences before it is replaced by a period of warming in the early 22nd century, a Russian scientist said Friday.
Environmentalists and scientists today focus on the dangers of global warming provoked by man's detrimental effect on the planet's climate, but global cooling - though never widely supported - is a theory postulating an overwhelming cooling of the Earth which could involve glaciation.
"On the basis of our [solar emission] research, we developed a scenario of a global cooling of the Earth's climate by the middle of this century and the beginning of a regular 200-year-long cycle of the climate's global warming at the start of the 22nd century," said the head of the space research sector of the Russian Academy of Sciences' astronomical observatory.
Khabibullo Abdusamatov said he and his colleagues had concluded that a period of global cooling similar to one seen in the late 17th century - when canals froze in the Netherlands and people had to leave their dwellings in Greenland - could start in 2012-2015 and reach its peak in 2055-2060.
He said he believed the future climate change would have very serious consequences and that authorities should start preparing for them today because "climate cooling is connected with changing temperatures, especially for northern countries."
"The Kyoto initiatives to save the planet from the greenhouse effect should be put off until better times," he said, referring to an international treaty on climate change targeting greenhouse gas emissions.
"The global temperature maximum has been reached on Earth, and Earth's global temperature will decline to a climatic minimum even without the Kyoto protocol," Abdusamatov said.
China vs. rich countries' arrogance in climate talks
There was a news report yesterday in the Financial Times,
"Climate change focus shifts to Beijing"
By Fiona Harvey
2 June 2009
The United Nations, the US and European governments have all stepped up their diplomatic efforts to woo Beijing in recent days, emolliently brushing aside the hardline stance it has taken. Beijing late last month called on rich countries to cut their emissions by 40 per cent by 2020, far more than any has agreed, and to give 0.5 per cent to 1 per cent of their gross domestic product to poor countries to help them cope with climate change....A fellow member at our CSCCC coalition (www.csccc.info), Daren, commented,
If I were China, I’d be laughing at the UN and the “green” counties. I’d have the leverage and not sacrifice a thing—instead I’d get the other countries to pay for nuclear development and whatever I could think of. Sure I’d pretend to care about global warming, but I’d make these countries pay big-time for their arrogance and desire to somehow keep us from obtaining the wealth and prosperity that they have enjoyed for decades.I feel that all those climate change "talks" are full of contradictions and ironies. Consider the following:
1. Rich countries to provide climate aid of around $300 billion/year, even $200 B/year -- at a time that those countries are heavily indebted because of their current borrowings for fiscal stimulus, then future borrowings to "fix" their health care, Medicare, medicaid, other welfare entitlement programs. Where will those rich countries to borrow from to finance their additional aid commitment -- China? Yes, from China!
2. While global temperatures are falling, the carbon dioxide concentration in the atmos phere is rising (now around 390 parts per million I think, it was 385 ppm about 3 years ago). The reality between falling temperature and rising CO2 -- said to be responsible for rising(!) temperature -- is 180 degrees apart.
3. All those "renewable" energies the rich countries and climate alarmists are pushing -- wind and solar specially -- produce the lowest (sometimes zero) electricity at a time the temperate countries need energy the most. At winter, the sun seldom shines and the wind seldom blows. Sometimes there is almost zero wind speed in winter time. I read this in the exeperience of wind farms in Scotland. So where will rich and cold countries get huge energy? You guess it, from "non-renewables" like coal and natural gas power plants!
So I agree with Daren. China should drag its butt on those "climate talks" by the UN and rich countries. Let them beg if they have to, but China should proceed its break-neck economic growth using cheap energy sources. It is not possible to grow fast if your energy sources are very expensive, if not very unreliable and very small.
The worst "revenge" that the rich countries can get back at China is trade protectionism. Imposing huge "carbon tax" on all China exports. Fine. Let those countries suffer hyper-inflation with buying their own expensive products and services produced from expensive energy sources, made more expensive by carbon caps passed on to consumers, made more expensive by high taxes and fees.
China has hundreds of millions of alternative market. ASEAN countries alone (Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Cambodia, Singapore, Myanmar, Laos, Brunei) is almost 600 million people, or almost the combined population of US and EU. Then there are rich neighbors like Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, with almost 200 million people. And India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc. with nearly 1.5 billion people, And China's growing trade relations with Brazil, S. Africa, other countries in Latin America and Africa.