Information about News And Events, Politics And Government and More

A 30-year map of the Earth’s climate changes has indicated that the planet’s atmosphere warmed an average of about 0.4 degrees Celsius.

This was reported by Dr. John Christy, a professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center (ESSC) at The University of Alabama in Huntsville, US.

The warming estimates are according to data collected by sensors aboard NOAA and NASA satellites. The satellite-based instruments measure the temperature of the atmosphere from the surface up to an altitude of about eight kilometers above sea level.

The map, operational since December 1, 1978, doesn’t show a uniform global warming. It looks more like a thermometer: Hot at the top, cold at the bottom and varying degrees of warm in the middle.

According to the map, half of the globe has warmed at least 0.3 degrees C in the past 30 years, while half of that - a full quarter of the globe - warmed at least 0.6 degrees C.

This is a pattern of warming not forecast by any of the major global climate models.

The area of fastest warming is clustered around the Northern Atlantic and Arctic oceans, stretching from Arctic Canada across Greenland to Scandinavia.

The greatest warming has been on opposite ends of Greenland, where temperatures have jumped as much as 2.5 degrees C in 30 years.

During the same time, however, much of the Antarctic has cooled, with parts of the continent cooling as much as Greenland has warmed.

But, areas of cooling were isolated: Only four percent of the globe cooled by at least half of one degree Fahrenheit.

“If you look at the 30-year graph of month-to-month temperature anomalies, the most obvious feature is the series of warmer than normal months that followed the major El Nino Pacific Ocean warming event of 1997-1998,” said Christy.

“Right now, we are coming out of one La Nina Pacific Ocean cooling event and we might be heading into another. It should be interesting over the next several years to see whether the post La Nina climate ‘re-sets’ to the cooler seasonal norms we saw before 1997 or the warmer levels seen since then,” he added.

Virtually, all of the warming found in the satellite temperature record has taken place since the onset of the 1997-1998 El Nino.

Earth’s average temperature showed no detectable warming from December 1978 until the 1997 El Nino.

A team of scientists from the US are studying high-altitude lakes in the Central Andes as global warming “hot spots”, and their ability to sustain life in a highly dynamic environment.

The group is studying high altitude lakes, which are considered “hot spots” of global warming and its effects, such as loss of precipitation (50 percent in 50 years in some parts), glacier retreat, and increased impact of UV radiation in bodies of water that evaporate.

According to the researchers, the conditions are very similar to what Mars might have experienced about 3.5 billion years ago.

“I”m collecting information on the lakes and the watersheds that surround them, including the transparency of the water, the zooplankton that live in the lakes, and the materials in the water that control transparency,” said Miami University zoology grad student Kevin Rose.

“One of the main goals of the project is to use the lakes as analogs to what potentially existed on Mars millions of years ago. By examining the most extreme environments on Earth, such as extremely high UV, low oxygen, low temperatures, and low pH, we can infer what life, if it existed, may have had to deal with on Mars,” he explained.

The project not only addresses the question about early Mars water, habitability, and life, it also documents a subject of critical importance on Earth right now: how water resources and life are responding to the climate change Earth is experiencing today.

“Very few places in the world have the extreme conditions found here,” said Rose.

“The Atacama desert is the driest place on Earth. The lakes are among the highest in elevation in the world. UV levels here are among the highest on Earth. The combination of these factors makes it an ideal site to study how life persists in an extreme environment and the conditions in which life can thrive,” he added.

According to Rose, understanding the response of these lakes and life adaptation to rapid changes may hold important clues to forecasting the evolution of other threatened terrestrial lakes, and possibly finding solutions to global warming.

It is us, humans, who have been ruining this great earth into garbage and rubbles for our selfishness. We have been destroying the green trees like anything and making this place unlivable for our future generations. It is only recently where we have realized that we should do something for our earth. There are smaller things like buying organic tote bags only and other stuff like which help us in our aim of making our place greener.

No one knows that recycled sports bottles can be reused again. Such ignorance has been costing us a great deal when it comes to making the earth greener. Buying only promotional USB will also help in our goal of making this place greener.

The products like organic tote bags help immensely by way of preserving the green by reusing them and using only organic materials. They also will not pollute our earth unlike their polythene counterparts.

Recycled cards are another way to help make this place a better one to live. They are reused once and can be reused many times.

If only if we vow that to only buy green promotional products like the tote bags, etc we can actually help in smaller ways to make this place greener.

The climate change adviser of the Prime Minister of Australia has said that instead of beef and lamb, people should eat kangaroo meat to help combat climate change.

