EPA Analysis Finds Climate Security Act Could Cut GHG Emissions 25% Below 1990 Levels By 2050 at a Cost of 0.06 to 0.16 Percentage Points of GDP per Year; Transportation Contributes Little

Sources of GHG abatement under EPA's ADAGE modeling. Click to enlarge.

An analysis by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (S. 2191) currently pending before the full Senate concluded that under the act total US greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are approximately 40% lower (~ 3,749 MtCO₂e) than reference case emissions in 2030 (~11% below 1990 levels) and 56% lower (~ 6,030 MtCO₂e) in 2050 (~25% below 1990 levels).

These reductions would be achieved at a projected cost to GDP of between 0.9% ($238 billion) and 3.8% ($983 billion) lower in 2030 and between 2.4% ($1,012 billion) and 6.9% ($2,856 billion) lower in 2050 than in the Reference Scenario. That works out to a cost of about 0.06 to 0.16 percentage points per year from 2010 to 2050.

More... from greencarcongress.com

YIKES! The smug is choking me... like daylight savings, millions were blown in "Earth Hour" to make a few people call obvious attention on over publicized problems.

.... power stations simply cannot be turned off for an hour while people flick their lights out to feel good about it.

The often electricity is 'run to ground' if it isn't needed. In reality it can take up to 14 hours to get a baseload coal-fired power station up to full operating speed.

Biochar is mostly inert, and is known to stay in the soil for thousands of years. It is also not subjected to the risk of being blown down in a hurricane, or cut down, or otherwise placed in a process for a more rapid return of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.

As a sequestration technology, biochar is simple, easy, and proven. Although sequestration alone might be enough of a reason to consider biochar, the benefits of biochar in agriculture are really the reason this solution is gaining momentum quickly. The use of biochar has been shown to increase water retention, microbial activity, uptake of minerals by plants, as well as continued deposition of healthy soil. Two new organizations have emerged that highlight the multi-faceted solution of biochar.

The International Biochar Initiative (IBI) has emerged as the center for biochar research and development. The IBI:

"Provides a platform for the international exchange of information and activities in support of biochar research, development, demonstration and commercialization. It advocates biochar as a strategy to:

* improve the Earth's soils;
* help mitigate the anthropogenic greenhouse effect by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and sequestering atmospheric carbon in a stable soil carbon pool; and
* improve water quality by retaining agrochemicals.

The IBI also promotes:

*sustainable co-production of clean energy and other bio-based products as part of the biochar process;
* efficient biomass utilization in developing country agriculture; and
* cost-effective utilization of urban, agricultural and forest co products."

Biochar begins to answer problems surrounding biodiversity, water purity, deforestation, hunger, and poverty. As we recognize the 'services' healthy soil can provide biochar continues to gain value as a strategy to mitigate many of these issues at the same time.

Read more at treehugger

If  genuine care, sincerity and concern for nature and protecting people was put into two words, they might be "David Suzuki". . Even if he is being paid for it,  his lifelong commitment is impressive.

Here is his latest take on pesticides: The ugly truth about cosmetic pesticides

A real estate agent once visited me at home and offered to sell my house. I was tempted for about a nanosecond before turning him down cold.

The house where I've lived for decades in Vancouver is not just a property to me. My home - especially the backyard - means so much more.

The backyard isn't just my own private place of refuge in the summer. It's a sacred place for my family as well.

It's where my kids played tag as children and where they now socialize with their friends as adults. It's where my wife and I hold family barbecues and dinners in the summer. And it's where my father-in-law gets down on his hands and knees to pull weeds and tend to the St. John's Wort and tulips. Our pet dog, Huckleberry, was even buried in the backyard when he died.

I wouldn't trade any of my memories that have taken place on that small stretch of grass for anything in the world. I know I'm not alone in my passion. Our yards and gardens are a symbolic zone, a private sanctuary. Our public parks are also treasured spaces: they're the public commons where we can throw Frisbees, play volleyball, read a book, or (my favorite) take a nap.

There's been a tremendous amount of interest in green spaces recently. And with good reason. Many of the private yards and public parks that we enjoy are coated with toxic chemical pesticides to kill weeds. The problem is that they work too well, and exposure to them can damage our health.

In 2003, the Ontario College of Family Physicians published a scientific literature review that showed "consistent links to serious illnesses, such as cancer, reproductive problems and neurological diseases" associated with chronic pesticide exposure.

It stands to reason that children and pets are often more exposed since they're the ones most likely to be found rolling playing on the grass during the summer months. Children are also more vulnerable to the health effects of pesticide exposure because their young bodies are still developing.

So what exactly are we spraying on our lawns? At least 50 active pesticide ingredients registered for use in Canada have been banned in other countries due to health or environmental concerns. One popular lawn herbicide called "2,4-D", can easily be found in products lining the garden care section of your local hardware store. But don't look for it in Denmark, Norway or Sweden. The herbicide, 2,4-D, is no longer sold in Scandinavia because of health and environmental concerns.

