Comments on: Global Warming Policy 2007: Ten Victories

By: Sheryl Canter

Sheryl Canter — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:56:34 +0000

fred1 – you confuse weather and climate. Just because it's cold today doesn't mean global warming isn't happening.

If you'd like to know more about the science of global warming, start here:

http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/01/09/basic_science/

By: fred1

fred1 — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 05:41:09 +0000

I am just curious as to how mankind can hope to stablize the climate? Plus isn't it a bit too cold now anyway? I am totally onboard with protecting the environment but when you start talking about regulating CO2 and methane and all of the other greenhouse gas emissions, many of which occur naturally, I am reminded of my research which showed that 1000 years ago the global temperatures were quite warmer than they are today, and Co2 levels were lower than they are today. i also researched that according to the objective research done with ice core samples from Antarctica and Greenland, they show that increases in CO2 levels in the atmosphere tend to lag global temperature increases by 200 years or more. I want to understand the science more. Can you help me?

By: IMWright

IMWright — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 22:25:26 +0000

Ayden good question. Of course it really doesn't matter the cost if you grub your hands into someone else's wallet for the money needed. That's irrelevant. It's how we all show how much more we care than everyone else. And if course, I care more than anyone else.

By: Ayden_K

Ayden_K — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 12:23:05 +0000

My kids asked me how much energy does it take to keep blogs running 24/7 52/52? I could not answer, can any one?

By: IMWright

IMWright — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 18:17:17 +0000

Nathan good observation!

By the way, exactly where has Sheryl gone to for vacation and by what mode of transport. Shouldn't there also be a cap on the amount of travel each of us may have so that we may save the planet? Every little sacrifice we all make will make the salvation of mother Earth happen that much sooner.

By: Kira

Kira — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 21:29:21 +0000

Nathan, Sheryl is already gone for the holiday, so I'm chiming in with an answer.

First, we are happy that the Energy Bill passed! (See our comments: http://ed.org/pressrelease.cfm?contentID=7457).

But it falls short of the national action we need to avoid dangerous climate change. I checked in with one of our analysts, Freda Fung, and her figures match up with Nathanael's: The Energy Bill cuts are modest, less than one-fifth of what we need to stabilize the climate. She also points out that the Energy Bill is not designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the long term, as major provisions expire in 2022.

When we were talking about what belonged on this list, our policy staff said loud and clear that Congress isn't done until they pass a strict national cap on the emissions that cause global warming. That's why the progress of the Climate Security Act made the list, and the Energy Bill didn't.

Hope that helps, and Happy New Year!

By: NathanSchock

NathanSchock — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 17:12:20 +0000

Sheryl,

I'm surprised that this list didn't include passage of the Energy Bill which improves CAFE standards, makes strides in energy efficient lighting and appliances, and sets the first mandates for cellulosic ethanol. Nathanael Greene of NRDC said that it would provide 13 to 19 percent of the cumulative 2010-2030 reductions that would be required under climate bill that you list as number nine: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ngreene/bush_signs_energy_billpolitica.html