Global warming will have catastrophic consequences for the wider economy in California for a century, in a report released today says.

Up to $ 2.5 trillion of the $ 4 trillion in real estate properties – houses and other buildings – data at risk from rising sea levels, wild fires and other extreme weather events occurring as the world gets warmer, according to a report from the University of California, Berkeley agricultural And economic resources, Professor David Roland-Holst and Fred Rich Kahrl.

The 127-page report was sponsored by the following non-profit foundation that 10 studies of the intersection of California and the future economy and environment.

Believed to be the first time in the academic institution has tried to put a price on the potential damage to the climate in California between now and 2100. Roland-Holst characterized as Golden State’s 2006 version of “Stern Review on the economics of climate change,” to see the consequences of global warming on the world economy and so most clearly the type of research.

In an interview, Roland-Holst said that despite the overwhelming numbers, he did not want his research appeared as a doomsday report.

“This is not a small chicken. This is a call up as a result,” he said. “Estimates are currently a lot of uncertainty there, but we have to take it seriously.”

Roland-Holst Kahrl offered predictions about the consequences of global warming on the seven-INDUSTRIES sectors of California.

# Water: An estimated $ 5 billion in assets at risk and the cost could reach $ 600 million a year in what one investigator called “high-warming scenario.”

# Energy: $ 21 billion in assets at risk, with annual damage at $ 2.7 billion to $ 6.3 billion. Potential impacts will include small hydropower because of less rainfall, more hot days, which requires increased use of air conditioning, and winter storms caused several power outages.

# Transportation: $ 500 billion in danger of ports, air fields, roads and bridges.

# Travel & Leisure: $ 98 billion in assets at risk, with annual damage starting at $ 200 million to $ 7.5 billion. “The highest warming scenario, the California ski industry collapse,” said Roland-Holst. Beaches, golf courses and state and national parks, will be affected also. And in a few days when golf can hit the links can actually increase because of global warming, the warmer days would be to burn the golf course.

# Real estate and insurance: $ 2.5 billion in assets at risk, and water damage could cost $ 1.4 billion a year, while fire can cause damage to the $ 2.5 billion in damages.

# Agriculture, forestry and fisheries: $ 113 billion in assets at risk, with annual damage starting at $ 300 million to $ 4.3 billion.

# Public Health: Annual costs due to changes in atmospheric range from $ 3.8 billion to $ 24 billion a year.

“Our estimates show that the climate risk – damage, if no action is taken – will include tens of billions of dollars a year in direct costs, indirect costs even higher, and expose trillions of dollars in assets collateral risk,” he wrote investigator on Abstract.

“This is the most expensive that we can do about climate change is not something,” said Roland-Holst. “We can ignore the change is already happening, or we can make the threat of climate damaging energetic a chance to change, renewal and growth.”

The investigator described California’s landmark climate change legislation, AB 32, as “a positive … but only the beginning.” AB 32 implementation plan faces final approval by the state Air Resource Board in December. He noted that about 32 AB is a relief, or reduce the risk of climate change. His research was a call for an adjustment, he said, or to limit the damage caused by climate change.

The investigator’s recommendations more efficient allocation of water in the country, more promotion of renewable technologies, more investment in the country’s natural and scores of entertainment and research on climate change on human health, especially when it comes to the elderly and low-income residents.

Something on the scale of the New Deal during the Great Depression, the Marshall Plan after the devastation of Europe during World War II or the conquest of space will be required to make climate change, researchers said.

“We will not wait until the Bay Bridge to fall to build a new,” said Roland-Holst. “It was in response to a perceived risk. We know earthquakes come, and the cost of early action far less than action later.”

Climate change is not impressive as Earth asteroid, he said, but much more as a threat that can be avoided by immediately begin to manage supertanker in a different direction.

These Days global warming is a very hot topic and little wonder, seeing as the earth grows hotter with each passing year.

For a long time now the effect of man’s industrialization and technological progress has quietly yet continuously eked away at the delicate balance of the planet’s atmosphere and ecosystem, but within the last 30 or so years the pace of this damage has markedly accelerated!

DOWNPLAYING GLOBAL WARMING

In much the same way that big tobacco once vehemently denied the association between cigarette smoking and lung cancer, for the longest time a number of multi-billion-dollar-a-year industries have also been questioning the existence of global warming and misleading the public about its reality.

In fact the Bush II years have been particular devastating to Environmental Protection Rights, yet staggeringly lucrative for those who would profit from the loss of such protection.

