Congress is debating whether a carbon cap-and-trade program would kill jobs or save money in the long run. (Photo courtesy of aoc.gov)
Congress will be considering an energy and climate bill. Lester Graham reports the legislation would shift the American economy from reliance on fossil fuels to greater reliance on renewable energy and energy efficiency:
Transcript
Congress will be considering an energy and climate bill. Lester Graham reports the legislation would shift the American economy from reliance on fossil fuels to greater reliance on renewable energy and energy efficiency:
The fight over what –if anything– should be done about climate change will center on this legislation.
Coal companies, big oil –and industries that use a lot of energy say this is a jobs killer and our energy bills will go through the roof.
Environmental groups and green businesses say ‘no, actually this will create jobs in a new green economy and in the long run our energy bills will be lower.’
A carbon cap-and-trade scheme included in the package would limit greenhouse gas emissions and put a price on them. Those against it call it cap-and-tax.
Liz Perera is with the environmental group the Union of Concerned Scientists. She says doing nothing about climate change would cost more.
“That’s definitely the most expensive thing we can do: just ignore this and then suffer these consequences of global warming.”
Those consequences are uncertain and will be among the many arguments we’ll hear in Washington this summer.
Reporter Sadie Babits is tracking the blooming of a lilac tree, as part of a "citizen scientist" project that will document climate change. (Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons)
Scientists are asking citizens to pay attention to plants this spring. They want you to report everything from leaf buds to blossoms. Scientists want those observations from right in your backyard to better understand how climate change is affecting plants and trees. Sadie Babits liked the idea and signed up:
Transcript
Scientists are asking citizens to pay attention to plants this spring. They want you to report everything from leaf buds to blossoms. Scientists want those observations from right in your backyard to better understand how climate change is affecting plants and trees. Sadie Babits liked the idea and signed up:
You know, I found it really isn’t hard to be a citizen scientist.
I’m on the website for Project Budburst. It’s a nationwide effort to get people out into their backyards to track spring flowers. All I have to do is to pick a plant or tree to keep an eye on and then report my findings.
I’m thinking I’ll check out the lilac trees in my neighborhood here in Portland. But before I head out, I need some advice.
So I called Sandra Henderson. She’s busy these days directing Project Budburst at the University Corporation of Atmospheric Research.
“Hey Sadie.”
I reach Henderson at her office in Boulder, Colorado.
What advice do you have for me, a first citizen scientists observing phenology?
“The ideal thing to do is get a sense of when lilacs in your case in Portland, Oregon are expected to have different pheno events.”
Good thing I looked up phenology before calling Henderson. Basically it means nature’s calendar – the timing of when cherry blossoms bloom or a robin builds a nest.
And these life cycles of plants and animals are sensitive to changes in climate.
“Plants provide a wonderful context for understanding changes to the environment and they certainly respond to changes in temperature and precipitation, things that climate scientists are very interested in.”
Scientists can’t be in everyone’s backyard. That’s where volunteers come in. Last year some five thousand people across the country reported their observations to Project Budburst. That information now is the foundation for an online database that includes everything from dandelions to ponderosa pines.
So after walking through our neighborhood and seeing a lot of trees that have already flowered, I’ve decided that these lilac trees outside of our house are perfect for watching because they haven’t flowered yet and there are leaf buds all over the branches. And here’s a branch and the leaf buds are huge and they are just starting to unfurl.
Now that I’ve found my lilac tree to watch, I can report today’s findings.
Really that’s it. Scientists are finding out a lot of interesting things. For example, forsythia in Chicago are blooming a week earlier. These simple observations will eventually create a snapshot of how climate change is affecting plants across the U.S.
Mother-calf pair of "Type C" orcas in the Ross Sea. (Photo by Robert Pitman, NOAA)
Japan kills more whales than any other country in the world. A new proposal would allow Japanese whalers to hunt off their county’s coasts. Mark Brush reports – some think opening up these waters to whale hunts is a bad idea:
Transcript
Japan kills more whales than any other country in the world. A new proposal would allow Japanese whalers to hunt off their county’s coasts. Mark Brush reports – some think opening up these waters to whale hunts is a bad idea:
The International Whaling Commission passed a moratorium on commercial whaling in 1986. But it allowed some countries to kill whales for what it calls scientific study.
Japanese boats kill hundreds of minke whales in the southern ocean under this designation. Critics say there’s nothing scientific about these hunts.
