Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Subscriber Services |

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Attytood

New summer '08 hot spot: The North Pole

Today's open thread

78 comments

New summer '08 hot spot: The North Pole

POSTED: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 9:41 AM

Forget Cape May -- the North Pole is looking like a nice spot for a sunset cruise these days:

For the first time in modern history, the North Pole may be iceless this summer. Scientists say it's an even bet that sea ice in the region will completely disappear in the next few months, perhaps as soon as August.

So you can understand the great sense of urgency that world leaders are applying to climate change:

RUSUTSU, Japan — Pledging to “move toward a low-carbon society,” leaders of the world’s richest nations on Tuesday endorsed the idea of cutting greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2050, but refused to set a short-term target for reducing the gases that scientists agree are warming the planet.

Uh:

Environmentalists, though, were harshly critical. Phil Clapp, an expert in climate change at the Pew Environmental Group who is here monitoring the talks, said the leaders had significantly weakened language they adopted last year at Heiligendamm.

“The emissions reduction goal is extremely weak,” Mr. Clapp said, because it aims to reduce emissions from current levels rather than 1990 levels, as the leaders proposed last year. He added, “The science shows that we have to reduce 80 to 90 percent from current levels to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.”

What would Ronald Reagan do?

It's the open thread, people. Who is the greater threat to mankind -- Obama, McCain, or Eaton? Discuss, and I'll see you tomorrow.

Will Bunch @ 9:41 AM Permalink | 78 comments

78 comments

Comments (78)

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 11:58 AM, 07/08/2008

etotheb: While that is true, there is simply no immediate solution to transportation fuels. The end result (we hope) will be plug in cars, but that is a long way off. Until then we have to do what we can to increase the domestic supply of fuels to keep our economy afloat without creating world-wide food shortages and further hurting the environment. (Those plug in cars will do nothing for the environment, however, if we are still using coal and natural gas for the majority of our energy output. Another reason we need more nuclear power, and soon.) ----- Other country's energy problems are a different matter. Many of them do not want our help anyway, but those that do I am sure we will be willing to share the technology with which they can be trusted (clean coal, etc.)

— bon

Comment removed.

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 12:06 PM, 07/08/2008

I love how the weather has become a political issue

— doorspj24

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 12:21 PM, 07/08/2008

"while McCain touts the longterm solution of a better battery for an electric car (with a generous government reward for the creator)" --- Wow, some free market, huh? (To be fair, I think Obama's plan is junk, too. Ethanol is a loser). BTW, Obama supports expanded nuclear. He just doesn't publicize it (a mistake, imo). Dunno where you got the idea he's against it (it apparently stems from taking a quote out of context.. the GOP is using it in an ad now). One of Obama's biggest donors is Exelon.

— Politburo

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 12:29 PM, 07/08/2008

Politburo: Here is a video of Obama saying "nuclear energy is not optimal" and that he is "not a nuclear energy proponent." It shows the whole answer from beginning to end. There is no contextual problem. http://neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com/2008/01/barack-obama-on-nuclear-energy.html ----- 300$ million in added incentive for a new generation of car batteries is a very small amount of spending compared to what Obama is advocating for ethanol. A small amount of money to the federal government is a lot of money to a small group of brilliant engineers, though. It is a decent idea to spur individuals to innovate. :)

— bon

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 12:58 PM, 07/08/2008

You guys seen who's getting frisky? THe Iraqi security council is demanding that the US establish a timeline for withdraw. You should be thrilled. The Iraqis are going to tell us we won so we can go home. I guess they are pretty good at taking instructions from their Iranian masters.

— SteveMG

Comment removed.

Comment removed.

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 1:15 PM, 07/08/2008

Xi Jah that must be taken out of context too because there never could have ever been any fluctuation of global temperatures before now or humans would be extinct.

— jwad56

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 1:16 PM, 07/08/2008

Just wait until they have to find places to store the nuclear waste in less developed countries.

— SteveMG

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 1:32 PM, 07/08/2008

Thing is, battery companies and engineers already have a huge incentive to do this work. Rewards are good for things that people wouldn't make money on otherwise. On Obama, those statements do not mean that he is against nuclear (I cannot view the video). He just doesn't act like it's as a perfect solution (hence "not optimal"). Part of this is pandering because certain people on the left are knee-jerk against nuclear, and part of it is pragmatism because there are issues with nuclear that do have to be solved (mainly waste containment). Typical politics.. I'm hoping that he states his position on nuclear more forcefully throughout the general election. "U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Friday [June 20] nuclear power was "not a panacea" for U.S. energy woes but it is worth investigating its further development."

— Politburo

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 1:32 PM, 07/08/2008

— Politburo

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 1:33 PM, 07/08/2008

Will, the first statement is not even true. Does anyone in the press even check any facts or contrasting data anymore. Are you in the press, or just a blowhard? You want credibility, lose the agenda. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/03/goddard_polar_ice/

— kat99

Comment removed.

0 like this / 0 don't • Posted 1:38 PM, 07/08/2008

Steve and ET: You are using very old and tired scare tactics, here. Nuclear creates a small amount of compact waste. Coal and natural gas create a great amount of waste that is flung into the air. Obama and other Democratic politicians may like to employ these fear tactics, but it is dishonest and harmful to the United States. Nuclear power is safe, and any plants we build today will be even safer than the ones we already have. Yucca mountain is a safe method for disposing of the waste, but if you like we can find an alternative. Divert a few billion from NASA's insane budget and launch the waste into space if you like. I don't care. In the end we need nuclear power to keep our economy strong.

— bon

| View All Comments | View All By Latest

View comments: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | NEXT »

The day the Obama administration went Nixon on us
Before Obama probed the AP, the right wing tried to destroy it
Kochs, coke and an American dystopia in Detroit
And then they came for Fox News
God's messenger comes down to remind us of the true meaning of scandal
What would Ayn Rand say about Bryz
And your bird can flip
Dept. of I Told You So
If the Gosnell trial was supposed to make you anti-abortion, I guess the Daily News didn't get the memo
Mystery pundit outsourcing

About this blog

Will Bunch, a senior writer at the Philadelphia Daily News, blogs about his obsessions, including national and local politics and world affairs, the media, pop music, the Philadelphia Phillies, soccer and other sports, not necessarily in that order.

PLEASE COMMENT WITH PASSION...

...but not with racial slurs, potentially libelous allegations, obscenities or other juvenile noise. Such comments will, at our discretion, be deleted in their entirety, and repeat offenders will be blocked from commenting. ALSO: Any commenter advocating killing any government official will be immediately banned.

Reach Will at bunchw@phillynews.com.

Will Bunch

Get our top stories