In what can best be described as an orgy-fest of self-congratulatory backslapping, many a heavyweight lobbyist for industries such as oil, coal, mining, logging, aviation and auto manufacturers have left the Bush Whitehouse grinning like the proverbial Cheshire cat because they’d gotten firm assurance that pesky environmental laws would never get in the way of business as usual!

An example of how the Bush II Administration misled the public into believing they were truly concerned about protecting the environment was the sneaky way in which they enacted laws such as The Clean Skies Act.

The Clean Skies Act introduced in February 2003 apparently appears to strengthen already existent environmental laws such as The Clean Air Act but which in reality actually weakened and undermined them.

The Clean Skies Act gave pollutant industries a lot of leeway allowing them to spew an additional 42 million more tons of pollution into the atmosphere and raised caps on greenhouse gas emissions.

Soon after Bush II came to power the situation got so bad, that after decades of effective service, two of the most senior enforcement officials in the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) resigned citing an agency that was pursuing contrary goals to that of actually protecting the environment.

Former US vice president Al Gore is no stranger to these tactics. As perhaps the most widely recognizable face in the fight against global warming he has been scoffed at and ridiculed by the same individuals who would have us believe global warming is nothing more than a myth!

Recently in 2007 several scientists have gone on public record citing claims of a gestapo-like environment of intimidation to produce figures and reports that belied the true extent of global warming!

CAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING

The unprecedented super-accelerated rate of global warming happening today is due to the amount of greenhouse gases being spewed into the atmosphere.

The most notorious greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide (CO2) because it so happens to be the biggest single contributing factor to global warming (CO2 comprises more than 75% of all greenhouse gases). So what’s spewing all that CO2 in the air? Simply put–mankind and his toys!

Some of the biggest greenhouse gas pollutants include automobiles; electricity production; planes; shipping and the various manufacturing industries dotted all over the globe.

SCIENCE OF GLOBAL WARMING

This article is intentionally not an in-depth treatise of the process of global warming, but having said that, here’s a brief explanation:

The rays from the sun are comprised of shortwave solar radiation which pass through the atmosphere and are then absorbed by the earth thereby warming it. Part of that absorbed energy is reflected back to the atmosphere as long wave infrared radiation which is mostly trapped by the greenhouse gases. This trapped heat ensures that the earth is approximately warmer by 33 degrees Celsius than it would otherwise be.

This trapped heat is actually good for us, for were it not for those greenhouse gases and other constituents in the atmosphere that trap heat, the earth would be as cold as Mars which has for all intents and purpose no atmosphere to speak of.

Over the past century the earth has gotten warmer by approximately 0.7 degrees Celsius. This may not seem like much until you consider that the difference between the average earth temperature of today and another ice age is a mere 5 degrees Celsius!

EFFECTS OF GLOBAL WARMING

Drought! Flooding! Disease! Hurricanes! Starvation! Unbearable Heat!

Any of these words seem to you to be appearing much more often in the news than before?

Do you remember the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami that claimed more than 200,000 people? Remember hurricane Katrina that claimed more than 2,000 lives? These are the better documented horror stories. The less well documented global-warming related stories are often dismissively written off as ethnic conflicts in a region (Africa) where supposedly little else can be expected.

CATASTROPHIC ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS CAUSED BY GLOBAL WARMING

1. Larsen B Ice Shelf: In 2002, a 500 billion ton chunk of ice that was 220m thick and covering a surface area of 3,250 sq km disintegrated in 35 days! What was especially alarming was that the experts expected this ice shelf to still be around for the next 100 years even after factoring in current global warming trends.

Yet more alarming still is that there’re two other MUCH, MUCH BIGGER ice masses that are exhibiting the same global warming related disintegration characteristics!

These endangered ice masses are Greenland and the West Antarctic Ice Shelf which was previously thought to be stable. Since these ice masses are land based (unlike the Larsen B Ice Shelf) if either one of them goes they could raise sea levels by 20ft apiece!

If both of them disintegrate around the same time, sea levels could rise by 40ft! Catastrophic does not adequately describe the ensuing destruction.

More than 66% of the world’s largest cities would be devastated if even just one of these ice masses disintegrated. Though many of the affected low-elevation costal areas are located in Asia, New York, Florida, San Francisco and The Netherlands are also on the list!

