Wednesday, 11 June 2014
Report: Keystone pipeline would have minimal environmental impact
Friday Jan 31, 2014 12:07 PMA long-delayed environmental report from the U.S. State Department could remove a major hurdle for a controversial oil pipeline from Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast.
A new State Department report on the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline finds that the project would have a minimal impact on the environment, an assessment likely to increase pressure on the White House to approve it. But the report sets no deadline for doing so.
Given this evaluation of environmental impact, President Barack Obama and his administration will face increased pressure to approve the project, which enjoys widespread support among Republicans, and some measure of support among Democrats and allies of the administration, like labor unions.
The proposed pipeline would carry crude derived from oil sands in Canada to refineries in the United States.
"Our national interest will be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution,” Obama said in June 2013. “The net effects of the pipeline's impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project is allowed to go forward."
The findings by the new State Department report could hasten a decision by the administration, though there is no hard and fast deadline by which Obama or Secretary of State John Kerry must act. The evaluation fell to the State Department because the proposed $7 billion project by TransCanada Corp would cross the U.S.-Canada border.
Quickly after the report's release, lawmakers ratcheted up pressure on Obama to act.
"Mr. President, no more stalling– no more excuses," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. "Please pick up that pen you’ve been talking so much about and make this happen. Americans need these jobs."
Centrist Democrats like West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin hailed the findings, as well.
"I have been incredibly frustrated for more than five years by the repeated and unnecessary delays in moving forward with the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline," he said. "I am pleased the State Department has confirmed there is no evidence of any negative environmental impact from building this pipeline."
In a statement Friday night, White House spokesman Matt Lehrich said the information would be "closely evaluated by Secretary Kerry and other relevant agency heads in the weeks ahead. A decision on whether the project is in the national interest will be made only after careful consideration of the (impact statement) and other pertinent information, comments from the public, and views of other agency heads."
Nathan Vanderklippe/Globe & Mail / Reuters
Pipes for underground fuel transport for TransCanada Corp.'s Keystone XL pipeline lie in a field in Gascoyne, North Dakota April 23, 2013.
Environmentally minded Democrats said the report paid insufficient attention to the environmental impacts of extracting the oil in the first place.
"I will not be satisfied with any analysis that does not accurately document what is really happening on the ground when it comes to the extraction, transport, refining, and waste disposal of dirty, filthy tar sands oil," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Senate panel that oversees environmental issues.
Kerry said earlier in January that he hoped to move along with his own consideration of the process quickly, though he signaled that he doesn’t feel pressure to move before various analyses are complete.
“We are doing it, and I can promise our friends in Canada that all the appropriate effort is being put into trying to get this done effectively and rapidly,” Kerry said Jan. 17 during an appearance with his Canadian counterpart. “And my hope is that, before long, that analysis will be available, and then my work begins.”
Protesters rally about the Keystone XL oil pipeline along U.S. President Barack Obama's motorcade as he arrives at the Jefferson Hotel in Washington July 11, 2013.
Following the release of Friday’s report, what’s known as a “comment period” will take place; a comment period allow both government agencies and the public as a whole to offer their input about a proposed rule or regulation. The Keystone report will open up a 30-day comment period for the public, and a comment period for relevant government agencies of up to 90 days.
“I'd stress, this is only one factor in a determination that will weigh many other factors as well,” State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said at a briefing on Friday. “And for Secretary Kerry, climate and environmental priorities will of course be part of his decision making, as will a range of other issues.”
The project could also conceivably figure into political considerations for Obama. Republicans in Congress have long demanded his approval for the project. Free of major environmental objections to it, the president could conceivably extract a desired vote or policy from GOP lawmakers in exchange for giving construction of the pipeline a green light.
NBC News' Peter Alexander contributed to this report.
This story was originally published on Fri Jan 31, 2014 3:07 PM EST
Global warming
Global warming
is the unequivocal and continuing rise in the average temperature of Earth's
climate system.
Since 1971, 90%
of the warming has occurred in the oceans. Despite the oceans' dominant role in
energy storage, the term "global warming" is also used to refer to
increases in average temperature of the air and sea at Earth's surface.
Since the early 20th century, the global air and sea surface temperature has
increased about 0.8 °C (1.4 °F), with about two-thirds of the
increase occurring since 1980. Each of the last three decades has been
successively warmer at the Earth's surface than any preceding decade since
1850.
