Advertisement

Archive for Friday, January 18, 2013

Letter: Climate action

January 18, 2013

Advertisement

To the editor:

The lead article in Friday’s Lawrence Journal-World lets us know that all but one Kansas county were declared disaster areas due to the extreme drought this past year. This week we also learned that 2012 was the hottest year ever recorded in the contiguous US, with a 55.3 degree average demolishing the previous record, set in 1998, by a full degree Fahrenheit.

How much evidence do we need that it’s time to address climate change? The longer we wait, the more painful the consequences.

The good news is we can take decisive action now! Dr. James Hansen, one of the world’s leading climate scientists, suggests implementing carbon fee and dividend legislation. This solution would place a fee on carbon at its source and then distribute the collected funds back to the American people on an equitable basis. Seventy percent of households would actually receive more in their monthly bonus check than they would pay for the increased cost of energy.

Besides being nonregressive, this revenue-neutral tax should be appealing to Republicans since it does not increase the size of government. Hopefully Sens. Moran and Roberts and Rep. Jenkins will lead Kansas and the country to an effective solution to this looming crisis.

With this legislation we could become a world leader in the green industry and also ensure that we have pristine air and water for generations to come. America is a can-do nation. Let’s roll up our sleeves and get this job done for this and future generations!

Comments

grammaddy 1 year, 11 months ago

"Hopefully,Sens. Moran and Roberts and Rep. Jenkins will lead Kansas and the country to an effective solution to this looming crisis."....... Somebody's got jokes this morning.

lunacydetector 1 year, 11 months ago

James Hansen - He obtained a B.A. in Physics and Mathematics with highest distinction in 1963, an M.S. in Astronomy in 1965 and a Ph.D. in Physics, in 1967, all three degrees from the University of Iowa. He participated in the NASA graduate traineeship from 1962 to 1966 and, at the same time, between 1965 and 1966, he was a visiting student at the Institute of Astrophysics at the University of Kyoto and in the Department of Astronomy at the University of Tokyo.

You'd think he'd also need to have a background in meteorology, to be an expert, but nope.

Ken Lassman 1 year, 11 months ago

You'd think you would be a bit more curious and check out why he's considered to be one of the world's foremost experts on climate change, but nope. If you would even have checked the wikipedia entry on him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ha...

you'd have found out that his specialty was studying the carbon dioxide induced greenhouse effect present on Venus. When he turned his attention to the atmospheric dynamics on our planet, he found his models to be equally applicable, and the predictions he made in the '80s have turned out to be stunningly accurate. He has continued to be one of the foremost experts in the field by continuing to help collect and analyze data and refine models and is still considered to be a well respected expert based on the quality of his publications.

It turns out that your performance, not your pedigree, is most important at least in some areas of science and government (since he is a part of both). Don't you find that to be reassuring?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 1 year, 11 months ago

You'd think that luny would at least have the decency of linking his limited info to the email or denialist website where he found it.

Richard Heckler 1 year, 11 months ago

Why meteorology?

What does that necessarily have to do with climate change/global warming?

Is meteorology a source of global warming? Like fossil burning vehicles, coal fired plants and drilling for oil?

Liberty275 1 year, 11 months ago

"How much evidence do we need that it’s time to address climate change?"

Tell me what the correct temperature is supposed to be and I'll help you get there.

gr 1 year, 11 months ago

"How much evidence do we need that it’s time to address climate change? "

Haven't we been addressing it? How has what we've done so far worked out? Is it having any affect? How will you, Lynate Pettengill, know it's not having any affect? When we pass the tipping point, if not already, of the point of no return of our grandchildren getting out of trillions of dollars of debt? Will there even be a country left that's not owned by some other country?

"With this legislation we could become a world leader in the green industry and also ensure that we have pristine air and water for generations to come."

Didn't follow what climate change had to do with pristine air and water. But the debt is for generations to come. If our country survives takeover.

Let’s roll up our sleeves and just say no to nonsense taxation of our grandchildren!

Ken Lassman 1 year, 11 months ago

gr says: "Didn't follow what climate change had to do with pristine air and water. But the debt is for generations to come. If our country survives takeover."

Reducing our dependence on fossil fuels decreases carbon emissions and thereby reduces it impacts, i.e. the frequency of extreme weather events such as prolonged droughts, flooding, etc., sea level rise, ocean acidification, shifting plant and animal habitat, etc. It also affects the amount of pollution that is otherwise released into the environment through the combustion of fossil fuels: mercury, sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxides from coal, oil etc. as well as increased ozone pollution, particulates, toxic pollution from leaky storage/spills, etc.

