<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Observer &#187; global warming</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.wvobserver.com/tag/global-warming/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.wvobserver.com</link>
	<description>Serving the eastern panhandle...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 19:51:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Change A National Security Threat</title>
		<link>http://www.wvobserver.com/2010/01/change-a-national-security-threat/</link>
		<comments>http://www.wvobserver.com/2010/01/change-a-national-security-threat/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2010 01:56:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Thomas Harding</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[From The Editors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[From The Paper]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capito]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copenhagen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wvobserver.com/?p=1412</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[﻿Interest groups all around are jockeying for newsprintand news reels touting their perspectives on the outcomes of the on United Nations Global Climate Change Conference. Three of the most important outcomes are getting the least amount of attention. First, the world’s nations have agreed unequivocally that the Earth’s climate is changing, that the pace and scale of these changes are being caused by human activity, and that the re-sults will likely be catastrophic for many of the world’s inhab-itants and natural ecosystems. They also agreed that future accords on climate ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.wvobserver.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/polar-bear.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-1418" title="polar bear" src="http://www.wvobserver.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/polar-bear.jpg" alt="polar bear" width="689" height="594" /></a>﻿Interest groups all around are jockeying for newsprintand news reels touting their perspectives on the outcomes of the on United Nations Global Climate Change Conference. Three of the most important outcomes are getting the least amount of attention. First, the world’s nations have agreed unequivocally that the Earth’s climate is changing, that the pace and scale of these changes are being caused by human activity, and that the re-sults will likely be catastrophic for many of the world’s inhab-itants and natural ecosystems. They also agreed that future accords on climate should rely on science, and that the science of the reality of climate change is undeniable. For more than a decade, there has been a war on science primarily sponsored by Ameri-can business and fundamen-talist religious interests. Their disinformation campaign and a media propensity to show “both sides of the story,” has engendered a misconceptionthat there is controversy sur-rounding the existence of cli-mate change. There is not, nor has there been for many years.A second outcome from the Climate Conference is the emerging focus on global secu-rity.West Virginia U.S. Army vet-eran Jonathan Gensler of Hun-tington [West Virginia?] joined a delegation of military veter-ans to the climate conference to highlight the national and global security threats posed by climate change and Amer-ica’s dependence on foreign energy.These veterans brought per-sonal stories and a front-lines perspective to the national se- curity threat. Most of the vet-erans served during the cur-rent conflicts in Iraq and Af-ghanistan. Representing three branches of the military, they met with members of the U.S. delegation and shared their ex-periences with an international audience. Their message: Global action is necessary for global security because climate change makes the world a more dangerousplace. In military terms, it is a threat multiplier that cre-ates safe havens and breeding grounds for terrorists when unstable countries collapse un-der the weight of the droughts, famines, and floods caused by climate change. “Preventing climate change means protect-ing us and our allies from hav-ing to fight future conflicts,” said the group in a prepared statement. “The world needs a united front in the face of this common threat. It is time for real teamwork, where everynation can be part of a win-win solution for everyone. America needs to set the right example, look to the future, and lead by example in the face of this global security threat.”The third bit of news from Copenhagen relevant to West Virginians is that West Vir-ginia’s Congressional delega-tion has decided to join the dia-logue on climate change at last. In a recent editorial, Senator Robert Byrd said, “To deny the mounting science of climate change is to stick our heads in the sand and say ‘deal me out.’ West Virginia would be much smarter to stay at the table.” In the same piece, Byrd acknowl-edged that there are fewer and fewer coal miners producing more and more damage. “As your United States Senator, I  must represent the opinions and the best interests of the entire Mountain State, not just those of coal operators and southern coalfield residents who may be strident support-ers of mountaintop removal mining.”Perhaps Governor Joe Man-chin might take up Byrd’s call to dialogue, and stop defend-ing coal to the exclusion of long term planetary health. As Sen. Byrd’s said, “The time has come to have an open and hon-est dialogue about coal’s future in West Virginia.”Rep. Shelley Moore Capito attended the climate summit. Now that the majority of her party’s members have finally acknowledged the risks posed by climate change it appears that climate change legislation has a real hope of success in Congress. However, Capito has gone on the record numerous times questioning the science behind global warming. Yet in Copenhagen Capito took a more conciliatory approach. In her blog from the summit she wrote that she supports an “American energy bill that will invest in alternative energy, promote new technology, and encourage conservation,” add-ing that she believes this could be achieved without raising taxes. Mrs. Capito’s leadership in U.S. legislation could be criti-cal. If she understands that the interests of West Virgin-ians extends beyond protect-ing coal royalties, she can both represent our state’s tradition-al energy interests and help forge an agreement that breaks down entrenched interests on both sides. It could be a “Nixon goes to China” opportunity for Capito and the United States.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.wvobserver.com/2010/01/change-a-national-security-threat/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can Coal Save Us from Climate Change?</title>
		<link>http://www.wvobserver.com/2009/11/can-coal-save-us-from-climate-change/</link>
		<comments>http://www.wvobserver.com/2009/11/can-coal-save-us-from-climate-change/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 04:19:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blue Ridge Press]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[From The Paper]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climate change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copenhagen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wvobserver.com/?p=1236</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Glenn Scherer and David Lillard
When our economy tanked last year, politicians told us that our nation’s financial institutions were “too big to fail,” and the federal government immediately proceeded to bail out the banks. Now, as world leaders prepare for a critically important climate summit in Copenhagen, we need to ask: Is Earth too big to fail? And if the collapse of our planet’s life support systems is unacceptable to us, then how do we shatter the climate change policy logjam once and for all?