Scientific
understanding of the cause of global warming has been increasing. In its fourth
assessment (AR4 2007) of the relevant scientific literature, the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported that scientists were
more than 90% certain that most of global warming was being caused by
increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases produced by human activities. In
2010 that finding was recognized by the national science academies of all major
industrialized nations. Affirming these findings in 2013, the IPCC stated that
the largest driver of global warming is carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions from fossil fuel combustion, cement production, and land use changes
such as deforestation. Its 2013 report states
Human influence has been detected in warming of the
atmosphere and the ocean, in changes in the global water cycle, in reductions
in snow and ice, in global mean sea level rise, and in changes in some climate
extremes. This evidence for human influence has grown since AR4. It is
extremely likely (95-100%) that human influence has been the dominant cause of
the observed warming since the mid-20th century. - IPCC AR5 WG1 Summary for Policymakers
Climate model
projections were summarized in the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). They indicated that during
the 21st century the global surface temperature is likely to rise a further 1.1
to 2.9 °C (2.0 to 5.2 °F) for their lowest emissions scenario and 2.4
to 6.4 °C (4.3 to 11.5 °F) for their highest. The ranges of these
estimates arise from the use of models with differing sensitivity to greenhouse
gas concentrations.
Future climate
change and associated impacts will vary from region to region around the globe.
The effects of an increase in global temperature include a rise in sea levels
and a change in the amount and pattern of precipitation, as well as a probable
expansion of subtropical deserts. Warming is expected to be strongest in the
Arctic, with the continuing retreat of glaciers, permafrost and sea ice. Other
likely effects of the warming include more frequent extreme weather events
including heat waves, droughts and heavy rainfall; ocean acidification; and
species extinctions due to shifting temperature regimes. Effects significant to
humans include the threat to food security from decreasing crop yields and the
loss of habitat from inundation.
Proposed policy
responses to global warming include mitigation by emissions reduction,
adaptation to its effects, building systems resilient to its effects, and
possible future climate engineering. Most countries are parties to the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC whose ultimate objective
is to prevent dangerous anthropogenic (i.e., human-induced) climate change.
Parties to the UNFCCC have adopted a range of policies designed to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and to assist in adaptation to global warming. Parties
to the UNFCCC have agreed that deep cuts in emissions are required and that
future global warming should be limited to below 2.0 °C (3.6 °F)
relative to the pre-industrial level. Reports published in 2011 by the United
Nations Environment Programme and the International Energy Agency suggest that
efforts as of the early 21st century to reduce emissions may be inadequate to
meet the UNFCCC's 2 °C target.
Emissions of
greenhouse gases grew 2.2% per year between 2000 and 2010, compared with 1.3%
per year from 1970 to 2000.
Observed and expected environmental effects
Long-term
effects
On the timescale of centuries to millennia, the magnitude of
global warming will be determined primarily by anthropogenic CO2
emissions. This is due to carbon dioxide's very long lifetime in the
atmosphere. Stabilizing global average temperature would require reductions in
anthropogenic CO2 emissions. Reductions in emissions of non-CO2
anthropogenic GHGs (e.g., methane and nitrous oxide) would also be necessary.
For CO2, anthropogenic emissions would need to be reduced by more
than 80% relative to their peak level. Even if this were to be achieved, global
average temperatures would remain close to their highest level for many
centuries.
Large-scale
and abrupt impacts
Climate change could result in global, large-scale changes in
natural and social systems. Two examples are ocean acidification caused by
increased atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, and the long-term
melting of ice sheets, which contributes to sea level rise.
Some large-scale changes could occur abruptly, i.e., over a
short time period, and might also be irreversible. An example of abrupt climate
change is the rapid release of methane and carbon dioxide from permafrost,
which would lead to amplified global warming. Scientific understanding of
abrupt climate change is generally poor. However, the probability of abrupt
changes appears to be very low. Factors that may increase the probability of
abrupt climate change include higher magnitudes of global warming, warming that
occurs more rapidly, and warming that is sustained over longer time periods.
