A survey released Monday by the Texas Forest Service estimates 100 million to 500 million trees, or 2% to 10% of the state’s 4.9 billion trees, have been killed by the severe drought, which began last year."
In one of the most flagrant recent instances of scientific censorship, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) refused to publish a report chapter unless all mention of climate change and its impact on sea level rise were eliminated. The author — Rice University oceanographer John Anderson, a leading expert on sea level rise with more than 200 publications — refused. As a result, TCEQ killed his chapter in The State of the Bay, a regular publication of the Galveston Bay Estuary Program."
Gonzales lives near a miles-long stretch of refineries, where massive pipes and stacks light the night like skyscrapers do in other cities. An intense odor of burnt chemicals hangs over the town. “There are days when we can’t go out because our children’s asthma is that bad,” she said. “And then they want money back?”
Gonzales lives near a miles-long stretch of refineries, where massive pipes and stacks light the night like skyscrapers do in other cities. An intense odor of burnt chemicals hangs over the town.
“There are days when we can’t go out because our children’s asthma is that bad,” she said. “And then they want money back?”
I’m starting to think that Rick Perry may be the best thing that ever happened for global climate change!
Since he declared his intention to run for President of the United States of America, there has been a blitz of environmental news articles about the man and his positions on climate change, water solutions for the state of Texas, and lots more, the majority of them negative. One of my favorite quotes from all the latest in that regard is the following:
“We’re not going to win a national election if we become the anti-science party,” John Weaver…said in an interview Wednesday. “The American people are looking for someone who lives in reality and is a truth teller because that’s the only way that the significant problems this country faces can be solved. It appears that the only science that Mitt Romney believes in is the science of polling, and that science clearly was not a mandatory course for Governor Perry.”
I also really enjoyed the story, yesterday, that stated Perry must not have checked with his own Texas A & M scientists… a story I put together here a few weeks ago. And this morning TIME runs a piece that starts with this:
Regardless of what Rick Perry and the rest of Republican presidential candidate field believe (except for you, Jon Huntsman), climate change is real and it’s happening. The questions for the 98% of climate researchers who accept the consensus on man-made global warming is how fast the climate is changing, and what impact it will have on humanity and the planet.
Want to read even more about Perry? Check out this most excellent blog here:
Rick Perry Thinks America Desires Another Rigid, Anti-Science, Idealogue Governor From The Great State of Big Oil
When I use to write contractual like documents, we always had the “force majure” assumption in there somewhere. And, of course, in very important projects, you had disaster and business recovery plans, continuity plans, all in case the risks, including those acts of God, occurred. So where is the plan for the risk impact that will occur if there is climate change? For any reason? Even if it’s a natural occurrence - it’s hard to ignore records like this one in Texas.
So what if the temps do continue to set records? It’s a risk, it may or may not happen but if it does, from an energy perspective, it’s not a pretty picture. The hotter it gets the more power needed for refrigeration and cooling. Let me tell you, in Texas, in the Summertime, you do not walk around your swimming pool barefooted because if you do you will severely burn the bottoms of your feet! Living in cities like that, the way they are now, will be come unsustainable. They’ll need to be abandoned. That’s almost worth going to war for, isn’t it? Hmm.
But hey, that’s just ONE of the risks that the representatives of the United States of America do not want to mitigate. Think of a different risk, I bet you can. Do you have a stream that crosses your property? Do you live in a city dependent on a water supply 100 miles away? 2000 miles away? What risk would really rock your world? Mine is my well water and the uranium waste down the road.
This article was really interesting and I said I wasn’t going to do negative news but it is very hard for me to see the good news with all that’s happening. The oil spill mess in Nigeria, the dead-in-seconds Fukishima and the Fairewinds update this week, and now Shell got the OK to drill in the Arctic! DRILL IN THE ARCTIC, are you kidding me?
““Never before has so little rain been recorded prior to and during the primary growing season for crops, plants and warm-season grasses.”
And climate change is playing a role: “we do know is that temperatures are a degree or two warmer with climate change so the drought is worse than it would otherwise be,” said Nielsen-Gammon.”“
This is a statement from a home boy! And Texas A&M’s very own Professor John Nielsen-Gammon is also a Texas State Climatologist!!
Too bad the governor was in the news last month as a possible presidential candidate, running as a climate change denier, I wouldn’t count on him to do much risk mitigation. Who has your back Texas?
Water and Air are required for life. Can we all agree on that? So who owns the water and who owns the air we breathe? This is a question that all of us should ponder on a regular basis as these vital elements fall deeper into the controlling hands of industries. But for now, let’s ponder this particular situation which is in the news today from Houston:
“The Lower Colorado River Authority on Wednesday will discuss and may vote on the request by the White Stallion Energy Center. A Texas agency that oversees crucial parts of the state’s water supply will consider awarding a water permit to a proposed coal-fired power plant. The authority says the request for 25,400 acres of water annually won’t affect Central Texas lakes after a new reservoir is built. It says the multimillion-dollar contract will benefit future projects — but wants $55 million up front and $250,000 annually once the plant is built. Texas has 19 operating coal-fired plants, most in the nation. Nine new plants have been permitted, and two have started construction.Opponents say the contract would take precious water away from farmers in the sometimes-arid region, especially during droughts.” SOURCE
Why do they represent the amount of water in the context of acres rather than the way the UCS measures it? And although they’re close to the Ocean, doesn’t that article sound like they’re NOT talking about Ocean water? (If they were we’d have to include concerns about the life they’d be killing too.)
The Union of Concerned Scientists state:
A typical 500-megawatt coal-fired power plant draws about 2.2 billion gallons of water each year from nearby water bodies, such as lakes, rivers, or oceans, to create steam for turning its turbines. This is enough water to support a city of approximately 250,000 people.
Is it because 25,400 acres sounds better than 2.2 billion gallons? Does it strike anyone else as interesting that TEXAS, one of the hottest states in the USA (and I can say that from personal experience since I lived there for 2 years) is using up it’s water in this unsustainable way? Nine new plants have been permitted…. I don’t know if the 19 existing + 9 new plants are all typical (as defined above by the UCS) but if they are then 28 x 2.2 billion gallons of water per year = 61,600,000,000 gallons of water per year. Wow! I’m impressed that Texans are OK with that.