Another report, published by my foundation, showed that more than 6,000 cases of acute pesticide poisoning occur in Canada [L1] each year. Even more frightening, half of those poisonings involve children under six.

Despite the clear evidence against chemical pesticides, more than 30 per cent of Canadians with gardens still use them. But there is evidence that this practice may be coming to an end. Many cities have passed bylaws banning the use of these lawn and garden pesticides. We can look forward to the day when a neighbor applying these chemicals to their yards will seem as out-of-place as a smoker lighting up a cigarette on a transatlantic flight.

That day may be just around the corner - at least in some parts of Canada. In 2003, Quebec banned the use and sale of many lawn pesticides. Now the Ontario government is proposing similar legislation. The Government of PEI also recently held hearings on a potential province-wide ban. Provincial action is important, because while cities and towns can restrict the use of these chemicals on public and private property, provincial governments have the power to ban the sale of cosmetic pesticides. Pulling the prohibited products from store shelves is the best way to make sure they aren't used.

I hope that residents across Canada - especially in Ontario and PEI - make their voices heard on this issue.

Remembering the great times I've had in my backyard, like watching my kids play, chatting with my father-in-law while he tends the garden, and having friends over for a summer dinner are incredible experiences. I'm sure most Canadians have similar memories that have taken place in their own backyards. We should be able to enjoy these green sanctuaries without worrying about chemicals. And so should our children.

From David Suzuki at cnews 

Plug-in hybrids get far better mileage than standard cars or regular hybrids — and emit far less pollution.

But they are also tough to justify economically at the moment with existing technology, according to the first several months of data from RechargeIT.org, which is studying how well plug-in hybrids work in real-world circumstances.

Read the full story here

Hydrogen car problem: While hydrogen has been lauded as the "energy of the future," this is NOT a short term reality.... Hydrogen is not a great energy carrier. It has a relatively low energy density, it's difficult and dangerous to transport, and finding a way to store it in vehicles has proven difficult (ranges of only 100 miles). The refueling infrastructure is also non-existent.

Even more to the point, we haven't yet established a renewable source of energy to produce hydrogen.

Possible solution: Weighing less than one pound, the square piece of shiny steel houses an array of microchannels containing patented catalytic sites. Each microtube helps convert a continuous stream of hydrogen from fuels like gasoline, diesel, vegetable oil, biodiesel, propane, natural gas, even the glycerol byproduct from biodiesel manufacturing.

Reducing the cost of hydrogen generation: "The smaller system size, reduced catalyst volume, and more efficient process that is realized with InnovaTek's technology represents another significant step in moving the hydrogen economy from science to commercial reality," he said. 

While InnovTtek's reactor can run on a variety of non-renewable hydrocarbon sources they, like the potentially revolutionary Coskata Biofuels, are expressly interested in sustainable power, even to the point of preferring biodiesel in their test runs. Innovatek also said that biodiesel just plain works better: it contains fewer impurities and reforms at lower temperatures than petrodiesel.

Taking all this into consideration, Innovatek's reactor could revolutionize the energy and transportation infrastructure of the country.

Source gas2.org

Find out more about hydrogen fuel problems and solutions at: HybridHype

For consumers, retail prices for broiler products is up 10% over the last year.  For a company whose revenue in 2007 was $7.6 billion, a rise in costs of $1.3 billion ain't chicken feed.

Bloomberg news reports:

``Our company and industry are struggling to cope with unprecedented increases in feed-ingredient costs this year due largely to the U.S. government's ill-advised policy of providing generous federal subsidies to corn-based ethanol blenders,'' Chief Executive Officer J. Clint Rivers said in the statement.

The price of soybean meal in Chicago rose to $392.90 per 2,000 pounds, the highest since 1973, on March 3 and has gained more than 50 percent in the past year.

``Based on current commodity futures markets, our company's total costs for corn and soybean meal to feed our flocks in fiscal 2008 would be more than $1.3 billion higher than what they were two years ago,'' Rivers said.

One of the very first acts performed by David Paterson as Governor of New York was to sign a law enacting the Great Lakes Compact, an agreement among all of the States and Canadian Provinces around the Great Lakes to protect the lakes from pollution, invasive species and covetous neighbors. To make a bad pun, it is a watershed agreement, an international coalition to protect one of the world's great resources.

Except it has to be approved unanimously and Republican politicians in Wisconsin are playing games, sacrificing one of their greatest assets on the altar of cheesy politics. They don't like co-operating with neighbors- one state senator wrote "To relinquish our sovereignty to a regional body of governors that can make changes after the compact is adopted is unacceptable. Where else do we have a dictatorial or totalitarian form of government where we give up our decision-making authority? I do not support a document that relinquishes our sovereignty to another state"