One answer is to stop ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Glenn Scherer and David Lillard</p>
<p>When our economy tanked last year, politicians told us that our nation’s financial institutions were “too big to fail,” and the federal government immediately proceeded to bail out the banks. Now, as world leaders prepare for a critically important climate summit in Copenhagen, we need to ask: Is Earth too big to fail? And if the collapse of our planet’s life support systems is unacceptable to us, then how do we shatter the climate change policy logjam once and for all?</p>
<p>One answer is to stop seeing the fossil fuel industries as the enemy, and start seeing them as part of the solution. This radical approach may be the only way to achieve a viable global climate change treaty in time to do any good for the planet and the human race. We must move together as a nation and as a world. Otherwise the environmentalists and fossil fuel industry are likely to wrestle each other impotently for more precious years atop the runaway train of climate change, as we rush headlong toward oblivion.</p>
<p>To achieve this goal, both sides must surrender their rants and spin. We must realize that both have valid points, and fairly seek common ground between the realities of climate science and the realities of our fossil fuel driven economy.</p>
<p>The astounding truth is that this common ground does exist, and that the two sides have a world to gain from sitting down at the negotiating table. Here are four bold measures – fresh ideas – for breaking the climate debate deadlock:</p>
<p><em>• Put tens of billions into cleancoal. </em>Coal largely powers our nation. That is current reality. And clean coal is still a fantasy, but not long ago so was a trip to the moon. Money is the answer. It is already technologically possible to remove 90 percent of the carbon from coal emissions. However, according to a July 2009 Harvard study, this thorough carboncleansing nearly doubles the cost of making electricity. So why not offer federal loans to energy producers to cover the difference? A carbon tax would pay back that loan. It can be done: Norway is already sequestering carbon beneath the North Sea, and sequestration sites are being identified across America.</p>
<p>This is no permanent solution, but triage. It’s a stopgap measure to buy us some time: at a cost roughly equal to current U.S. corn subsidies, sequestering coal carbon emissions underground would give us a few decades to transition into a renewable-energy world, and give coal companies time to transform into 21st Century energy companies.</p>
<p><em>• Repurpose petroleum. </em>Oil isn’t renewable. Every barrel we burn for energy is wasted. It’s like burning money. Rather, let’s transition from using oil as fuel and turn it into high-quality plastics and other durable goods. Let’s fund research into next-generation plastics and other petrochemically-based materials designed for reuse in an endless loop—rather than discarding them.</p>
<p>Already, scientists at the University of Washington are using petroleum- based plastics to make solar cells; other researchers are using them in high-quality building materials. Following the “cradle to cradle” ideas of architect William McDonough, manufacturers are inventing ways to design shoes, cars— even factories—to be dismantled and reused. Such change could take decades, but an infusion of investment will quicken it.</p>
<p><em>• Institute a global Marshall Plan. </em>Current economic and climate realities dictate that we bail out the developing world. Unless we bring the poor out of poverty through clean energy, all of the developed world’s carbon emission reduction efforts will go for naught. Exporting sustainable-energy technologies to the developing world will help end poverty and dramatically boost our economy. When the U.S. rebuilt Europe and Japan after World War II, skeptics called it economic suicide. Today the U.S.-European- Japanese trading partnership is the strongest, freest economic engine the world has known. Likewise, investment in Africa today will create thriving free markets there tomorrow.</p>
<p><em>• Adapt now. </em>No matter how successfully we implement the first three steps, too much greenhouse gas is already aloft. We must prepare for some climate- caused upheaval. Intensive cooperative public-private planning is needed to anticipate the extreme weather, sea rise, wildfire, insect, disease and other damage done by climate change.</p>
<p>This proposed compromise will likely cause entrenched environmentalists and fiscal conservatives to fall out of their chairs. But it could break the logjam, dealing decisively and honestly with the climate change threat, while also allowing the fossil fuel industry and the rest of the U.S. and world economy to thrive.</p>
<p>Sticking with the current crop of platitudes is getting us nowhere. And we’ve run out of time. Hear this recent warning from U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon: “Our foot is stuck on the accelerator and we are heading towards an abyss.” We are speeding headlong into climate and economic chaos. A change in approach must come now. Impossible? Not in the America we know.</p>
<p><em>Glenn Scherer and David Lillard are the editors of Blue Ridge Press.</em></p>
<p>© Blue Ridge Press 2009</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.wvobserver.com/2009/11/can-coal-save-us-from-climate-change/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
