While still repeating a number of easily disprovable climate denial whoppers (e.g., that the earth hasn't warmed in the last 18 years, even though it has, and the usual cheap attempts to downplay the overwhelming scientific consensus), the author seemed to be striving to reposition conservative opinion to accept the reality of climate change -- this, even though he is a member of the Heartland Institute, notorious for (among other travesties) its repugnant Unabomber billboard campaign.

Others have noted the curious phrase that is now ubiquitous among Republican politicians – "I'm not a scientist" -- and like Jonathan Chait, have speculated on whether this phrase represents a kind of tactical retreat:

“I am not a scientist” makes sense as a way to resolve a tension within Republican politics. It may be a political liability for Republicans to openly associate themselves with the kook conspiracy theories popular among conservative ideologues. One solution might be for Republicans to concede that anthropogenic global warming is indeed real, but that any solution is simply too costly. That might allow Republicans to minimize their kook exposure while still hewing to the bottom line party doctrine that individuals and firms ought to be able to dump carbon into the atmosphere for free.

[kindler: "The Impending GOP Retreat on Climate: From Denial to Do-Nothing-ism" (2015/01/09) on DailyKos]

Ed Rogers’s piece last week on global warming is timely in a number of respects and worth reading to see how the Republicans, having lost their argument that global warming is not real and man-made, have shifted to a new argument: Global warming may be real, but the solutions cost too much and won’t work anyway. The new Republican argument against doing anything to combat global warming has moved from denial of its existence to despair of its mitigation. This is what passes for progress today in the Republican Party.

[Carter Eskew: "The Insiders: Republicans move from denial to despair on climate change" (2015/03/09) on WashingtonPost]
Living down to our worst expectations, the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology voted Thursday to cut deeply into NASA's budget for Earth science, in a clear swipe at the study of climate change.

The committee's markup of the NASA authorization bill for fiscal 2016 and 2017 passed on a party-line vote, Republicans in the majority. The action followed what appears to be a deliberate attempt to keep Democrats out of the loop. According to Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), the committee's ranking Democrat, her caucus "did not even know [the markup] existed before last Friday. ... After we saw the bill, we understood why."

As outlined by Marcia Smith at SpacePolicyOnline, the measure would cut NASA's Earth science budget to at most $1.45 billion in fiscal 2016, from $1.77 billion currently -- a cut of $323 million, or nearly 20%. Under some circumstances, the budget could shrink even further to $1.2 billion, a cut of nearly one-third. Compared with President Obama's request for fiscal 2016, which is $1.95 billion, the proposal would amount to a cut of at least 26%.

The budget plan perfectly reflects the House GOP's glorification of space exploration, which masks its disdain for research on climate change

[Michael Hiltzik: ""The GOP attack on climate change science takes a big step forward" (2015/05/01) on LA Times]

Is human activity contributing to climate change? Should we do anything about climate change?
Marco RubioUnclearUnclear
Ted CruzNoUnclear
Rand PaulYesYes
Jeb BushUnclearUnclear
Chris ChristieYesYes
Scott WalkerUnclearUnclear
Mike HuckabeeUnclearUnclear
Rick SantorumUnclearNo
Rick PerryUnclearUnclear
Bobby JjndalYesYes
Carly FiorinaYesUnclear
Lindsey GrahamYesYes
Ben CarsonUnclearUnclear
Sarah PalinNoNo
John KasichUnclearUnclear
Mitt RomneyYesYes
John BoehnerUnclearUnclear
Mitch McconnelUnclearUnclear
Jim InhofeNoNo

[THE GUIDE TO REPUBLICANS AND CLIMATE CHANGE (2015/02/08) on National Journal]

posted by Kumicit at 2015/05/22 08:05 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする


東京 31℃ (Update 2014/07/25)

屋外:WBGT = 0.7×湿球温度+0.2×黒球温度+0.1×乾球温度
屋内:WBGT = 0.7×湿球温度+0.3×黒球温度


[日本体育協会(1994) 熱中症予防のための運動指針より quoted by 国立環境研究所]


posted by Kumicit at 2014/07/25 23:32 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



数年前に米国の温暖化否定活動を概観した。このとき、理系スタッフのほとんど存在しない保守系シンクタンクが出版物などの形で広めている状況を見た。このような保守系シンクタンクへの資金の流れについて、社会学者Suzanne GoldenbergRobert Brulleの研究が論文掲載された。
Conservative groups may have spent up to $1bn a year on the effort to deny science and oppose action on climate change, according to the first extensive study into the anatomy of the anti-climate effort.

The anti-climate effort has been largely underwritten by conservative billionaires, often working through secretive funding networks. They have displaced corporations as the prime supporters of 91 think tanks, advocacy groups and industry associations which have worked to block action on climate change. Such financial support has hardened conservative opposition to climate policy, ultimately dooming any chances of action from Congress to cut greenhouse gas emissions that are warming the planet, the study found.


“I call it the climate-change counter movement,” said the author of the study, Drexel University sociologist Robert Brulle. “It is not just a couple of rogue individuals doing this. This is a large-scale political effort.”

Brulle's study, published on Friday in the journal Climatic Change, offers the most definitive exposure to date of the political and financial forces blocking American action on climate change.

この研究論文の著者であるDrexel Universityの社会学者Robert Brulleは「私はこれを気候変動カウンター運動と呼ぶ。これは極少数の悪党によるものではない。これは大規模な政治活動である。」Brulleの研究は金曜日にClimatic Change誌に掲載され、米国の気候変動対策を妨害する、今日の政治的及び資金的な力を明瞭にしている。
The vast majority of the 91 groups on Brulle's list ? 79% ? were registered as charitable organisations and enjoyed considerable tax breaks. Those 91 groups included trade organisations, think tanks and campaign groups. The groups collectively received more than $7bn over the eight years of Brulle's study ? or about $900m a year from 2003 to 2010. Conservative think tanks and advocacy groups occupied the core of that effort.

The funding was dispersed to top-tier conservative think tanks in Washington, such as the AEI and Heritage Foundation, which focus on a range of issues, as well as more obscure organisations such as the Atlas Economic Research Foundation and the John Locke Foundation.


資金は、AEIやHeritage Foundationのようなこの問題のフォーカスしたワシントンの一流の保守系シンクタンクから、Atlas Economic Research FounationやJohn Locke Foundationのような曖昧な団体にまで分散している。

[Suzanne Goldenberg: "Conservative groups spend up to $1bn a year to fight action on climate change" (2013/12/20) on TheGuardian]
大手のシンクタンクは複数の問題を取り上げている。また、特定メンバーだけが温暖化否定を担当していて、組織全体としては気候変動についてポジションを明示していない場合もある。このため、資金量を厳密に特定することは困難だが、Suzanne GoldenbergRobert Brulleの調査ではおおよそ年間9億ドルが、温暖化否定活動に流れている。資金を提供している人々にとっては、それだけの資金を使っても見返りが十分にあるということなのだろう。
posted by Kumicit at 2013/12/26 09:17 | Comment(2) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



PEW Researchによる気候変動についての世論調査結果が発表された。
Two-thirds of Americans (67%) say there is solid evidence that the earth has been getting warmer over the last few decades, a figure that has changed little in the past few years. While partisan differences over climate change remain substantial, Republicans face greater internal divisions over this issue than do Democrats.

[GOP Deeply Divided Over Climate Change (2013/11/01) on PEW]




The analysis in this report is based on telephone interviews conducted October 9-13, 2013 among a national sample of 1,504 adults, 18 years of age or older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia (752 respondents were interviewed on a landline telephone, and 752 were interviewed on a cell phone, including 407 who had no landline telephone). The survey was conducted by Abt SRBI. A combination of landline and cell phone random digit dial samples were used; both samples were provided by Survey Sampling International. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish. Respondents in the landline sample were selected by randomly asking for the youngest adult male or female who is now at home. Interviews in the cell sample were conducted with the person who answered the phone, if that person was an adult 18 years of age or older.

