Global Warming Facts and Effects – Global Warming Climate Change


May 16, 2015

The Decision to Shop Ethically While Ensuring Others Don’t Starve …

Category: Climate change economics – admin 4:25 am

by: Alison Withers

Choosing to buy local, healthy food when you know it may cause someone somewhere else in the world hardship or even malnutrition or starvation is an uncomfortable decision.

We also want to do our best for our families by buying the healthiest food we can find while at the same time keeping down the cost of things like our weekly shopping bills.

How on earth can we know we’re making the right choices and being as “green” as possible, given the plethora of conflicting information we get, the inter-governmental and scientific squabbles and the sheer amount of time and energy we would have to devote to research?

How, therefore, can we eat healthily, be sure there are no chemical residues in our food and be sure also that the carbon footprint of our locally-produced food is not actually greater than food imported from somewhere else in the world?

Of course there are labels on food, but they need to be clear, understandable and consistent and checking every label on the weekly shop with a couple of tetchy toddlers in tow, perhaps, at the end of a working day, really – life’s too short!

A look at the 2009 laws on food labelling in the UK is enough to give the ordinary shopper a headache. This extract is just a sample. It says that “fibre”, in the context of nutrition labelling, means carbohydrate polymers with three or more monomeric units, which are neither digested nor absorbed in the human small intestine and then lists a string of definitions.

And then there’s packaging! Producers are bound by the Packaging (Essential REquiremnets) Regulations, which list the maximum levels of various chemicals that are allowed in the packaging, as well as levels of packaging that can be used, and requires them to be made of recyclable materials.

Also large-scale producers have to comply with the Producer Responsibility Obligations (packaging waste)Regulations.

The Food Standards Agency also has rules covering the mislabelling of foods.

So there are three sets of rules simply on packaging in labelling, before we even consider nutrition content and although it’s good that they exist what’s really needed is consistent, clear information in a language consumers can understand.

Then there are the scientific disagreements. It has been suggested, for example, that the carbon footprint of some food produced in Africa may actually be lower than it is for locally-produced organic foods.

When it comes to licensing the new low-chem agricultusal products being created by biopesticides developers there’s no more agreement.

It’s generally agreed, however, that they are much more enfironmentally friendly than many of the previous generation of chemical-based fertilisers, yield enhancers and pesticides and could potentially help keep food costs down compared to organically grown products.

These new generation biofertilisers, biofungicides and yield enhancers have the potential to help small farmers in developing countries both protect their land and improve its yield with obvious benefits to their incomes and to us all in being able to buy affordable, healthy food.

A World Health Organisation publication in 2008 on health and nutrition says a sound communication and information strategy coordinating and creating synergy among the various media is essential for supporting the adoption of healthy lifestyles and the maintenance of food safety and sustainable food supplies.

It adds that currently, messages provided through nutrition education campaigns are often contradicted by commercial communication practices ….. and that consumers find that current nutrition label formats are generally confusing and do not help them to make healthy choices.

The World Health Organisation’s assessment applies equally to this discussion.

If we are to be able to change our shopping habits to do our bit towards a more sustainable environment, reducing food scarcity and reversing the impacts of climate change we need information about what we’re buying in a form that’s consistent wherever we live, that we can rely on and in words we can understand.

Copyright (c) 2010 Alison Withers
Information on food, such as whether it has been grown using the new low-chem agricultural products being created by Biopesticides developers, is neither consistent, nor reliable. Consumer journalist Ali Withers argues for more info to help shoppers make “green” choices. http://www.agraquest.com

The author invites you to visit:
http://www.agraquest.com

@@ADSENSE@@.

June 2, 2014

Smart Grid Stimulus Paves the Way for Savings and Clean Air by …

Category: Climate change economics – admin 12:51 am

by: Ashly Sun

Everyone is into intelligent technology and smart devices nowadays. That is why it only seems natural that industries and homeowners turn to smart devices for saving energy and going green.

The power grid is the world’s biggest machine. It is composed of a network of power plants, transmission towers, poles and wires. A recent report called The Smart Grid: An Estimation of the Energy and CO2 Benefits, from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory stresses how an efficient smart grid can be used as a powerful tool against climate change. Research scientist Rob Pratt said that they wanted to show the added contribution of the smart grid meter to the nation’s goal of mitigating climate change through the reduction of carbon footprint from electric power systems.

Smart grid meters may be used to cut down waste. The United States Energy Information Administration said that more than half of the energy generated is wasted in generation and transmission. Energy is wasted usually through unused but running lights and electronic appliances. According to the Department of Energy, the waste in energy results in $4 billion in expenses in the United States every year.