Now, the Commission wants to stop Japan from killing whales in the southern ocean. Phasing out these so-called scientific whale hunts. But in exchange, they might let the country openly hunt whales off its own coasts.
Jonathan Stern is with the American Cetacean Society. He says whale populations could take a hit, if Japan is allowed to start hunting in these waters:
“I’m just afraid once their fleet starts operating. They’re going to want to take more whales and more different species of whales.”
Japan has long maintained that these hunts are part of their cultural heritage. The International Whaling Commission will meet next month to decide the issue.
Artist's concept of the Orbiting Carbon Observatory. The satellite crashed into the ocean on Tuesday, February 24th, 2009.
(Photo courtesy NASA Jet Propulsion Library)
(NOTE: THE SATELLITE FEATURED IN THIS STORY CRASHED INTO THE OCEAN ON TUESDAY, FEB. 24TH)
Drive your car. Mow your lawn. Heat your house. It all puts climate changing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. But not all of the carbon dioxide stays up there. Vincent Duffy reports scientists at NASA hope a new satellite will help them solve the mystery of where some of that CO2 goes:
Transcript
(NOTE: THE CARBON SATELLITE CRASHED INTO THE OCEAN ON TUESDAY, FEB. 24TH)
Drive your car. Mow your lawn. Heat your house. It all puts climate changing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. But not all of the carbon dioxide stays up there. Vincent Duffy reports scientists at NASA hope a new satellite will help them solve the mystery of where some of that CO2 goes:
People worried about climate change pay a lot of attention to carbon dioxide.
It’s one of the chief causes of climate change. And people put a lot of carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere, almost 8 billion tons a year.
That has former Vice President Al Gore worried. Here he is testifying before
Congress last month –
“Our home, earth, is in danger. What is at risk of being destroyed is not the
planet itself of course, but the conditions that have made it hospitable for
human beings.”
If we are in danger, then scientists need a good handle on what happens to
all that carbon dioxide.
About half of the CO2 created by humans is absorbed back into the earth by
what scientists call ‘carbon sinks.’ Scientists know half of the absorbed
carbon dioxide goes into the oceans, and the other half is sucked up by
plants. But scientists don’t know which plants are absorbing the most carbon
dioxide, and how the CO2 travels there.
The scientists at NASA hope a new satellite, called the Orbiting Carbon
Observatory, will help them answer those questions.
David Crisp heads up the project. He says measuring carbon dioxide levels
from the ground doesn’t provide enough information to know where the
CO2 actually ends up.
“But from space we can actually make much more detailed measurements,
make a snapshot of the carbon dioxide distribution in the atmosphere. That
will give us much more information about where the carbon dioxide is and
from that we can infer where the sources are and where the sinks are.”
Right now it’s a bit of a blur. Anna Michalak is a professor at the University
of Michigan and part of the NASA team. She says to track what’s going on
with all the CO2 on the earth is like trying to figure out how cream went into
a cup of coffee.
“If I give you a cup of coffee, and I pour cream into the cup of coffee, and I
ask you what’s going to happen when I start stirring, it’s pretty easy to
predict that you’ll have a creamy cup of coffee. But what we do instead is
someone hands us a creamy cup of coffee and asks us, ‘Did we pour the
cream in on the left side or the right side, and did we pour the cream in five
minutes ago or ten minutes ago?’ And you can imagine that’s a much more
difficult question.”
Michalak says the satellite observatory will help answer that difficult
question, and help us understand how plants may react to carbon dioxide in
the future, as the earth’s climate changes. She says right now plants seem to
be absorbing more CO2 than ever before.
“And we have no guarantee that this is going to continue in the future. And
so you can imagine that something that has such a high value, there is an
interest in us knowing how predictable and how reliable this service is to us.
Because the cost for us to replicate anything resembling that is just
astronomical.”
The satellite will also answer other questions about climate change. Things
like which countries emit the most CO2.
Jiaguo Qi studies climate change at Michigan State University. He says the
satellite may show that people concerned about the cost of reducing green
house gasses may unfairly blame the United States and other developed
nations.
“Media report that North America is primarily responsible for global
warming. But we don’t know how much carbon dioxide other countries are
emitting, because we donít have good measure. This one will tell us who is
emitting and how much they are emitting instead of just blaming us.”