[GOP Deeply Divided Over Climate Change (2013/11/01) on PEW]

PEWの調査は2006年からと短期なので、政党支持による世論の乖離が進む過程は見えない。そのあたりは、Gallup Pollのデータを見るとわかりよい
posted by Kumicit at 2013/11/06 21:55 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする


東京 31℃

屋外:WBGT = 0.7×湿球温度+0.2×黒球温度+0.1×乾球温度
屋内:WBGT = 0.7×湿球温度+0.3×黒球温度


[日本体育協会(1994) 熱中症予防のための運動指針より quoted by 国立環境研究所]


posted by Kumicit at 2013/07/14 01:22 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする


「地球を人間より上位に置いた世界観」を批難するRick Santorum (2012年)

昨年(2012年)2月に、まだ共和党大統領候補の座をめぐって戦っていたRick Santorumも、温暖化否定について神を持ち出していた。
“We were put on this Earth as creatures of God to have dominion over the Earth, to use it wisely and steward it wisely, but for our benefit not for the Earth’s benefit,” Santorum told an audience at the Colorado School of Mines where he was a guest speaker Monday at the Colorado Energy Summit.

“We are the intelligent beings that know how to manage things and through the course of science and discovery if we can be better stewards of this environment, then we should not let the vagaries of nature destroy what we have helped create,” Santorum said to applause from the conservative crowd.



[Troy Hooper: "Santorum and Gingrich dismiss climate change, vow to dismantle the EPA" (2012/02/06) on Colorado Independent]
The former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania argued that science has been hijacked by politicians on the left, and that climate change is “an absolute travesty of scientific research that was motivated by those who, in my opinion, saw this as an opportunity to create a panic and a crisis for government to be able to step in and even more greatly control your life,” Santorum said.

“I for one never bought the hoax. I for one understand just from science that there are one hundred factors that influence the climate. To suggest that one minor factor of which man’s contribution is a minor factor in the minor factor is the determining ingredient in the sauce that affects the entire global warming and cooling is just absurd on its face.



[Troy Hooper: "Santorum and Gingrich dismiss climate change, vow to dismantle the EPA" (2012/02/06) on Colorado Independent]

Rick Santorum本人はキリスト教信仰として語っているが、米国保守思想の精髄でもある人間例外主義に基づく次の点は基本と言えば基本:
"I just said that when you have a worldview that elevates the Earth above man and says that we can't take those resources because we're going to harm the Earth;


[Leigh Ann Caldwe: "Santorum: Obama's worldview upside-down" (2012/02/19) on CBSnews]
posted by Kumicit at 2013/06/22 17:26 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする


神や聖書を掲げて温暖化否定を語る議員たち Again

テキサス州選出の共和党Joe Barton連邦下院議員が先月(2013/04)、聖書によれば人間起源の地球温暖化は起きないと、2013年4月10日のエネルギー電力小委員会で述べた
“I would point out that people like me who support hydrocarbon development don’t deny that climate is changing,” he added. “I think you can have an honest difference of opinion of what’s causing that change without automatically being either all in that’s all because of mankind or it’s all just natural. I think there’s a divergence of evidence.”
“I would point out that if you’re a believer in the Bible, one would have to say the Great Flood is an example of climate change and that certainly wasn’t because mankind had overdeveloped hydrocarbon energy.”



[Andrew Kaczynski:"Republican Congressman Cites Biblical Great Flood To Say Climate Change Isn’t Man-Made" (2013/04/10) on Buzzfeed]
ここで、十数万年の氷期と間氷期の例を出せばそれまでのことなのだが、ノアの洪水を持ち出すJoe Barton連邦下院議員。米国人の半数近くを占める若い地球の創造論支持層をターゲットにした発言というところか。

で、この元連邦下院エネルギー商業委員長であり、エネルギー政策における共和党の有力者であるJoe Bartonは2009年には、二酸化炭素排出は問題ではないと述べていた。
"CO2 is not a pollutant in any normal definition of the term," Barton said in an interview on C-SPAN.

"It's in your Coca-Cola, your Dr. Pepper and your Perrier water. It's necessary for human life," he continued. "It's odorless, colorless, tasteless, doesn't cause cancer, doesn't cause asthma."


[Chelsea Kiene: "Joe Barton Cites Great Flood To Disprove Human Role In Climate Change" (2013/04/10) on Huffibgtonpost]

聖書を持ち出して、地球温暖化を論じる連邦議員はJoe Bartonだけではない。連邦上院の最も熱心な温暖化否定論者である共和党James Inhofe連邦上院議員は、Right Wing Watch"によれば、自分の新刊本をフィーチャーしたラジオ番組で、次のように述べている。
Inhofe: Well actually the Genesis 8:22 that I use in there is that ‘as long as the earth remains there will be seed time and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night,’ my point is, God’s still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous.



Caller: Senator, do you quote any Scripture in your book?

Inhofe: Yeah, as a matter of fact I do. My favorite is Genesis 8:22 which is ‘as long as the earth remains there will be seed time and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night,’ you know, God’s still up there. There’s another piece of Scripture I’ll mention which I should’ve mentioned, no one seems to remember this, the smartest thing the activists did in trying to put their program through is try to get the evangelicals on their side, so they hired a guy named Cizik, and he had his picture in front of Vanity magazine dressed like Jesus walking on water. He has been exposed since then to be the liberal that he is. I would say that the other Scripture that I use quite frequently on this subject is Romans 1:25, ‘They give up the truth about God for a lie and they worship God’s creation instead of God, who will be praised forever.’ In other words, they are trying to say we should worship the creation. We were reminded back in Romans that this was going to happen and sure enough it’s happening.

実際に引用している。私のお気に入りはた創世記8章12節「地の続くかぎり、種蒔きも刈り入れも/寒さも暑さも、夏も冬も/昼も夜も、やむことはない。」で、ご存知のように、今も神はそこにいる。もう一つ、聖書で言及すべき部分に、言及している。誰も覚えていないようだが、活動家たちが自分たちのプログラムを押し通そうとして行ったことで、最もスマートなことは、福音主義キリスト教徒を味方につけようとしたことだ。それで、彼らはCizikという名の男を雇った。彼は水の上を歩くイエスのようなコスチュームでVanity magazineの表紙を飾った。彼はかつてリベラルだったことを明らかにされている。私はこの問題について、頻繁に引用する聖書の部分は、ローマの信徒への手紙 1章25節である「神の真理を偽りに替え、造り主の代わりに造られた物を拝んでこれに仕えたのです。造り主こそ、永遠にほめたたえられるべき方です」言い換えるなら、彼らは被造物を崇めるべきだと言ってきた。ローマの信徒への手紙えは我々に、これから起きることを思い起こさせる。そして、今まさにおきている。

[Brian Tashman:"James Inhofe Says the Bible Refutes Climate Change" (2013/03/08) on Right Wing Watch"]
温暖化否定で、ローマの信徒への手紙 1章25節を持ち出す例はほかにはない。目の付け所が違う。

何にせよ、James Inhofe連邦上院議員によれば、福音主義キリスト教徒は当然のごとく、地球温暖化を否定すべきであり、実際に地球温暖化を否定している。だからこそ、James Inhofe連邦上院議員は聖書を以て、気候変動えお語るのだろう。

あと、気候変動についての連邦下院公聴会で、聖書の関連部分を読み上げた、共和党John Shimkus連邦下院議員も有名。
posted by Kumicit at 2013/05/29 08:43 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする




posted by Kumicit at 2013/03/20 10:02 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



All tobacco products must comply

The plain packaging and new health warning requirements will apply to all tobacco products, including but not limited to cigarettes, loose leaf tobacco, cigars, waterpipe tobacco and bidis.