Being debt free will be a pyrrhic victory at best if we are having to spend all of our moneys rebuilding from increasingly frequent weather disasters, moving cities from rising sea levels, and fighting wars when our food growing areas dry up, creating food shortages. Our country has had to dig deep into debt to rise to meet other challenges in fighting for freedom in the world wars, for instance. Are you saying that we shouldn't have done that since they put our country into debt?

gr 1 year, 11 months ago

"Reducing our dependence on fossil fuels decreases carbon emissions and thereby reduces it impacts, i.e. the frequency of extreme weather events such as prolonged droughts, flooding, etc., sea level rise, ocean acidification, shifting plant and animal habitat, etc."

That would be answering the question, what does dependence on fossil fuels have to do with pristine air and water. But my question was, what does climate change have to do with pristine air and water.

And as far as debt, I'm just saying one, anyone, should not spend more than they have. Is that foreign to you?

Armstrong 1 year, 11 months ago

Lynate, may I suggest holding our commander in chief accounable. If you have noticed he has done nothing about global warming his last term

Ken Lassman 1 year, 11 months ago

It's true he could have done more, but it's ludicrous to say he's done nothing. The Obama administration provided the auto industry with new mileage standards that will effectively cut carbon emissions from automobiles in half by 2025, after all. He delayed the Keystone XL expansion project, approved the EPA calling greenhouse gases a regulatable pollutant and has pushed for the Production Tax Credit to help the fledgling wind turbine industry.

Could he do much more? You bet. The LTE writer suggests one viable option, and I'm hoping the president comes up with even more actions. The Congress is one of the prime reasons Obama has been less than ideal on this topic: the political reality is that they would have shot down most things that he could have suggested.

lunacydetector 1 year, 11 months ago

every meteorologist i've met says global warming is a farce

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 1 year, 11 months ago

The ones you have talked to probably have really great hair and nice teeth, but they are out of step with the position held by the American Meteorological Society.

http://www.ametsoc.org/policy/2012climatechange.html

Water 1 year, 11 months ago

Met alot of meteorologists have you lunacydetector? What are the meteorologists you haven't met saying? Maybe you misunderstood and she said, "....global warming is in your face!" Oh, I'm not worried about global warming. I'm looking forward to the locally grown coconuts, pineapples and bananas at the farmers market.

bearded_gnome 1 year, 11 months ago

Besides being nonregressive, this revenue-neutral tax should be appealing to Republicans since it does not increase the size of government.

---and if we say the sun rises in the west, then look it rises in the west, too!

it does dramatically increase the reach and size of government! no thanks.

furthermore, the earth has been warmer than this in the past, several hundred years ago. plus, there is no good data indicating that manmade sources impact global temperature, the NASA "scientist" cited in the LTE has jiggered data himself. normally the left cheers whistleblowers, except when they come from East Anglia and show that the global warming researchers blew up their own data.

global warming is simply the latest anticapitalist belief system of the left. it, by the way, has no clothes, as exemplified by AlGore selling his network out for 100Million petrodollars to terrorist TV. lol!
AlGore's own film was found to have a dozen factual deceptions.

"the greatest hoax." appropriately named in a recent book by an Oklahoma Senator.

Ken Lassman 1 year, 11 months ago

Just because stir your lies together and pack them into a tight little ball doesn't make any one of them true. In a task reminiscent to my picking apart some coyote scat to see what she's been eating, here's a very brief reply:

-- one of the cool things about the revenue neutral carbon tax as I read it is that virtually ALL of it is returned to the citizen, who can use it to pay off their ever increasing fossil fuel bills, or they can use it to weatherize, get a car with better gas mileage, support renewables and otherwise get out from under the carbon emitting fossil fuel lifestyle. In other words, it leaves the choice in the hands of each citizen, not with some government bureaucrat. It uses government to collect and distribute the tax, something it is very good at, but leaves the decision on how to use it in the hands of the taxpayer.

-- James Hansen, the referred to scientist has been involved in data analysis and developing climate modeling, not data collection, something completely different. East Anglia was in no way connected to Hansen and involved one major dataset, where there was controversy over different scientists manipulating data, but closer reviews (6 of them at last count) determined that the data is really good after all.

--You're entitled to have faith in your favorite set of conspiracy theories; they fail to account for the heavy subsidization off the climate denialist industry by the fossil fuel companies that would be most affected by converting to low carbon energy sources in order to avoid the most severe consequences of climate change. And last time I checked "petrodollars" were United States dollars, the official currency used by the oil industry worldwide--you got a problem with that?

--And Sen. Imhofe is such an embarrassment to our country because of his slavish allegiance to his fossil fuel sponsors that I really don't need to say any more than that.

gr 1 year, 11 months ago

"It uses government to collect and distribute the tax, something it is very good at, "

Ha ha ha!

Ha ha ha ha ha !

Collect..... yes....kind of....

Ha ha ha.

Need I say more?

Sooooo funny!

Commenting has been disabled for this item.