And the data from the Orbiting Carbon Observatory might show that it’s not
just the forests and jungles that help keep climate change at bay. It might
also be forests and farmland in the United States, and your lawn, and even
golf courses.
Former US Vice President Al Gore will deliver a special address to the thousands of scientists gathered at the American Association for the Advancement of Science's meeting this week. (Photo courtesy of the US Department of State)
Thousands of scientists from around the world will be hob-knobbing in Chicago, starting today. They’re going to be celebrating the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin and how he changed science forever. But they won’t be just celebrating – they’ll be thinking through one of the biggest environmental problems we all face:
Transcript
Thousands of scientists from around the world will be hob-knobbing in Chicago starting today. They’re going to be celebrating the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin and how he changed science forever. But they won’t be just celebrating –- they’ll be thinking through one of the biggest environmental problems we all face:
The group’s called the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and they’re putting on their annual meeting – one of the biggest science meet-ups in the world.
This time around there’s plenty of attention on the science of climate change.
The group doesn’t mince words on the issue.
Here’s CEO – Dr. Alan Leschner.
“The last five or more years has been a period of, frankly, denial by the US government about the need to address the problem of global change and its consequences for the world. Now , we think there’s a big opportunity, particularly with the new science appointments made by President Obama to be able to address these kinds of issues in a focused and coherent way.
Scientists there will present work on whether biofuels really help cut carbon emissions, what kind of food crops are best for the climate, and whether we’re losing fish species because global warming.”
And to headline the whole thing – former Vice President Al Gore’s dropping in later this week.
Democrats in the Senate are talking about climate change policy. (Photo courtesy of NASA)
Democrats in the US Senate are talking about climate change legislation again. But its fate is uncertain. Tamara Keith reports from Washington:
Transcript
Democrats in the US Senate are talking about climate change legislation again. But it’s fate is uncertain. Tamara Keith reports from Washington:
Barbara Boxer is the senator who chairs the Environment and Public Works committee. The committee will be putting together the climate change legislation. A climate bill didn’t get anywhere last year in the senate, but Boxer says things have changed since then.
“A lot of those who voted against us are no longer here.”
But what’s not changed is the argument over how sweeping controls on carbon emissions could affect the economy. Those opposed call climate legislation a job-killer. Steve Cochran with the Environmental Defense Fund argues the opposite.
“If those of us who want to see strong climate policy are effective and articulate and persuasive on the jobs argument then I think we can actually get this done. And if we’re not I don’t think we will.”
Boxer said she didn’t know when the full senate would take up the legislation.
Scientists say the oceans are
getting noisier. The racket threatens
whales and other marine mammals that
communicate through sound. Nancy
Greenleese reports:
Transcript
Scientists say the oceans are
getting noisier. The racket threatens
whales and other marine mammals that
communicate through sound. Nancy
Greenleese reports:
The oceans are already noisy from military sonars and oil and gas exploration. Scientists say it could get worse. Some of the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, is getting soaked up by the oceans and seas. The carbon dioxide makes the water more acidic. Sound travels through that acidic water more easily. A UN climate change panel recently issued a report raising concerns about the chemistry change. Mark Simmonds of the Whale and Dolphin Conversation Society says already there’s an “acoustic fog” in the world’s waters.
“The ambient noise levels in the oceans because of pH are likely to rise. This is a very unexpected finding. They’re anticipating that marine mammals will have further problems communicating.”
The noise confuses marine mammals. So, they’re beaching themselves and running into ships more often.
program will only increase the cost of everything.
Dan Lashoff is with the Natural Resources Defense
Council, one of the US CAP members.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham asked him
why the companies in US CAP would want Congress
to come up with a cap-and-trade program now?
Transcript
We can expect Congress will take up a carbon
cap-and-trade bill soon. That would make
greenhouse gases a commodity. The United
States Climate Action Partnership wants to
know the rules of the carbon trading game
sooner rather than later. US CAP is made
up of businesses such as GE, automakers,
some power companies and environmental groups.
Other business leaders say a carbon cap-and-trade
program will only increase the cost of everything.
Dan Lashoff is with the Natural Resources Defense
Council, one of the US CAP members.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham asked him
why the companies in US CAP would want Congress
to come up with a cap-and-trade program now?