Supply and trading tips

To effectively manage your stock during the transition to plain packaging and the new health warnings:

Find out when your tobacco supplier can start supplying you with plain packaged tobacco products labelled with the new health warnings.

Think carefully about how much non-plain packaged product with the old health warnings you hold and purchase from now on. This will minimise the quantity of non-compliant stock you may have left which will be illegal to sell after 1 December 2012.

Find out from your tobacco supplier what will happen to any non-compliant stock you have after 1 December 2012 – for example, can you return that stock to your supplier?

[Tobacco plain packaging (YourHealth.gov.au)]
[Competition and Consumer (Tobacco) Information Standard 20111]
BIG tobacco company Philip Morris has been forced to release documents relating to a stoush with the federal government, after taking its fight against the government's plain-packaging legislation to an offshore court.

Despite being defeated in the Australian High Court, the tobacco giant is continuing to pursue the government over what it claims is a breach of intellectual property rights, after the government legislated that no branding can be shown on cigarette packets.

Philip Morris Asia alleges that Australia's Tobacco Plain Packaging Act breaches the 1993 agreement between the Hong Kong government and the Australian government for the Promotion and Protection of Investments. The case is being heard in the international Permanent Court of Arbitration.

The company tried to have court submissions relating to the case suppressed, but the government has succeeded in an application to have all documents released.

In what the Attorney-General, Nicola Roxon, said was a ''very significant and somewhat unusual step'', the international court ordered that each party be allowed to publish its own documents filed in the proceedings.

As previously revealed by Fairfax Media, the government believed Philip Morris engaging in corporate restructuring as a ''trick''.

When the company launched its compensation claim through Philip Morris Asia, it argued the laws were detrimental to its investment in the company's Australian arm, which was supposed to be protected by the trade treaty. But the government said the challenge was spurious because Philip Morris Asia only acquired a stake in the Australian operation a year after the government’s plain-packaging plans was announced, in "full knowledge" of what was to come.



フィリップモリスは裁判に関連する文書公開を抑えようとしたが、豪州政府は全文書の公開の申し立てに成功した。司法長官Nicola Roxonは。国際法廷が原告被告両者に対して、法廷亭主文書の公開を許可したことは、「非常に重要かつ、異例の一歩である」と述べた。

Fairfax Mediaによって明らかにされたように、豪州政府はフィリップ・モリスが「トリック」として企業のリストラクチャリングに取り組んでいると考えている。


[Jacqueline Maley:"Tobacco giant won't quit fight on plain packaging" (2013/01/20) on Canberra Times]

posted by Kumicit at 2013/02/09 21:25 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



Wiredが選ぶ2012年の科学的最悪のひとつ、ノースカロライナ州法案SL2012-202 (HB819)だった。それは...
RALEIGH – Gov. Beverly Perdue on Wednesday declined to sign or veto a controversial bill on sea-level rise, allowing it to become law.

Instead, the Democratic governor urged the Republican-dominated legislature to reconsider its stand on the issue.

"North Carolina should not ignore science when making public policy decisions," Perdue said in a statement. "House Bill 819 will become law because it allows local governments to use their own scientific studies to define rates of sea level change. I urge the General Assembly to revisit this issue and develop an approach that gives state agencies the flexibility to take appropriate action in response to sea-level change within the next four years."

State Sen. David Rouzer, R-Johnston, one of the bill's main supporters in the Senate, said he was pleased Perdue allowed the bill to become law. But he argued that House Bill 819 doesn't ignore science, but rather requires that the state look at all available studies and data on the issue when it develops policies regarding sea-rise.

海面上昇についての州法案に対して、ノースカロライナ州Beverly Perdue知事は署名せず、拒否権も発動せず、州法として成立させた。そのかわりに、民主党知事は、共和党が過半数を占める州議会に対して、この問題について再考を求めた。

Beverly Perdue州知事は声明で「公共政策決定のおいて、ノースカロライナ州は科学を無視すべきではない。海面上昇率を定めるのに州独自の研究を使うことを州政府ができるようにするが故に、HB819が州法として成立する。私は州議会に対して、この問題を再考し、今後4年間に海面上昇に対して、州政府機関が適切に対応できるようなアプローチをつくることを強く求める」と述べた。

州法案の州上院における主たる支持者の一人である、Johnson選出共和党David Rouzer州上院議員は、Perdue州知事が州法を成立させたことを歓迎すると述べた。しかし、彼はHB819が科学を無視するものではなく、海面上昇についての政策立案に際して州政府に、この問題についての研究とデータを見ることを義務付けるものだと述べた。
Last month, at the close of this year's state legislative session, lawmakers approved a watered-down version of an earlier, more controversial proposal regarding sea rise.

The legislation prevents the state from defining rates of sea-level change for regulatory purposes before July 1, 2016. Meanwhile, the Science Panel of the Coastal Resources Commission will update a March 2010 report that recommended the state plan for as much as 39 inches of sea rise by 2100.
The bill passed the Senate 40-1. It passed the House 68-46.

An early version of the proposal would have prohibited the state from using projections of accelerated sea rise – which many scientists believe is coming because of global warming and the melting of polar ice caps – when forming coastal development policies and rules. Instead, under the earlier proposal, the state could have determined sea-level rise rates using historical data alone, which would have allowed the state only to plan for about 8 inches of rise this century.




[Patrick Gannon: "Sea-level rise bill becomes law" (2012/08/01)]
この初期バージョンのときは、Stephen Colbertがネタにした。
The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Word - Sink or Swim
Colbert Report Full EpisodesPolitical Humor & Satire BlogVideo Archive

posted by Kumicit at 2013/01/16 02:09 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



[Jeff Masters: "Comparing the 2012 drought to the Dust Bowl droughts of the 1930s" (2012/08/16) ]

The great U.S. drought of 2012 remained about the same size and intensity over the past week, said NOAA in their weekly U.S. Drought Monitor report issued Thursday, August 16. The area of the contiguous U.S. covered by drought remained constant at 62%, and the area covered by severe or greater drought also remained constant at 46%. However, the area covered by the highest level of drought--exceptional--increased by 50%, from 4% to 6%. Large expansions of exceptional drought occurred over the heart of America's grain producing areas, in Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Missouri. The new NOAA State of the Climate Drought report for July 2012 shows that the 2012 drought is 5th greatest in U.S. history, and the worst in 56 years.


The top five years for area of the contiguous U.S. covered by moderate or greater drought:

1) Jul 1934, 80%
2) Dec 1939, 60%
3) Jul 1954, 60%
4) Dec 1956, 58%
5) Jul 2012, 57%

The top five years for the area of the contiguous U.S. covered by severe or greater drought:

1) Jul 1934, 63%
2) Sep 1954, 50%
3) Dec 1956, 46%
4) Aug 1936, 43%
5) Jul 2012, 38%
既に2012年7月から、1930年代の"Dust Bowl"の再来に怯える記事が...US drought might lead to food shortages and global unrest (2012/07/25)]

Rising food prices and global unrest might ensue from this month’s worst US drought since the 1934 Dust Bowl, with 64 per cent of the country desperately hoping for rain.

Predicted to last until October, the drought is foreseen to devastate US harvests, which would significantly affect global prices on corn, wheat and soybeans, of which America is the world’s largest exporter.

Worldprices for these foods have already reached record levels, and will continue to affect developing countries the most – especially those relying on agricultural imports.