Perhaps this disturbing data may explain the belated, albeit grudging acknowledgement by the Bush II administration that global warming is not a myth after all and that it won’t just affect the poorer regions of the world. As things stand, experts are predicting that with current unmodified global warming trends Greenland may collapse as soon as 2050.

2. Lake Chad: Lake Chad used to be the 6th largest lake in the world but due to global warming has shrunk to 1/20th of its former size. In fact Chad the country for which it is named after is now more than 60 miles from the water’s edge!

3. New Ice Age: The northern hemisphere of the world is located above the equator and constitutes most of the world’s land mass as well as almost 90% of the world population.

Though current expert reports on global warming imply that the northern hemisphere will initially actually benefit from the temperature increase (unlike the southern hemisphere where unprecedented drought and starvation is predicted by 2020) what is little mentioned is how global warming could usher in a new Ice Age!

Some paradox, huh? Warming leading to freezing! Here’s a simplified explanation of how that comes about:

The Gulf Stream current is one of several currents that occur in the Atlantic Ocean. The particular importance of the Gulf Stream Current and its northern extension (the North Atlantic Drift which flows towards Europe) is that their warm-water flow heats up the surrounding air which in turn ensures that the temperature of the northern hemispheres does not dip precipitously.

These two currents are saline (salt) based. If a huge mass of fresh water (such as a melting body of ice the size of Greenland) was to dilute these currents, in effect that would shut down the Gulf Stream Current!

Once the Gulf Stream Current shuts down temperatures are going to drop precariously in the United States, Europe and other nations located in the northern hemisphere. When that happens those regions will deep-freeze into another Ice Age!

GLOBAL WARMING AND THE CO2 WARS

The following figures illustrate the CO2 emissions from the various regions around the globe:

USA: 30.3%

Europe: 27.7%

Russia: 13.7%

South East Asia: 12.2%

Japan: 3.7%

South America/Central America: 3.8%

Middle East: 2.6%

Africa: 2.5%

Australia: 1.1%

These figures amply illustrate how Western Europe and the United States are by far largely responsible for the effects of global warming we are seeing today.

Contrastingly the regions least responsible are the ones that will bear the brunt of those effects (initially at any rate, until such time that the process progresses to an ice age then the situation will reverse).

However, with the two mega economies of China and India expanding rapidly (each boasting a population in excess of 1 billion) soon their greenhouse gas emissions may surpass those of the U.S.

A series of meetings held in Washington in early 2007 had American legislators demanding that developing nations be held to the same greenhouse-gas-emission accountability as the developed nations! Not unexpectedly there were worldwide outcries and accusations of shameless hypocrisy leveled at the United States.

With the not unreasonable contention that they have the right to develop and advance in the same manner that both Europe and America have enjoyed over the past forty years these two looming economical giants are not about to be cowed by Washington.

Furthermore considering the suspicious manner with which the U.S. justified its invasion of Iraq, few these days are inclined to believe a word that Washington says.

Compounding this climate of distrust and suspicion are the many questionable prerogatives the U.S. claims. These include:

1. Not subscribing to the Kyoto Protocol (Treaty on Global Warming)

2. Seeking the right to pre-emptive strikes (Bush II)

3. Demanding to be exempted from The Geneva Convention (Bush II)

4. Not a participant of the World Court

5. Biggest contributor to global warming but doing the least to rectify the situation.

In a world where America demands exclusive rights to pre-emptive strikes, perhaps then it is not too far fetched to understand if India and China harbor a degree of paranoia that the U.S. may one day set its targets on them.

After all for a country that so conveniently and magically connected two totally unrelated events to one another as an excuse to pursue its ultimate goal (U.S. invasion of Iraq after 911), it is not unconceivable that the U.S. could one day claim that the greenhouse gas emissions from the Asian giants are threatening the very existence of its coastal cities and hence amount to an act of war!

For their part the Asian giants already suspiciously view Washington’s demands concerning greenhouse gases as a thinly veiled attempt to restrict their economical development.

That said, China and India are hardly Iraq! These are two countries which both boast formidable nuclear arsenals that are quite capable of reaching the U.S. Besides if the U.S. were to take any drastic action it is unlikely that the slumbering Russian bear would continue dozing for much longer.

World wars have erupted over much less and in the heated climate of today it only takes one more little spark to set everything off!

Global Warming effects are seen on our planet more and more and this topic became one of the hottest on the scene. Global warming effects are occuring, but who is to blame? Did we make this ourselves or is the planet itself going through the natural cycle of renewing.

Global warming research has become a very big business throughout the world. Each year billions of dollars are spent studying climate change. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), now has an annual budget that has reached more than $136 million. The Bush Administration has spent more than thirty billion dollars on federal programs involved in global warming in the last six years. In total, global warming proponents are estimated to have been funded by more than fifty billion dollars during the last decade.

This huge money stream is flowing directly into the pockets of the advocates of man-made global warming. It is a river of money that can only be shut off if it is discovered that man does not cause global warming and that climate change is really out of our control. In effect, the same people that benefit from the huge research funding pool would have to be motivated to shut it off.

The truth is that the business objective of the man-made global warming bandwagon is an increasing flow of scientific research grants and bureaucratic jobs. The worse the man- made global crisis, the better for the global warming business. In addition, the news media loves stories of fear. This makes man-made global warming a big business for television, magazines, and books as well.

Various “experts” on man-made global warming appear regularly on television to remind everyone of the upcoming global climate catastrophe in the next century. Unfortunately, its not in the interest of the media to cast doubt on man-made global warming. It is a very good business for them. The fact is that very little news media coverage is given to research that brings into doubt the so-called scientific man-made global warming consensus.

Therefore, it is not surprising that we have not heard much from the news media on the recent blockbuster report (December 2007) in the prestigious International Journal of Climatology (Royal Meteorological Society), of professors: David H. Douglass (of the University of Rochester), professor John R. Christy (of the University of Alabama), Benjamin D. Pearson and professor S. Fred Singer (of the University of Virginia). In this report the scientists found: “that observed patterns of temperature changes over the last 30 years disagree with what greenhouse models predict and can better be explained by natural factors, such as solar variability”. Their conclusion was that climate change is “unstoppable” and cannot be affected or modified by controlling the emission of greenhouse gases, such as CO2, as is proposed in current legislation.

Dr. S. Fred Singer, said: “The current warming trend is simply part of a natural cycle of climate warming and cooling that has been seen in ice cores, deep-sea sediments, stalagmites, etc., and published in hundreds of papers in peer-reviewed journals. “Our research demonstrates that the ongoing rise of atmospheric CO2 has only a minor influence on climate change. We must conclude, therefore, that attempts to control CO2 emissions are ineffective and pointless — but very costly.”

The news media has also not made us aware that data (2005) from NASA’s Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide “ice caps” near Mars’ south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row. This means that both the Earth and Mars have been experiencing similar degrees of global warming. Of course, the problem for the man-made global warming crowd is that there are no humans on Mars for them to blame for that planet’s warming.

In a National Geographic story on February 2007, Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of space research at St. Petersburg’s Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the Sun. He reasons that “The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars.”

The man-made global warming industry should remind us of the tulip bulb mania in Holland in 1636. The history books tell us that in 1593 tulips were brought from Turkey and introduced to the Dutch. The novelty of the new flower made it widely sought after. After a time, the tulips contracted a non-fatal virus known as mosaic, which altered them causing different colors to appear on the petals. The color patterns came in a wide variety and increased the popularity of the flower.

The increase in popularity of the tulip led to a rise in its price. Soon everyone began to deal in tulip bulbs. It became a very big business. Eventually things became so crazy that people were selling everything they owned, including their homes and livestock, to buy tulip bulbs. At the time, the consensus expectation was that the tulip bulb would continue to grow in value forever.

In 1636, tulips were listed on the Amsterdam stock exchange which further accommodated the tulip speculators who had become the primary market for tulip bulbs. The price of a tulip bulb at the height of this mania was $76,000. In the next six weeks tulip bulbs would drop in value to less than one dollar.

Today, man-made global warming is similar to the tulip bulb mania in Holland in 1636. It is an issue that has been hyped into a huge business. The absurd consensus in Holland in 1636 was that tulips were so unique that they would continue to increase in value forever. The current global warming crowd wants us to believe that global warming is controllable and man-made. There is no conclusive evidence that global warming is man-made and all contrary evidence is dismissed and ridiculed. We are told that we must act now to save the planet or our world will be lost to a multitude of catastrophic events in the future.

The inconvenient truth of all this is that, like the Holland tulip bulb in 1636, man-made global warming hype has entered the world of the absurd. We may think the price of $76,000 for a tulip bulb in Holland was silly. However, how silly is it when compared to the global warming hype of today? Indeed in the future people will look back with humor on a decade when tens of billions of dollars were spent in an attempt to convince society that the warming of Earth was due to man and not a function of the Sun.