Dan Lashoff: The opportunity that we have, right now, is to, first of all, invest
billions of dollars in the economic stimulus package – which the Congress will be
taking up in the next couple of weeks, that President Obama has made clear he
wants to see a substantial portion of that investment go into clean energy
technologies: insulating homes, building a smart grid to carry renewable energy
around the country. So, there’s an immediate step that needs to take place to
get investment flowing, to jump-start the green energy economy that we need.
That should be quickly followed with the type of comprehensive climate policy
that US CAP has called for, because that will guide longer-term investments, it
will mobilize private capital that is needed to build the clean energy future that we
need to have. And that will put people to work installing wind turbines, installing
solar systems, insulating homes, insulating schools. And keep the investment
flowing, and actually create an export opportunity for companies that are making
clean and efficient energy systems that the world is going to increasingly
demand.
Lester Graham: President Obama has talked a lot about the green economy and
green-collar jobs that you just mentioned, but will those jobs actually offset the
economic pain that a cap-and-trade program is expected to cause?
Lashoff: Well, first of all, you have to realize, if we passed a cap-and-trade bill
tomorrow, the actual limits would not kick in until 2012 at the earliest, and, by that
time, hopefully, the economy is really moving forward. So, what the value of
passing the legislation now is that it sets the long-term agenda, it sets the
strategic agenda that’s going to reduce our emissions, and it mobilizes
investment flows. The actual price signal that is needed to discourage global
warming pollution actually wouldn’t kick in for a couple of years, and that actually
works quite well with the timing, that is appropriate given the current economic
crisis.
Graham: The 80% emissions reduction below 2005 levels by 2050 is exactly
what President Obama has suggested we do, but there still are enough
Republicans who hold enough seats in the Senate to block cap-and-trade if they
wanted to. What are the chances of having legislation like this passed?
Lashoff: Well, I’m very optimistic that with the momentum that the US CAP
proposal delivers, the strong business support from at least a significant portion
of the business community, certainly not universal, that we can move forward. It
certainly will require a bi-partisan effort. There will need to be Republicans
joining the Democratic majority in the Senate as well as in the House to enact
legislation. I think we can do that. I think that this proposal provides a lot of
insight into the types of provisions, in addition to the cap itself. Things like
energy efficiency investments that will hold down the costs for consumers,
approaches to dealing with concerns of the economic impact – that chose a
pathway to get legislation enacted, hopefully in 2009.
African penguins at the Bristol Zoo in England (Source: Arpingstone at Wikimedia Commons)
At the north pole… polar bears are threatened by melting sea ice. Now, on the other end of the earth… some penguin populations are dropping because of climate change and other threats. Rebecca Williams reports:
Transcript
At the north pole… polar bears are threatened by melting sea ice. Now, on the other end of the earth… some penguin populations are dropping because of climate change and other threats. Rebecca Williams reports:
Melting sea ice and warmer ocean temperatures are affecting the fish that penguins eat. Overfishing and oil pollution are other threats.
Pamela Hall is with the Fish and Wildlife Service. The agency wants to put seven species of penguins on the endangered species list.
“Hoping that by going forward with the listing of these particular penguin species we’ll be able to work with countries to do some cooperative conservation.”
The Center for Biological Diversity petitioned the government to get these penguins on the list. The group is upset that the agency denied protection for the Emperor penguin. You might remember them from the movie “March of the Penguins.”
Government scientists say the emperor penguin populations are stable right now… though they say that could change in the future.
The classic photograph of the Earth, taken by the Apollo 17 crew on December 7, 1972 traveling toward the moon (Photo courtesy of NASA-JSC Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth)
2008 is on track to be one of the
ten warmest years on record. Rebecca Williams
has more:
Transcript
2008 is on track to be one of the ten warmest years on record. Rebecca Williams has more:
Scientists keep track of how hot and how cold it gets in places all over the planet. And this time of year they tally up the data.
Karsten Shein is with the National Climatic Data Center. He says 2008 was a cooler year – but it still ranks as one of the top ten warmest years in the past century.
“We do see there are periods where temperatures have gotten cooler for a short period of time and periods where temperatures have gotten warmer for a short period of time but over the entire period of record we’ve seen a general warming trend.”
Shein says many places around the planet continue to have more extreme weather – more rain, more heat waves and more snow.
Congress is debating whether a carbon cap-and-trade program would kill jobs or save money in the long run. (Photo courtesy of aoc.gov)