[BRYAN WALSH: "Rising Temperatures and Drought Create Fears of a New Dust Bowl" (2012/07/05)]

Whether 2012 goes down as just an off year for corn crops or a truly historic disaster will depend on the next couple of weeks. The pollination phase is imminent for corn plants in much of the country. That’s the period when ears of kernel-filled corn should be appearing on the plants. But drought and extreme heat can wither and stress corn plants , stunting their growth − or even preventing pollination altogether.そして、National Geographicも2012年9月号で"New Dust Bowl"と題した記事を掲げている。

The New Dust Bowl

Texans have endured dry days before. They’ve seen lakes vanish and rangeland wither. But the drought of 2011 was gut-kicking even by Texas standards.
1930年代のDust bowlでは250万人が砂嵐に追われて移住を余儀なくされた。というより国内難民化したとでも言うべきかもしれない。旱魃といえば、このDust Bowlと絡めて報道される。

posted by Kumicit at 2012/08/18 01:40 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



[MATTHEW L. WALD: "Court Backs E.P.A. Over Emissions Limits Intended to Reduce Global Warming" (2012/06/26) on NY Times]

WASHINGTON − A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld a finding by the Environmental Protection Agency that heat-trapping gases from industry and vehicles endanger public health, dealing a decisive blow to companies and states that had sued to block agency rules.


A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia declared that the agency was “unambiguously correct” that the Clean Air Act requires the federal government to impose limits once it has determined that emissions are causing harm.

The judges unanimously dismissed arguments from industry that the science of global warming was not well supported and that the agency had based its judgment on unreliable studies. “This is how science works,” they wrote. “The E.P.A. is not required to reprove the existence of the atom every time it approaches a scientific question.”

DC連邦控訴裁判所の3人の判事による法廷は、排出が害を引き起こしていることが判明した場合に、連邦政府に対して排出制限を課すことを義務付ける"Clean Air Act"は「明確に正しい」と判決した。裁判官たちは全員一致で、「地球温暖化の科学はよく支持されてはおらず、環境庁は信頼できない研究に基づいて判断している」という産業界の訴えを棄却した。裁判官は「このように科学は働く。環境庁は科学的問いにアプローチするときに、原子の存在を再証明する必要はない」と書いていてる。

In addition to upholding the E.P.A.’s so-called endangerment finding, the court let stand related rules setting limits on greenhouse gas emissions from cars and limiting emissions from stationary sources. Opponents had also challenged the agency’s timetable for enforcement and its rules singling out big polluters, but the court said the plaintiffs lacked the standing to do so.

Fourteen states, led by Virginia and Texas, had sued to block the rules. Fifteen states, including New York, California and Massachusetts, went to court to support the agency. Massachusetts and California were among the states that won a landmark Supreme Court decision in 2007, Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, that led to the agency’s endangerment finding. The attorney general of Virginia said he would appeal Tuesday’s ruling.


ヴァージニア州とテキサス州が率いる14の州は、法規制の差し止めを求めて訴えた。ニューヨーク州・カリフォルニア州・マサチューセッツ州など15の州が環境庁を支持するべく法廷に赴いた。マサチューセッツ州とカリフォルニア州は、「公衆の健康を危険晒しているという知見」につながった、マサチューセッツ州対環境庁(Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency)裁判で、2007年に画期的な最高裁判決を獲得している。ヴァージニア州の検事総長は、火曜日の判決を不服として上告すると述べた。


テキサス州公益事業委員会(PUC)委員長は、2012年1月1日に発効する連邦の排出規制が電力供給を崩壊させるだろうとの懸念を、金曜日に表明した。州間大気汚染規制の適用が延期されないと、「この規制はテキサス州の電力の信頼性問題と輪番停電をもたらすと確信している」と委員会の開会時に、Donna Nelson委員長は発言した。

7月初めに環境庁が公告した規制は、27州の発電所で窒素酸化物と硫黄酸化物の排出量を大幅に削減を義務付けている。環境庁は、この法規制は、有害なスモッグと煤塵汚染を浴抑制することで、生命を守り、長らえさせることができると述べている。環境庁補佐官のひとりGina McCarthyは以前の声明で、テキサス州の発電所は「テキサス州の電力供給の信頼性を損なうことなく、汚染を削減できるだろう」と述べていた。

しかし、Energy Future Holdingsの部門であり、ダラスを本拠地とする発電会社Luminantは、「法規制遵守には十分な時間がなく、環境庁に適用延期を求めている。排出対策の実装には業界標準では、数年のタイムスケールが必要であるが、この規制では半年間しかない。Luminantは東部テキサスの石炭火力を幾つか停止せざるを得ない」と述べた。

[Jack Z. Smith: "New EPA rule could lead to rolling blackouts in Texas, PUC chairwoman says" (2011/08/19) on Star Telegram]

A federal court ordered Friday that the Environmental Protection Agency's controversial cross-state air pollution rule be stayed − to the delight of Texas officials and the chagrin of environmentalists.

The rule, which sought to reduce sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from power plants in Texas and 26 other states, had been scheduled to take effect in January. Now it will await a ruling by the court on its legal merits.



[Kate Galbraith: "Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Stayed in Texas" (2011/12/30) on The Texas Tribune]

posted by Kumicit at 2012/06/29 06:21 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする


Heartland Instituteをめぐる流れ弾回避がつづく...


2012年5月3日にユナボマーを使った温暖化否定イベントののデジタル広告看板を24時間だしたHeartland InstituteはシカゴとDCのオフィスを持つ、常勤40名のシンクタンクである。このHeartlandの保険金融部門であるCenter on Finance Insurance and Real EstateのEli Lehrerの離脱表明に伴い、これまで資金提供してきた保険会社たちが、それを取りやめ始めている。

結果として、Eli Lehrer本人のみならず、Center on Finance Insurance and Real Estateを2012年5月31日に切り離すのことをHeartland Instituteiは公表した
According to Joseph Bast, president of The Heartland Institute, “We’re convinced this will be a win-win situation for Heartland as well as Eli Lehrer and his team of very skillful and devoted policy experts. We urge any individual, foundation, and corporation with an interest in insurance and related finance issues to contribute to Eli’s new organization once it is up and running. We look forward to working closely with Eli in the future.”
未確認情報として扱うべきだが、今回の広告はHeartland InstituteのBast所長判断で行われ、ボードメンバーは事後に知らされたらしい:
According to three people with knowledge of Heartland's campaign, the surprise ad comparing Unabomber Ted Kaczynski to advocates of reducing greenhouse gases prompted a sudden conference call last Friday between the board and the group's president, Joe Bast. The call occurred hours after the electronic billboard became active Thursday afternoon. The ad was canceled before rush hour Friday.

One director on the 14-member board disassociated himself from the failed campaign when asked whether he was comfortable with the message of the highway advertisement.

"Well, I just learned about it after the fact," said the board member, who asked not to be identified.

The board appears to have pushed back on Bast's failure to disclose the campaign to its directors, who oversee the libertarian organization that raised $4.6 million in 2011.

"Since the billboard thing happened, we're on the same page moving forward," said the board member. "Whatever Heartland is saying at this point, I think we're all in concert with."

Another director, Robert Lamendola, resigned last Friday because of the ad, according to sources. He's a senior adviser for Renaissance Reinsurance, which terminated its relationship with Heartland over the billboard after giving the organization $407,000 during the past two years.