According to a report in The Australian, Professor Ross Garnaut, climate change adviser to Aussie PM Kevin Rudd, has suggested in his final report on climate change that Australia’s farmers should switch to the low-emission meat. He also suggested that Australian families should give up beef and eat more kangaroo. “Sheep and cattle production is highly vulnerable to the biophysical impacts of climate change, such as water scarcity,” said Garnaut. “Australian marsupials emit negligible amounts of methane from enteric fermentation. This could be a source of international comparative advantage for Australia in livestock production,” he added. “For most of Australia’s human history of around 60,000 years, kangaroo was the main source of meat. It could again become important,” he further added. Professor Garnaut notes there are some barriers to this change, including livestock and farm-management issues, consumer resistance and the gradual nature of change in food tastes. According to Michael Mulligan, president of the Kangaroo Industry Association, the animal, which is the national symbol, had become a “more and more accepted everyday meat”. Professor Garnaut said that researchers have modeled the potential for kangaroos to replace sheep and cattle for meat production in Australia’s rangelands, where kangaroos are already harvested. “They conclude that by 2020, beef cattle and sheep numbers in the rangelands could be reduced by seven million and 36 million respectively, and that this would create the opportunity for an increase in kangaroo numbers from 34 million today to 240 million by 2020,” he said. ANI

Ecologists have warned that global warming might result in species shrinking in size.

According to a report in New Scientist, Kaustuv Roy, a biologist at the University of California in San Diego, believes that scientists need to think now about how they are going to preserve large species.

“Our collective actions are negatively affecting body sizes of many living species,” said Roy.

It is well-known that humans tend to hunt or fish larger animals, creating a selective pressure that favours the smaller ones that can reproduce while they are still small.

Several species of cod are smaller as a result of pressures of the fishing industry.

The degradation of natural environments around the world is having the same effect by limiting the amount of food available to animals, according to Roy, meaning smaller animals that need less food have a head start.

But, another factor threatens the world’s most impressive animals.

“Global warming may reinforce this trend towards smaller sizes through the temperature-size rule,” said Roy.

The temperature-size rule, also known as Bergmann’s rule, says that species size increases with latitude: they tend to be smaller in the tropics, and larger closer to the poles.

Bergmann’s rule is debated, but one explanation for it is that larger animals have a lower surface-area-to-volume ratio, allowing them to retain more heat and fare better in cooler climes.

Conversely, smaller species radiate their heat more easily and so are better adapted to living in warm temperatures. There is also some experimental evidence that rearing animals in higher temperatures generally results in smaller individuals.

Roy has shown that the average body size of tiny ocean shrimps, known as ostracodes, gradually became bigger several million years ago. As the world cooled by 12 degree Celsius during the Cenozoic era, fossil ostracodes got about 30 microns bigger for every degree of cooling.

Although he does not yet have the data, Roy has said that we should expect the opposite consequence from human-induced global warming.

“In effect, our actions have set up a grand selection experiment where bigger is no longer better,” said Roy, who has also shown that species evolve faster in cooler temperatures.

“It makes sense to be bigger when it’s colder,” said Wendy Foden, a biologist at the World Conservation Union who is studying the effects of climate change on species.

“As the world gets warmer, the converse will happen, species will shrink,” she added.

There were reports that Shilpa Shetty actually learnt to play the violin for Sunny Deol’s ‘The Man’, but the actress admits that she couldn’t go beyond holding the musical instrument properly.’It takes years to master the violin. All I did was to learn how to hold the violin properly so that I don’t look stupid with it. Also, let me tell you when someone who doesn’t know how to play the instrument actually puts the fiddle on the string, it sounds like a donkey braying. So I’d never dare,’ Shilpa told IANS.

The actress was all praise for those who had really learnt a skill to play a film character convincingly.

‘Learning a new instrument takes years, forget about mastering it. I believe Mr Dilip Kumar actually learnt to play the sitar for the song ‘Madhuban mein Radhika’ (in ‘Kohinoor’) and Shabanaji (Shabana Azmi) sat down with a Carnatic singer to learn the ragas for ‘Morning Raga’. Hats off to them. For me not looking stupid with the violin was enough,’ she said.

The others who have brushed up their musical talents for movies include Arjun Rampal and actor-director Farhan Akhtar. While Arjun learnt how to play the guitar to essay the role of the lead guitarist in ‘Rock On’, Farhan has himself sung six of the nine songs in the film. We also have Katrina Kaif who took cello lessons to look convincing as a classical musician in Subhash Ghai’s ‘Yuvraj’.