Ecological
systems
In terrestrial ecosystems, the earlier timing of spring
events, and poleward and upward shifts in plant and animal ranges, have been
linked with high confidence to recent warming. Future climate change is
expected to particularly affect certain ecosystems, including tundra,
mangroves, and coral reefs. It is expected that most ecosystems will be
affected by higher atmospheric CO2 levels, combined with higher
global temperatures. Overall, it is expected that climate change will result in
the extinction of many species and reduced diversity of ecosystems.
Increases in atmospheric CO2 concentrations have
led to an increase in ocean acidity. Dissolved CO2 increases ocean
acidity, which is measured by lower pH values. Between 1750 to 2000,
surface-ocean pH has decreased by ~0.1, from ~8.2 to ~8.1. Surface-ocean pH has
probably not been below ~8.1 during the past 2 million years. Projections
suggest that surface-ocean pH could decrease by an additional 0.3-0.4 units by
2100. Future ocean acidification could threaten coral reefs, fisheries,
protected species, and other natural resources of value to society.
Observed and expected effects on social systems
Food
security
Under present trends, by 2030, maize production in
Southern Africa could decrease by up to 30%, while rice, millet and maize in
South Asia could decrease by up to 10%. By 2080, yields in developing countries
could decrease by 10% to 25% on average while India could see a drop of 30% to
40%. By 2100, while the population of three billion is expected to double, rice
and maize yields in the tropics are expected to decrease by 20–40% because of
higher temperatures without accounting for the decrease in yields as a result
of soil moisture and water supplies stressed by rising temperatures.
Future warming of around 3 °C
(by 2100, relative to 1990–2000) could result in increased crop yields in mid-
and high-latitude areas, but in low-latitude areas, yields could decline,
increasing the risk of malnutrition. A similar regional pattern of net benefits
and costs could occur for economic (market-sector) effects. Warming above 3 °C could result in crop yields falling in temperate
regions, leading to a reduction in global food production.
Habitat
inundation
In small islands and megadeltas,
inundation as a result of sea level rise is expected to threaten vital
infrastructure and human settlements. This could lead to issues of homelessness
in countries with low lying areas such as Bangladesh, as well as statelessness
for populations in countries such as the Maldive and Tuvalu.
Tuesday, 10 June 2014
BIODIVERSITY
Biodiversity
Biodiversity is the degree of variation of life.
This can refer to genetic variation, species variation, or ecosystem variation within an area, biome, or planet.
Thus, biodiversity includes
Biodiversity is the degree of variation of life.
This can refer to genetic variation, species variation, or ecosystem variation within an area, biome, or planet.
Thus, biodiversity includes
- genetic variation within species,
- the variety of species in an area, and
- the variety of habitat types within a landscape
Threats to Biodiversity
Extinction is a part of nature.
In fact, an estimated nine (9) percent of species become extinct every million years or so, a rate that works out to between one to five species per year.
Now, 65 million years after that last of the dinosaurs disappeared in the most recent extinction episode, it is happening again.
But this time, species are becoming extinct at a rate many times faster some scientists say that the rate has increased to 10,000 times faster than ever before, thus roughly 10,000 to 25,000 species are disappearing each year and dozens each day.
The exploitation of natural resources, such as the world’s oceans and forests faster than they can be renewed, i.e. overharvesting of trees for timber and oceans for food
Overpopulation – the world’s population is estimated to be over 7 billion
Draining wetlands, clearing forests and grasslands for agricultural purposes, towns and cities
Ruining habitats due to road construction and development
Releasing toxic pollutants into waterways and lands
Climate change – continued rise of global temperatures
Poaching(illegal hunting) of wildlife.
Extinction is a part of nature.
In fact, an estimated nine (9) percent of species become extinct every million years or so, a rate that works out to between one to five species per year.
Now, 65 million years after that last of the dinosaurs disappeared in the most recent extinction episode, it is happening again.
But this time, species are becoming extinct at a rate many times faster some scientists say that the rate has increased to 10,000 times faster than ever before, thus roughly 10,000 to 25,000 species are disappearing each year and dozens each day.
The exploitation of natural resources, such as the world’s oceans and forests faster than they can be renewed, i.e. overharvesting of trees for timber and oceans for food
Overpopulation – the world’s population is estimated to be over 7 billion
Draining wetlands, clearing forests and grasslands for agricultural purposes, towns and cities
Ruining habitats due to road construction and development
Releasing toxic pollutants into waterways and lands
Climate change – continued rise of global temperatures
Poaching(illegal hunting) of wildlife.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)