Heartlandのキャンペーンを知る3名によれば、ユナボマーTed Kaczynskiと温室効果ガス削減主張者を退避するサプライズ広告により、先週金曜日(2012/05/04)にJoe Bast所長とボードメンバーの緊急電話会議が実施された。電話会議はデジタル広告が出た木曜午後の1時間後に行われた。広告は金曜のラッシュアワーの前に取り下げられた。


2011年には460万ドルの予算を監督する、ダイレクターたちは、キャンペーンを事前に知らせなかったことについてBast所長を掣肘しているようである。そのボードメンバーは「デジタル広告が出てから、我々は協調して同じ道を歩んでいる。この時点でHeartland Instituteが何を言おうとも、それは我々の意見と一致していると考えている」と述べた。

Heartlandのキャンペーンを知る3名によれば、Robert Lamendolaダイレクターは先週金曜日に、デジタル広告を理由に辞任した。彼はRenaissance Reinsuranceのシニアアドバイザである。Renaissance Reinsuranceは、過去2年に40万7000ドルをHeartland Instituteに提供していたが、今回の広告によりHeartland Instituteとの関係を絶っている。

[Evan Lehmann, E&E reporter: "For Heartland board, failed climate attack was a surprise" (2012/05/11) on EEnews]

実験だったというリリースはまったくダメージコントロールに役立っていない。謝罪しても状況が改善するとも思えず、コアな支持者の脱落を招きかねない。したふぁって当面は、Heartland Instituteとしては嵐が弱まるのを待つと思われる。

posted by Kumicit at 2012/05/13 00:00 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする


Heartland Instituteの広告看板への反応は続く...

温暖化否定シンクタンクHeartland Instituteの広告看板キャンペーンへの反応の続き。

メインストリーム気象学に懐疑的な気候学者Anthony Wattsは流れ弾回避中...
Anthony Watts, a meteorologist and a vocal skeptic of mainstream climate science, called the billboard “unproductive,” akin to a “food fight.”

“I think Heartland is suffering battle fatigue,” said Watts, who runs a popular climate-skeptic Web site and who considers himself an ally of Heartland. “When you’re suffering battle fatigue, sometimes you make mistakes.”

メインストリーム気象学に懐疑的な気候学者Anthony Wattsは、看板について「非生産的」で「パイ投げみたいなもの」だと評した。

気候変動懐疑サイトを運営し、Heartlandの同盟者を自認するAnthony Wattsは「Heartlandは戦い疲れていると思う。戦い疲れると、誤りを時には犯す」と述べた。

[Brian Vastag,: "Group pulls plug on billboard linking global warming believers to terrorists" (2012/05/04) on Washington Post]
同様に、温暖化否定論者であるチェコのVáclav Klaus大統領は、2012/05/21のHeartland Instituteが開催する温暖化否定コンファレンスのキーノートセッションで講演するが...
Klaus's spokesman told the Guardian: "President Klaus is principally against non-serious, aggressive and provocative billboard campaigns of the kind the Heartland Institute used recently." Asked if Klaus would now be pulling out, his spokesman said: "Mr president will attend this conference."


[Leo Hickman:"Czech president condemns 'aggressive' Heartland Institute adverts" (2012/05/10) on Guardian]

一方、保険会社USAA (United Services Automobile Association)も寄付を中止を表明:
Andrew, USAA had been a supporter of the Finance, Insurance and Real Estate Center for Heartland because it afforded us the opportunity for open dialogue and debate on important issues that have a direct impact on our business and our members. In light recent personnel departures at Heartland, we decided to end our support for the organization. - Raul

USAAはHeartland InstituteのFinance, Insurance and Real Estate Centerのサポーターだった。これは我々の事業及び我々の会員に直接影響する重要な問題についてオープンな対話と議論を行う機会を確保できるという理由による。要員のHeartlandからの離脱に鑑みて、我々はHeartlandへのサポートの終了を決定した。

USAA/Facebook via Forecast the Fact]

Heartland Instituteは騒ぎが起きる前は....
1. Who appears on the billboards?

The billboard series features Ted Kaczynski, the infamous Unabomber; Charles Manson, a mass murderer; and Fidel Castro, a tyrant. Other global warming alarmists who may appear on future billboards include Osama bin Laden and James J. Lee.

広告看板シリーズは悪名高きユナボマーTed Kaczynskiや大量殺人犯Charles Mansonや独裁者Fidel Castroを取り上げる。他に温暖化警告者として、Osama bin LadenやJames J. Leeを取り上げていく。

[Do You Still Believe in Global Warming? (2012/05/03) by Heatland Institut]
と述べていて、Ted Kaczynski広告看板について注目を集めて成功だと言っているものの、Heartland Instituteは次の広告看板を出していない。どうも"後釣り"だったようだ。

追記 2012/05/11

Two speakers have withdrawn from the conference. Donna Laframboise, who recently authored a book critiquing the work of the U.N. International Panel on Climate Change, withdrew from that conference. On her blog, nofrakkingconsensus.org, she said her reputation had been “harmed,” adding, “Suddenly, we were all publicly linked to an organization that thinks it’s OK to equate people concerned about climate change with psychopaths.”

Lakely confirms that economist Ross McKitrick has now also withdrawn. In a letter sent to Heartland on Friday, he said, “You cannot simultaneously say that you want to promote a debate while equating the other side to terrorists and mass murderers.”

コンファレンスの2名の講演者が取り下げた。UNIPCCの成果を批判した本を書いたDonna Laframboiseはコンファレンスの講演を取り下げた。彼女は自分のブログnofrakkingconsensus.orgで、評判が傷つき、「我々は、気候変動を懸念する人とサイコパスを同一視してもよいと考える団体と、突然、結び付けられてしまった」と書いた。

LakelyはエコノミストRoss McKitrickの取り下げを確認した。金曜日(2012/05/04)にHeartland Instituteに送られた書簡で「議論を推進したいと言うことと、相手側をテロリストや大量殺人犯と同一視することは同時にはできない」と書いた。

[Dean Kuipers: "Unabomber billboard continues to hurt Heartland Institute"(2012/05/09) on LA Times]
But on Friday, Microsoft distanced itself from Heartland with a statement on its blog that read, in part, “the Heartland Institute’s position on climate change is diametrically opposed to Microsoft’s position. And we completely disagree with the group’s inflammatory and distasteful advertising campaign.”

しかし、金曜日(2012/05/04)に、MicrosoftはHeartlandから距離を取り、次のような声明をブログに出した「Heartland Instituteの気候変動に対する立場は、まったくMicrosoftの立場とは反対である。煽動的かつ不快な広告キャンペーンにまったく同意できない」

[Dean Kuipers: "Unabomber billboard continues to hurt Heartland Institute"(2012/05/09) on LA Times]

posted by Kumicit at 2012/05/11 01:21 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



Huffington Postの2012年3月30日付の報道によれば、温暖化否定シンクタンクHeartland Instituteへささやかながら寄付をしてきたGeneral Motorsが寄付を取りやめる。
After getting called out by an environmental group, General Motors has pulled support from the Heartland Institute, a Chicago-based nonprofit well-known for attacking the science behind global warming and climate change.

The automaker told the Heartland Institute last week that it won't be making further donations, spokesman Greg Martin said. At a speech earlier this month, GM CEO Dan Akerson said his company is running its business under the assumption that climate change is real.

環境団体からの問題提起がなされた後に、General Motorsは、シカゴを本拠地とする、地球温暖化および気候変動についての科学を攻撃することで有名な非営利団体Heartland Instituteへの寄付を取りやめた。

「General MotorsはHeartland Instutiteに対して、先週、寄付を今後行わないと通告した」と、スポークスマンGreg Martinは述べた。これより前の、今月のスピーチで、GMのCEOであるDan Akersonは「我が社は、気候変動が事実であるとの仮定のもとで事業を行っている」と述べていた。


Internal documents leaked in February showed that the General Motors Foundation -- which the automaker runs separately from its business -- donated to the institute $15,000 in 2010 and again in 2011, with another $15,000 expected to be gifted this year.

Heartland, which identifies itself as a free-market think tank, has questioned the ideas on global warming through its newsletters, web site and associated scientists. Last year, the tagline for its annual conference on the subject was "Global Warming: Was It Ever Really a Crisis?"