However like Shilpa, Katrina cautions that she’s not an expert cello player.

‘I’ve taken lessons to look convincing holding and strumming on the cello. But I’m not really playing it in the film. I’m not some great musician. But I do have a sense of melody and rhythm. I guess that will see me through this cello-playing role,’ Katrina said.

Archaeologists are warning that climate change not only poses a threat to future generations, but could also damage the past by destroying remains dating back to the Bronze Age.

According to a report in Yorkshire Post, the warning comes as part of a conference at Bradford University in the UK, which discussed the damage global warming has done to the sites of archaeological interest across the north Atlantic.

A prominent point discussed at the conference was that rising sea level, coastal erosion, changing weather patterns and melting ice sheets has meant that evidence of Viking settlements is being lost.

Research work in this regards has been done by the staff of Bradford University, who are now working to identify sites which are at risk of being lost forever as a result of climate change.

“In the past archaeological finds in places like Greenland have been found in the permafrost beneath the surface frozen in time. Cloth, organic materials and textiles can be preserved but now these ice sheets are being lost,” said Stephen Dockrill, Bradford University’s senior lecturer in archaeology.

“One of the biggest problems we are facing in the north Atlantic is rising sea level and changing weather patterns causing more coastal erosion, cutting into cliff faces where lots of archaeological sites are based,” he added.

According to Dockrill, Bradford University have people working at a site in the Faroe Islands, where there is evidence of the very first Viking settlers who arrived there, which is being eroded.

Dockrill said that the damage caused by global warming to sites of historical interest had increased in the past two years.

“We are also seeing erosion of deposits in this country in places like the Orkney islands, with remains from the Neolithic and Bronze Age under threat,” he said.

I’m looking to start a project before the end of the summer, to power one of my kids rooms entirely off of clean energy. I’m starting first with solar cells. Where can i get some big and durable ones to put on the roof? Also if you’re experienced in this field, what problems should i expect to encounter? And what kind of regulator should i hook up to output 120 vAC?

In the automotive section in Canadian Tire. There are 80W solar cells for a hefty $750. Or a 120W solar panel for $1100.

But there is also this site here:

http://www.solarhome.org/

And needless to say, they are not cheap. Home kids starting at $8669.99.

Electric start
Price: <$1200
Comfortably seated for 2 people
Optional pedals
Headlights, turning signals etc.
Max speed: 20mph. No higher, Florida laws. I’m under 16 >.>
Max range: 30-40 miles.
Max load: 250-300lbs
Charging time: preferably less than 10 hours.

I also need a mile counter, I don’t really know what they’re called, but they, well, count the miles and it’s on the speedometer.

It’d be pretty sweet if it had like some sort of music player built into it But not a must

I also like the storage in some of the scooters. I know there is a trunk thingie in the back and underseat storage, thats pretty neat
I know there are alot of X-Treme scooters that fit, but I have heard way more bad things about X-Treme than good, so if possible.
So yeah, I’ve done like loads of research but can’t find anything goodddd >

Well one major problem with your criteria is that you’re not going to get a 30-40 mile range from an electric moped for under $1200.
For example, my first electirc moped cost $1200. It had a 20 mph top speed, and a range of about 15 miles per charge. So that gives you an idea what to expect.
http://greenhome.huddler.com/products/im…
This website has lots of info on electric mopeds, but the closest that fits your criteria is the one I already mentioned.
http://greenhome.huddler.com/products/ca…
You’re right to avoid X-Treme scooters though - they have a terrible reputation of breaking and the manufacturer not honoring the warranty.
So unfortunately I’m not aware of any electric mopeds which will meet your criteria. If you could afford $1800, Skeuter brand mopeds would work, except they go over 20 mph.
http://greenhome.huddler.com/products/sk…
This link might help a bit too:
http://greenhome.huddler.com/wiki/electr…
By the way, a mile counter is an odometer.
Instead of buying one moped, you might want to try buying 2 electric scooters, like these:
http://www.angelfire.com/electronic2/jba…
http://www.eastcoastwholesales.com/elect…
No odometer or headlight or turn signal or storage, but they’ll get you going 20 mph for under $400 apiece.

why is that?

yep maybe it’s because too many people are squashing catapillars

———

Loss of habitat for laying their eggs, insufficient food sources, pesticides, people who kill all bugs, good or not are all reasons for the decline.

We see more butterflies than most people do because we have a large yard, planted lots of plants they like, provide habitat, water is available in shallow saucers and we do as much organic as possible. IF we do use a chemical pesticide, it’s as little as possible to get the desired result.