The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory reported that there are nine ways smart grids can reduce carbon emissions, including smart-grid enabled diagnostics in residential and commercial buildings, use of demand- response systems, voltage regulation and control systems, and positive responses from informed consumers; which are expected to result in a 12 percent emission reduction by 2030 if fully implemented.

Another reason why smart grid programs can help battle climate change is because smart grid standards lessen operational costs for renewable program deployment. Savings from the program can be invested to more emission reduction projects for the future.

According to Mr. Pratt, getting savings for use in future clean energy projects is important because many states have an electricity sector renewable portfolio goal of 20 to 30 percent for 2030.

Full implementation of smart grid technologies in the United States could inhibit at least 442 million metric tons of carbon emission, equivalent 66 coal power plants. Just last November, the U.S. Department of Energy supported the city of Sacramento with a $127.5 million smart grid stimulus funding, to aid in pushing forward California’s green building initiative. The smart grid stimulus federal grant program aims to design, run, and manage an urban smart grid utility system for clients of various types and volume.

Many countries are starting to see the benefits of smart grid programs and starting to invest in various brands and types of smart grid meters, including the GE smart grid. China is not one to get left behind in the smart grid bandwagon, as it overtakes the United States in the smart grid investment. This year, China plans a $7.32 billion smart grid investment, which is more than U.S.’ $7.09 billion, as reported by ZPryme. China is increasing their investment in smart grids heavily because of the looming energy requirement in the country which is predicted to double over the following decade.
Ashly Sun is a seasoned writer, having travelled around the world, largely putting all her experiences and the sights and sounds she has come across to paper. She now writes extensively about topics related to green news, mostly on renewable energy, but also on a variety of related topics as well. When not travelling around the world, she is based in Central Hong Kong, taking in the myriad colours, flavours, and scents of the melting pot that Hong Kong is known for.

The author invites you to visit:
http://www.ecoseed.org

@@ADSENSE@@.

November 18, 2013

Shame On You America: Congress And The Truth About Global …

Category: Climate change economics – admin 12:06 am

by: Ian McCoy

Just 4 the Planet has in recent months been urging the US Congress to pass a major Climate Change Bill introduced by Senator Kerry. We said it was time for the USA to “step up to the plate” and hoped that environmental concerns would take precedence over the mighty dollar.

Unfortunately the mighty dollar won out and America did not step up. Incredibly myopic Republican Senators destroyed any chances of passing the legislation, arguing that taxing the big polluters would lead to higher energy price.

Now in a case of tragic irony the death of climate change legislation in the Senate has been followed by the appearance of two government reports in the past week that underscore the overwhelming scientific case for global warming — and go out of the way to repudiate sceptics.

First came a report on global climate from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which confirmed that the 2000s were by far the warmest decade in the instrumental record — as were, in their turns, the 1980s and the 1990s. Unlike year-to-year fluctuations, these 10-year shifts are statistically significant. Further, the report notes that it derived its conclusions from an array of data sources — not just the land-surface readings that doubters challenge — from ocean heat uptake to melting land ice to sea level rise.

“If the land surface records were systematically flawed and the globe had not really warmed, then it would be almost impossible to explain the concurrent changes in this wide range of indicators produced by many independent groups,” the report said. “The warming of the climate system is unequivocal.” The gases most likely responsible for that warming, such as carbon dioxide, continue to accumulate.

Second was a strongly worded response from the Environmental Protection Agency to petitions that it revoke its finding that “climate change is real, is occurring due to emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities and threatens human health and environment.” As with much climate-change scepticism, the petitions were based “on selectively edited, out-of-context data and a manufactured controversy,” EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson said. Among other things, the agency reviewed every document from the “Climategate” e-mail hack at a respected British climate research unit. The EPA found what four other independent studies did: that the e-mails contained some “candid” language but nothing that seriously discredits the scientific consensus on global warming.

Many climate-change sceptics will simply dismiss these reports as more evidence of a sprawling conspiracy instead of what they really are: yet more affirmation of the risks humanity runs if it continues to pump carbon into the atmosphere.

As for the US Congress we can only ask – have US legislators learned nothing from the Gulf disaster and the high price paid when oil lobbyists dictate US energy policy. Shame on you America.
Ian McCoy

University Education, Author

The comprehensive site to educate and inform on all issues environmental

www.just4theplanet.com

The author invites you to visit:
http://www.just4theplanet.com

@@ADSENSE@@.

November 11, 2013

How Climate Change Affects the Way We Do Business – ArticleCity …

Category: Climate change economics,Uncategorized – admin 12:11 am

by: BigPictureTV

@@AMAZON_GEN_WIDGET@@.

July 29, 2013

Obama Climate Change Strategy: Politically Realistic or Strategy for Disaster?

Category: Climate change economics – admin 12:00 am