Joseph Bast, president of The Heartland Institute, said GM had been a Heartland supporter for 20 years. "We regret the loss of their support, particularly since it was prompted by false claims contained in a fake memo circulated by disgraced climate scientist Peter Gleick," he said in a statement.

2月に流出したHeartland Instituteの内部資料は、GMが自動車製造業とは独立に運営しているGeneral Motors Foundationが、2010年と2011年さらに2012年に1万5000ドルずつ寄付していることが示されていた。

Heartland Instituteは自らを自由市場シンクタンクと位置づけ、ニュースレターやウェブサイトや関連する科学者たちと気候変動について懐疑を示してきた。昨年の年次会議のキャッチフレーズは "地球温暖化:これまで実際にあった危機?"だった。

Heartland InstituteのJoseph Bast所長は「GMは20年来のHeartland Instituteの支援者だった。我々は支援が失われたことを残念に思う。特に、不祥事な気候科学者Peter Gleickによって広められた、フェイクなメモに記載された誤った主張によるものであることに。」と声明で述べた。

[Sharon Silke Carty: "General Motors Decides Climate Change Is Real, Pulls Support From Heartland Institute" (2012/03/30) on Huffington Post]
Huffington Postによれば、自動車会社からのHeartlandへの寄付はGM以外に、Ford及びChryslerからもあったが、既に取りやめになっている。

なお、内部資料流出とは、desmogblogの執筆者にHeartland Instituteのボードミーティングと資料と思われるドキュメントが匿名の人物から提供され、ただちに公開した件のこと。これに対して、Heartland Instituteはひとつはフェイクでは他はボードミーティングで使用されたか不明だが盗まれたものであると表明。記述内容は特に新発見なものはなく、既に知られていたことみで、事態に影響はない。ただ、EconomistGuardianなども報道するニュースになり、寄付していることがわかったMicrosoftは「温暖化否定論なHeartlandへの資金提供は、実際には非営利法人への無償ライセンス供与」であり、資金そのものではないと表明するなど、騒ぎはそれなりに拡大していた。

また、これまでにも、Exxonmobilが温暖化否定のDr. Willie Soon支援を取りやめるなど、米国企業の温暖化否定論からの撤収が起きている。米国の世論に大きな動きが見られないが、経済界は方向を変えているもよう。
posted by Kumicit at 2012/04/01 14:22 | Comment(1) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



RightwingWatchSteve Benen (MSNBC)などによれば、連邦議会における温暖化否定論の代表的主張者たる共和党James Inhofe連邦上院議員が、温暖化否定論本"he Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future"の出版に関して、Voice of Christian Youth Americaのラジオ番組"Crosstalk with Vic Eliason"に登場(2012/03/07)して、創世記を引用して温暖化否定を語った。
Eliason: Senator, we’re going to talk about your book for a minute, you state in your book which by the way is called The Greatest Hoax, you state in your book that one of your favorite Bible verses, Genesis 8:22, ‘while the earth remaineth seed time and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease,’ what is the significance of these verses to this issue?

上院議員、我々は、あなたの本について少し話します。あなたの本"The Greatest Hoax"で、お気に入りの聖書の一節のひとつとして、創世記8章22節「地の続くかぎり、種蒔きも刈り入れも/寒さも暑さも、夏も冬も/昼も夜も、やむことはない。」を挙げています。これは、この問題について、どのような意味を持っていますか?

Inhofe: Well actually the Genesis 8:22 that I use in there is that ‘as long as the earth remains there will be seed time and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night,’ my point is, God’s still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous.



Caller: Senator, do you quote any Scripture in your book?


Inhofe: Yeah, as a matter of fact I do. My favorite is Genesis 8:22 which is ‘as long as the earth remains there will be seed time and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night,’ you know, God’s still up there. There’s another piece of Scripture I’ll mention which I should’ve mentioned, no one seems to remember this, the smartest thing the activists did in trying to put their program through is try to get the evangelicals on their side, so they hired a guy named Cizik, and he had his picture in front of Vanity magazine dressed like Jesus walking on water. He has been exposed since then to be the liberal that he is. I would say that the other Scripture that I use quite frequently on this subject is Romans 1:25, ‘They give up the truth about God for a lie and they worship God’s creation instead of God, who will be praised forever.’ In other words, they are trying to say we should worship the creation. We were reminded back in Romans that this was going to happen and sure enough it’s happening.

もちろん、実際、引用しています。私のお気に入りは創世記8章22節は地の続くかぎり、種蒔きも刈り入れも/寒さも暑さも、夏も冬も/昼も夜も、やむことはない。」です。ご存知のように、神は今も、そこにいるのです。もうひとつ私は言及すべき聖書の一節を引用していまう。誰も、このことを覚えていないようですが、活動家が自分の計画を広めようとして行う最もスマートな方法は、福音主義を味方につけることです。なので彼らはCizikという名前の人物を雇って、水の上を歩くイエスのような衣装をつけて、Vanity magzineの表紙を飾りました。彼はそれによって、自分がリベラルであることを、あらわにしました。この問題に関して、私がよく引用する聖書の一節は、ローマの信徒への手紙1章25節「神の真理を偽りに替え、造り主の代わりに造られた物を拝んでこれに仕えたのです。造り主こそ、永遠にほめたたえられるべき方です」です。言い換えるなら、これは、神の創造行為を崇拝すべきと言っています。これは起きようとしていたし、十分に起きていることだということを、ローマの信徒への手紙は我々に思い出させてくれます。

[Brian Tashman: "James Inhofe Says the Bible Refutes Climate Change" (2012/03/08) on RightingWatch]

これまでにも、共和党John Shimkus連邦下院議員が公聴会で創世記8章22節を読み上げて、地球温暖化は起きないという信念を表明したことがある。しかし、James Inhofe連邦上院議員は聖書を掲げて温暖化否定を語るようなことはしてこなかった。それが、ここで創世記8章22節を掲げたのは、福音主義キリスト教徒たちの票も確保したいというところか?
posted by Kumicit at 2012/03/10 09:52 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする


ExxonMobil, Willie Soon, Rockefeller

[ExxonMobil: safety & environment -- Managing climate change risks (via Jamie Vernon)]

Our strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is focused on increasing energy efficiency in the short term, implementing proven emission-reducing technologies in the near and medium term, and developing breakthrough, game-changing technologies for the long term. Technological innovation will play a central role in our ability to increase supply, improve efficiency, and reduce emissions. Approximately 90 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions generated by petroleum products are released when customers use our products, and the remaining 10 percent are generated by industry operations. Therefore, technology is also needed to reduce energy-related emissions by end users.


[ExxonMobil: safety & environment -- Managing long-term climate risks ]

Rising greenhouse-gas emissions pose significant risks to society and ecosystems. Since most of these emissions are energy-related, any integrated approach to meeting the world’s growing energy needs over the coming decades must incorporate strategies to address the risk of climate change. ...

これまで、ExxonMobilが温暖化否定論研究に資金提供してきたことが知られており、違和感を感じるものがある。たとえば、温暖化否定論で有名なDr. Willie Soonについて、これまで相当額の助成金を出してきた。
Documents provided to Greenpeace by the Smithsonian under the US Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) show that the Charles G Koch Foundation , a leading provider of funds for climate sceptic groups, gave Soon two grants totalling $175,000 (then roughly £102,000) in 2005/6 and again in 2010. In addition the American Petroleum insitute (API) , which represents the US petroleum and natural gas industries, gave him multiple grants between 2001 and 2007 totalling $274,000, oil company Exxon Mobil provided $335,000 between 2005 and 2010, and Soon received other grants from coal and oil industry sources including the Mobil Foundation, the Texaco Foundation and the Electric Power Research Institute.

