Climate
Change
News
– March 10,
2006
Brought
to
you
by
the
Environmental
and
Energy
Study
Institute
Carol
Werner,
Executive
Director
Warmer
New
England
Winters
Affect
Local
Industries
New
England’s
winters
have
become
warmer
and
shorter
since
the
1970s,
according
to
scientists
and
local
residents.
Weather
in
the
region
is
notoriously
variable,
but
according
to
Dr.
Barry
Rock,
a
natural
resources
professor
at
the
University
of
New
Hampshire
(UNH),
this
winter
has
provided
an
important
look
at
the
bigger
trend.
Dr.
Rock
said,
“There
is
no
debate
among
anyone
that
we
are
seeing
our
overall
global
climate
warming,
and
that
is
having
a
profound
effect
in
terms
of
the
winters
here.”
Dr.
Tom
Kelly,
director
of
the
UNH
Office
of
Sustainability
Programs,
said
“Climate
is
changing
in
New
Hampshire
and
New
England,
and
the
evidence
is
already
here.
It’s
not
a
question
of
some
future
possibility.
It’s
happening.”
A
2005
study
by
the
nonprofit
Clean
Air-Cool
Planet
and
UNH
professor
Dr.
Cameron
Wake
showed
that
annual
average
temperatures
in
the
Northeast
increased
1.8°F
between
1899
and
2000.
This
air
temperature
increase
coincided
with
increases
in
sea
temperature
and
annual
precipitation.
The
warming
in
New
England
has
hit
many
of
the
industries
that
define
the
regional
economy,
such
as
logging,
ski
resorts,
tourism,
apple
picking
and
maple
sugaring.
The
restaurant
and
lodging
industry
has
seen
about
a
20
percent
drop
in
profit
this
winter,
according
to
industry
spokesperson
Drew
Drummond.
One
resort
considered
offering
winter
golfing,
he
said.
Farmers
have
also
been
affected
by
the
changes.
“When
you
have
these
fluctuations
in
temperatures
and
heavy
rainfalls,
it
really
messes
the
farmer
up,”
said
Charlie
Reid,
an
organic
farmer
in
Nottingham,
NH.
Bill
Burtis,
spokesman
for
Clean
Air-Cool
Planet,
pointed
out
another
reason
that
warmer
weather
is
not
better
for
agriculture;
in
spite
of
the
lengthened
growing
season,
a change
in
climate
could
alter
natural
and
chemical
pest
controls.
Oil
Sand
Development
in
Alberta
Raises
GHG
Emissions
Concerns
On
March
2,
Chevron
Corporation
announced
it
has
leased
75,000
acres
in
Alberta,
Canada
containing
an
estimated
7.5
billion
barrels
of
heavy
oil
present
in
oil
sands,
a
so-called
“alternative”
source
of
oil.
According
to
the
Pembina
Institute,
a
Canadian
environmental
policy
research
and
education
organization,
the
highly
energy-intensive
process
of
extraction
of
oil
from
oil
sands
could
account
for
41-47
percent
of
the
expected
increase
in
Canada’s
greenhouse
gas
(GHG)
emissions
from
2003-2010.
In
2004,
Canada’s
National
Energy
Board
found
that
2.5
to
4
barrels
of
water
are
needed
to
produce
one
barrel
of
bitumen—a
heavy,
tarry
oil—from
the
oil
sands.
Extraction
of
the
sand
requires
burning
500–1,000
cubic
feet
of
natural
gas
(which
generates
carbon
dioxide)
to
produce
one
barrel
of
bitumen.
Dr.
Marlo
Raynolds,
Executive
Director
of
the
Pembina
Institute,
said
“Oil
sands
are
the
elephant
in
Canada’s
climate
change
room....
Canada
cannot
assume
its
international
responsibilities
unless
there
is
a
radical
reduction
in
the
greenhouse
gas
footprint
of
this
industry.”
UK
Looks
to
Distributed
Renewable
Energy
for
Climate
Mitigation
On
March
10,
the
United
Kingdom
(UK)
House
of
Commons
considered
a
Climate
Change
and
Sustainable
Energy
Bill
(Bill
133)
designed
to
promote
climate
mitigation
on
a
local
level
through
distributed
renewable
energy
and
energy
efficiency
technologies.
According
to
Green
Building
Press,
the
bill
has
all-party
support
to
promote
"micro-generation,"
such
as
solar
and
wind
power.
Prominent
Conservatives
are
among
hundreds
of
Members
of
Parliament
(MPs)
to
support
the
bill.
The
bill
would
introduce
official
targets
for
the
growth
of
micro-generation—and
there
would
be
a
"buy-back"
regulation
in
which
householders
who
produce
a
surplus
of
power
would
be
paid
a
fair
price
by
energy
suppliers.
The
bill’s
sponsor,
Mark
Lazarowicz
(Labour),
says
the
"whole
political
atmosphere
has
changed"
in
the
debate
over
energy
and
climate
change.
"The
argument
isn't
any
more
about
whether
we
should
use
more
renewable
energy,
but
how
we
do
it,"
says
Mr.
Lazarowicz.
According
to
the
Telegraph,
the
shift
of
Conservatives
to
local
generation
follows
a
report
by
the
Prime
Minister's
Sustainable
Development
Commission
which
came
out
firmly
against
building
a
new
generation
of
nuclear
reactors.
The
commission
pointed
to
the
lack
of
a
strategy
for
dealing
with
the
disposal
of
nuclear
waste,
uncertainty
over
the
cost
of
new
stations,
the
danger
from
terrorism
and
the
danger
that
going
down
the
nuclear
route
would
lock
Britain
into
a
centralized
system
of
generating
energy
for
the
next
50
years.
On
March
6,
former
Labour
MP
Ken
Livingstone,
the
mayor
of
London,
announced
that
the
capital
would
seek
to
cut
carbon
dioxide
emissions
by
generating
more
power
locally.
According
to
the
Bromley
Times,
fuel
poverty—not
having
enough
money
to
buy
energy
to
live
healthily—is
estimated
to
kill
up
to
30,000,
mostly
elderly,
people
in
the
UK
each
year.
CA
Chamber
of
Commerce
and
Gov.
Schwarzenegger
Clash
Over
Climate
Proposal
On
March
6,
the
California
Chamber
of
Commerce
stated
Gov.
Schwarzenegger’s
Climate
Action
Team
(CAT)
draft
report
on
climate
is
“not
convincing,”
and
denounced
its
proposed
new
gasoline
tax
and
carbon
dioxide
(CO2)
emissions
caps
as
potential
burdens
on
the
state’s
economy.
The
draft
report
says
fulfilling
Schwarzenegger’s
pledge
to
cut
CO2
emissions
80
percent
by
2050
actually
would
create
jobs
as
companies
developed
new
energy-saving
technologies.
The
report
estimates
83,000
jobs
could
be
created
over
the
next
15
years.
Chamber
of
Commerce
President
Allan
Zaremberg
summarized
the
Chamber’s
criticism
by
saying,
“We
don’t
know
what
it’s
really
going
to
cost,”
and
asked
the
CAT
to
“immediately
release
all
documents
and
data”
used
in
the
report.
At
a
conference
in
June
2005,
Gov.
Schwarzenegger
said,
“I
say
the
[climate]
debate
is
over.
We
know
the
science.
We
see
the
threat.
And
we
know
the
time
for
action
is
now.”
However,
although
he
is
yet
to
receive
the
final
CAT
report,
the
governor
has
publicly
opposed
an
early
recommendation
to
add
a
tax
of
2.57
cents
a
gallon
to
the
wholesale
price
of
gasoline
and
diesel
to
fund
research
into
alternative
energy
sources.
According
to
the
Los
Angeles
Times,
the
Chamber
of
Commerce’s
objections
to
putting
caps
on
greenhouse
gas
(GHG)
emissions
are
not
shared
by
all
California
businesses.
Environmental
Entrepreneurs,
an
organization
of
500
executives
from
mostly
high-tech
companies,
said
that
capping
GHG
emissions
and
even
a
new
wholesale
tax
on
motor
vehicle
fuels
could
stimulate
California
industry
and
make
the
state
a
global
leader
in
developing
anti-pollution
technology.
The
full
CAT
report
is
due
to
the
Governor
and
State
Legislature
this
spring.
Scientists
Predict
Significant
Decrease
in
African
Water
Supply
with
Climate
Change