US Freedom of Information Act(米国情報自由法)に基づいて、GreenpeaceへSmithsonianから提供された文書によれば、温暖化懐疑論者への主要な資金提供者であるCharles G Koch FoundationはSoonに対して、2回2005/6年と2010年に合計17万5000ドルの助成金を出していた。さらに、米国の石油および天然ガス業界を代表するAmerican Petroleum insituteは2001年と2007年に合計27万4000ドルを、石油会社Exxon Mobilは2005〜2010年に33万5000ドルを提供していた。SoonはこのほかにMobil FoundationとTexaco FoundationとElectric Power Research Instituteなどからも助成金を受けていた。

[John Vidal: "Climate sceptic Willie Soon received $1m from oil companies, papers show" (2011/06/28) on Guardian]

FunderGrant Description from sourceGrant Year(s)Grant AmountSource
Electric Power Research Institute1994-1999??Soon published papers
American Petroleum Institute1994-1997??Soon published papers
Mobil Foundation1995-1997??Soon published papers
Texaco Foundation1996??Soon published papers
American Petroleum InstituteSun's impact on climate over the last 1000 years2001, 2002$58,380Smithsonian FOIA
American Petroleum Institute1000 years of solar variability2003$60,053Smithsonian FOIA
American Petroleum InstituteThe 11-22 year climate responses2004, 2005$50,178Smithsonian FOIA
ExxonMobil Foundationlisted by Exxon as a grant to SAO2005$105,000ExxonMobil Worldwide Giving Report 2005
Charles G. Koch FoundationKoch/Mobile Charitable foundation2005, 2006$110,000Smithsonian FOIA
American Petroleum InstituteUnderstanding Arctic Climate Change2005, 2006$50,000Smithsonian FOIA
ExxonMobil FoundationListed by Exxon as "project support" to SAO.2006$105,000ExxonMobil Worldwide Giving Report 2005
Southern CompanyUnderstanding Arctic Climate Change2006, 2007$110,000Smithsonian FOIA
American Petroleum InstituteThe solar influence of arctic climate change2006, 2007$55,000Smithsonian FOIA
ExxonMobil FoundationExxon-Arctic climate change2007, 2008$55,000Smithsonian FOIA/Exxon Giving Report
ExxonMobil FoundationExxon-soon solar variability2008-2010$70,106Smithsonian FOIA/Exxon Giving Report
Free to ChooseThe sun's influence on climate change2008$19,383Smithsonian FOIA
Southern CompanySolar variability and Climate Change signals from temperature2008, 2009$120,000Smithsonian FOIA
Charles G. Koch FoundationUnderstanding solar variability and climate change2010$65,000Smithsonian FOIA

[CASE STUDY: Dr. Willie Soon, a Career Fueled by Big Oil and Coal on Geenpeace]
Geenpeaceだけだと怪しい気もするが、Reutersによれば、Dr. Soonはこれを認めている。
Soon agreed he had received funding from all of the groups and companies, but denied any group would have influenced his studies. "I have never been motivated by financial reward in any of my scientific research," he said.


[US climate skeptic Soon funded by oil, coal firms (2011/06/28) by Reuters]

で、その後、昨年はDr. Willie Soonは研究資金を手にできていない。
According to the documents, Exxon provided $55,000 for Soon to study Arctic climate change in 2007 and 2008, and another $76,106 for research into solar variability between 2008 and 2010.

Exxon spokesman Alan Jeffers said this week the company did not fund Soon last year, and that it funds hundreds of organisations to do research on climate and the environment.

Southern gave Soon $120,000 starting in 2008 to study the Sun's relation to climate change, according to the FIA documents. Spokeswoman Stephanie Kirijan said the company has spent about $500m on funding environmental research and development ,and that it did not fund Soon last year.

公開された文書によれば、ExxonMobilはSoonに対して、北極の気候変動について2007年と2008年に5万5000ドル、2008〜2010年に太陽変動について7万6106ドルの研究助成金を提供した。ExxonMobilの広報担当Alan Jefferは今週「当社は昨年はSoonには資金提供しておらず、数百の気候・環境研究機関に資金援助した」と述べた。

FIA文書によれば、Southern Companyは2008年からの、太陽と気候変動の関係研究に対して12万ドルを提供した。Southern Companyの広報担当Stephanie Kirijanは「当社は環境研究・開発に5億ドルを費やしてきたが、昨年はSoonには資金提供していない」と述べた。

[John Vidal: "Climate sceptic Willie Soon received $1m from oil companies, papers show" (2011/06/28) on Guardian]

The move comes ahead of the firm's annual meeting today in Dallas, at which prominent shareholders including the Rockefeller family will urge ExxonMobil to take the problem of climate change more seriously. Green campaigners accuse the company of funding a "climate denial industry" over the last decade, with $23m (£11.5m) handed over to groups that play down the risks of burning fossil fuels.

The ExxonMobil report says: "In 2008 we will discontinue contributions to several public policy research groups whose position on climate change could divert attention from the important discussion on how the world will secure the energy required for economic growth in an environmentally responsible manner."

Nine groups have reportedly lost the company's support, including the George C Marshall Institute, the Washington DC-based think tank that asserts there is no scientific consensus on climate change, and that changes in the sun, not greenhouse gases, could be responsible for rising temperatures.



「気候変動には科学的コンセンサスがなく、温室効果ガスではなく、太陽活動が気候変動の原因である」と主張してきたWashington DCに本拠地を置くシンクタンクGeorge C Marshall Instituteなど9つのグループがExxonMobilの研究助成金を失ったと伝えられている。

{David Adam: "Exxon to cut funding to climate change denial groups" (2008/05/28) on Guardian]
ExxonMobilはGeorge C Marshall Instituteなどへの資金提供を2008年にやめ、個人Dr Willie Soonへの資金提供も2010年で終了。

posted by Kumicit at 2012/02/10 07:17 | Comment(1) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



What caused this year's unprecedented Arctic ozone hole?

Earth's ozone holes are due to the presence of human-emitted CFC gases in the stratosphere. The ozone destruction process is greatly accelerated when the atmosphere is cold enough to make clouds in the stratosphere. These polar stratospheric clouds (PSCs) act like ozone destruction factories, by providing convenient surfaces for the reactions that destroy ozone to occur. PSCs only form in the 24-hour darkness of unusually cold winters near the poles; the atmosphere is too warm elsewhere to support PSCs. Stratospheric temperatures are warmer in the Arctic than the Antarctic, so PSCs and ozone destruction in the Arctic has, in the past, been much less than in the Antarctic. In order to get temperatures cold enough to allow formation of PSCs, a strong vortex of swirling winds around the pole needs to develop. Such a "polar vortex" isolates the cold air near the pole, keeping it from mixing with warmer air from the mid-latitudes. A strong polar vortex in winter and spring is common in the Antarctic, but less common in the Arctic, since there are more land masses that tend to cause large-scale disruptions to the winds of the polar vortex, allowing warm air from the south to mix northwards. However, as the authors of the Nature study wrote, "The persistence of a strong, cold vortex from December through to the end of March was unprecedented. In February - March 2011, the barrier to transport at the Arctic vortex edge was the strongest in either hemisphere in the last ~30 years. This unusual polar vortex, combined with very cold Arctic stratospheric temperatures typical of what we've seen in recent decades, led to the most favorable conditions ever observed for formation of Arctic PSCs. The reasons for this unusual vortex are unknown.

地球のオゾンホールは人間が放出したCFCガスが成層圏に存在することによって生じる。オゾンの破壊過程は成層圏が十分に寒くて、成層圏に雲が形成される場合に、大きく加速される。これらPSC(極地成層圏雲)は、オゾンを破壊する化学反応の"convnient surface"を提供することにより、オゾン破壊工場のように働く。PSC(極地成層圏雲)は、極近くで非常に寒い24時間夜なときにのみ形成される。それ以外の大気圏は暖かすぎてPSC(極地成層圏雲)を維持できない。南極より北極の方が成層圏の気温は高い。そのため、北極でのPSC(極地成層圏雲)形成およびオゾン破壊はこれまで、南極よりはるかに小さかった。PSC(極地成層圏雲)が形成されるような低気温を実現するには、極をめぐるswirling windの大きな渦が必要である。そのような"polar vortex"は極近くの冷たい大気を隔離し、中緯度の暖かい大気と混合するのを防ぐ。南極に比べて、北極回りには"polar vortex"の風を大きく乱してしまうような大きな陸地があり、南からの大気の流れと混合されやすくなっている。このために、冬から春にかけての強い"polar vortex"は南極ではよくあることだが、北極ではあまり見られなかった。しかし、Nature掲載論文の著者たちは「12月から3月末にかけて強く冷たい渦が持続したのは、これまでになかった。2011年2-3月には北極の渦の端での大気混合に対する障壁は、南北極あわせて過去30年で最強のものだった。」と書いている。過去数十年に典型的にみられる北極成層圏の低気温とあわせて、この普通でない"polar votex"により、これまでに見られないPSC(極地成層圏雲)形成の好条件が整えられた。この普通でない"polar votex"の原因は不明である。

[JeffMasters: "Unprecedented Arctic ozone hole in 2011; a Florida tropical storm next week?" (2011/10/04) on Dr. Jeff Masters' WunderBlog]



posted by Kumicit at 2011/11/01 07:44 | Comment(3) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする



Conservative white males are more likely to endorse climate change denial than the rest of the American public, says a new study published in the July issue of the Journal of Global Environmental Change.

The results were based on data from 10,000 respondents in ten annual polls on environmental issues conducted by Gallup from 2001 to 2010.

The study included five indicators of climate change denial taken from Gallup's annual phone interviews throughout that 10-year period, explained researcher Riley E. Dunlap, who co-authored "Cool Dudes: The Denial Of Climate Change Among Conservative White Males In The United States" with Aaron M. McCright.

Journal of Global Environmental Changeの7月号に敬愛あれた研究によれば、保守的白人男性は、それ以外の米国人よりも温暖化否定論を支持する傾向が強い。この結果は2001〜2010年にGallupが環境問題について実施した10000名を対象とする世論調査に基づくものである。

この研究には、10年間にGallupが実施した電話世論調査の5つの温暖化否定指標が含まれていると、M. McCrightとともに"Cool Dudes: The Denial Of Climate Change Among Conservative White Males In The United States"を執筆したRiley E. Dunlapは説明する。

The climate change denial indicators that the researchers honed in on included:

1) When the effects of global warming will happen
2) Whether climate change is attributed to human activities or natural change
3) Whether they believe global warming occurs
4) How much they personally worry about climate change
5) Whether they believe in the scientific evidence on global warming, and how much they think they know about climate change

29.6 percent of conservative white males said they believed that the effects of global warming will never happen, and only 7.4 percent of all other U.S. adults agreed with that view.

The results also showed that 58.5 percent of conservative white males denied that recent temperature increases are primarily caused by human activities, compared to only 31.5 percent of all other adults.

Conservative white males (65.1 percent) were also more than twice as likely to say the media exaggerated the seriousness of climate change compared to other adults (29.9 percent). Furthermore, 39.1 percent of conservative white males said they did not worry at all about global warming, compared to 14.4 percent of all other adults.


  1. 地球温暖化の影響がいつ出るのか
  2. 気候変動は人間の活動によるものか、自然変動か
  3. 地球温暖化が起きているのか
  4. どれくらい気候変動を懸念しているのか
  5. 地球温暖化の科学的証拠を信じているのか、どれくらい自分は気候変動を知っていると思っているのか





[Tara Kelly: "Conservative White Males More Likely To Deny Climate Change, Report Finds" (2011/07/28) on HuffingtonPost]
Dunlap and McCright reference Yale University's Dan Kahan, who researched the so-called "white male effect" in a study finding that white men fear various risks less than women and minorities. Kahan's theory of identity-protective cognition can be applied to Dunlap and McCright's study to show that accepting climate change risk is really no different than fearing other risks, Dunlap said. And because conservative white men tend to benefit from the current socio-economic system and subscribe to a hierarchical and individualistic worldview, recognizing climate change would be against the current status quo, explained Dunlap.

Dunlap and McCrightはYale Universityのan Kahanのいわゆる白人男性効果について触れている。このKahanの研究は、白人男性が女性やマイノリティよりも、様々なリスクを恐れない傾向にあることを見出している。アイデンティティ防衛的認知についてのKahanの理論は、Dunlap and McCrightの研究に適用できて、気候変動のリスクを認めることは、他のリスクを恐れるのと何ら違いがないことを示していると、Dunlapは言う。そいて、保守的白人男性は現在の社会経済システムから利益を得ていて、階層的かつ個人主義的世界観を採用しているので、気候変動を認めることは、その状態に反することになっているとDunlapは説明する。
posted by Kumicit at 2011/08/05 07:55 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする


エアロゾルによって温暖化が抑制されている by NOAA


原論文はこれ=>RK. Kaufmann et al:"Reconciling anthropogenic climate change with observed temperature 1998–2008", doi: 10.1073/pnas.1102467108, PNAS July 5, 2011,


==>S. Solomon et al.:The Persistently Variable “Background” Stratospheric Aerosol Layer and Global Climate Change, Science DOI:10.1126/science.1206027

The new research has focused on aerosols, the tiny solid or liquid particles that exist in the atmosphere that can affect global temperatures, such as when Mt. Pinatubo in the Philippines, erupted in 1991 causing a worldwide average decrease in temperature of 1 degree Celsius for more than a year. The cooling is not the result of the ash, notes co-author Susan Soloman, but from the sulfur dioxide that is thrust all the way up into the stratosphere, where it oxidizes and adds to the sun reflecting properties of other already existing particles.

1991年のフィリピンのピナツボ火山の噴火で全地球の気温が1年にわたり1℃低下したように、全地球の温度に影響する、待機中に存在する、小さな固体あるいは液体の粒子であるエアロゾルにフォーカスした新たな研究が行われた。共著者Susan Solomonは寒冷化が火山灰の影響ではなく、亜硫酸ガスが成層圏に昇って、そこに既に存在している粒子を参加し、太陽光を反射する属性を加えていることによるものだと書いている。

The team focused on the most recent decade because of the relative absence of massive volcanic eruptions , giving them a more clear environmental view of how much impact minor volcanic eruptions and human activities have on the amount of aerosols in the atmosphere and thus global temperatures. To find out what was going on, they used both ground based data and information from satellites such as Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observations (Calipso), to measure the amount of aerosols in the atmosphere and at what altitudes.


NOAA has released a statement outlining the results of the study, and in it Daniel, says, “stratospheric aerosol increased surprisingly rapidly in that time, almost doubling during the decade,” which forms the basis of the teams conclusions that such aerosols are responsible for the slowdown in increased temperatures that scientist around the world have been expecting due to greenhouse gas emissions.


The surprising aspect of the study is the large amount of aerosols found during a period when there weren’t any giant volcanoes going off, which leads researches to wonder if the aerosols are from the combined effects of multiple small eruptions, or human activity, such as the particles emitted from coal fired power plants, particularly in Asia, where such plants have multiplied in recent years. One thing the research is not able to tell us is what impact aerosols will likely have in the future, because of the uncertainty of their origin, which means there is no way to tell at this point if there will be more, or less of them, which means scientists can only guess if the temperature muting will continue to offset global warming from current and future carbon emissions.


[Bob Yirka:"NOAA study suggests aerosols might be inhibiting global warming" (2011/07/22) on Phys.Org]

posted by Kumicit at 2011/07/24 08:16 | Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | Sound Science | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする