Horno Solar

Reusable grocery bags and reusable shopping bags are now becoming very popular in society today. Though most of us don’t realize it, manufacturing bags-plastic, compostable plastic and even paper bags-contributes significantly to global warming. Greenhouse gases are the result of emissions caused by burning fossil fuels during the production of plastic and paper bags. The greenhouse effect is caused when infrared radiations from the earth’s surface are prevented from escaping into the outer space. The consequence is global warming. A very important way to reduce the use of plastic bags is through the use of reusable grocery bags and reusable shopping bags. It is through the use of these reusable grocery bags that we are able to reduce the negative effects that paper and plastic bags have on the environment. Reusable shopping bags eliminates the need for many consumers to carry their purchased items in paper or plastic bags. When consumers show that they no longer want to use paper and plastic bags, there will be less of a demand for these bag manufacturers to produce so many of them. It is through the production of these bags that the environment is affected. When these manufacturers see the lowered demand for them because consumers are using reusable shopping bags and reusable grocery bags, they will lower how many they put into production.

Paper bags have the highest global warming impact per bag compared to other types of bags. According to the US EPA, 70% more global warming gasses are emitted making a paper bag than a plastic bag, and 50 times more water pollution. They also use 4 times more raw materials, and consume 3.5 times more energy. They also contribute to global warming by destroying trees. In 1999, the American Forest and Paper Association reported that Americans used 10 billion paper shopping bags, consuming 14 million trees. The use of reusable shopping bags and reusable grocery bags not only eliminates the need for paper and plastic bags, but they will lower the number of bags being produced. It is evident that the production of these bags has a major effect on the environment and people need to make a strong effort in their consumption of these paper and plastic bags.

Reusable Grocery Bags and Reusable shopping bags are a great way to do your part in the prevention of global warming. Global warming, or climate change, shows no signs of slowing down. Average temperatures have climbed 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 degree Celsius) around the world since 1880, much of this in recent decades, according to NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. The rate of warming is increasing. When you go shopping at your nearest retail outlet, make sure to bring your reusable shopping bags. The next time you go to the supermarket, you should bring your reusable grocery bags. The 20th century’s last two decades were the hottest in 400 years and possibly the warmest for several millennia, according to a number of climate studies. And the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that 11 of the past 12 years are among the dozen warmest since 1850. The Arctic is feeling the effects the most. Average temperatures in Alaska, western Canada, and eastern Russia have risen at twice the global average, according to the multinational Arctic Climate Impact Assessment report compiled between 2000 and 2004. Arctic ice is rapidly disappearing, and the region may have its first completely ice free summer by 2040 or earlier. Polar bears and indigenous cultures are already suffering from the sea-ice loss. Glaciers and mountain snows are rapidly melting-for example, Montana’s Glacier National Park now has only 27 glaciers, versus 150 in 1910. In the Northern Hemisphere, thaws also come a week earlier in spring and freezes begin a week later. Reusable grocery bags are a great way to prevent the countless plastic bags from being manufactured, and it is partly through the production of these plastic bags that global warming is happening. Reusable Grocery Bags and reusable shopping bags are a simple and effective way people can do their part in conserving the environment. Reusable grocery bags can be purchased and used at all supermarkets, while reusable shopping bags are great for any occasion when you are out shopping. Do your part in caring about the environment and saving the planet through the use of reusable shopping bags and reusable grocery bags.

The green-house effect is the most important cause behind global warming. In fact global warming is known as the greenhouse effect. This phenomenon leads to an increase in the Earth temperature due to certain gases like CO2, nitrous oxide, and methane. These gases trap the energy from the sun and without them the heat would go back into space and Earth would be one massive iceberg. Since these gases warm the Earth, they are known as greenhouse gases.

In the last couple of decades, people have started using glass houses to grow plants in winter and these are called greenhouses. Typically, these houses will trap the heat from the sun. The glasses in the greenhouse let the light through and at the same time prevent the heat from escaping.

As a result, the greenhouse heats up to keep the plants alive in the winter. Similarly, the greenhouse gases in the Earths atmosphere work like the glass and prevent the heat from escaping.

The sunlight enters piercing through the cloud of greenhouse gases and when it reaches the Earths surface, it is absorbed by land, water, and air.

After absorption the same energy is sent back into the atmosphere. Some of it remains trapped in the atmosphere due to the greenhouse gases and this energy makes the Earth warmer. Since there has been an increase in CO2 emissions in the last couple of decades, more and more heat is being absorbed in the atmosphere. This is increasing the temperature of the Earth gradually and causing global warming.

Our success at understanding cause and effect has been outstanding in every aspect of science and engineering. Today we can build higher and bigger structures than ever before; we can travel further and faster than pretty much any time in our history, we understand more about our bodies and health than we have ever done allowing us to conquer disease and extend life spans for many. But, along with all that success, there has been a discovery that throws the whole world into uncertainty, that of global warming and the resultant climate change.

It comes as a surprise to many that the knowledge of global warming is not new.

As long ago as 1824 a scientist called Joseph Fourier discovered that the Earth’s atmosphere kept the planet warmer than would otherwise have been expected and this became know as the “greenhouse effect” The knowledge that that carbon dioxide or CO2 in shorthand, is an active gas that allows the visible (sunlight) radiation from the sun into the climate system but slows that same energy down on its way out as heat (infrared) radiation came more than 100 ago and was described in 1859 by a scientist called John Tyndall. Another called Svante Arrhenius made the first calculations of the impact of adding more CO2 from human activities (principally through the use of fossil fuels) to raise the average temperature of the earth’s surface before the end of the 19th century. Pretty much since then, scientists have been improving our knowledge and watching closely for generations now.

In recent years, scientists have recorded many activities that demonstrate that global warming is a real and continuing phenomenon such as:

Global temperature rise

Although accurate instruments measuring temperature in a wide number of areas is fairly recent, scientists have other ways to calculate past temperatures from other observations such as tree ring growth. There are three major methods for approximating global surface temperature and all three show that Earth has warmed since 1880. Most of this warming has occurred since the 1970s, with the 20 warmest years having occurred since 1981 and with all 10 of the warmest years occurring in the past 12 years.

Warming oceans

With higher surface temperatures has come warmer oceans. In the top 700 meters of the oceans a small but measurable increase in temperature has been recorded.

Melting Ice

Whether it is the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, the extent of Arctic ice cover or the size of glaciers, all of the world’s stocks of ice are melting. This and the fact that the oceans are warmer has also led to sea level increases.

Extreme Weather Events

Across the globe the number of extreme record high temperatures has been increasing and the number of record low levels has been decreasing. The frequency and intensity of storms and flooding is also increasing.

The big question facing global society is what to do about global warming and the resultant climate change. On one side, funded primarily by fossil fuel companies, is a lobby that says “don’t do anything”. Their argument is that science is “uncertain” about what the effects will be of further global warming and that the cost of switching from fossil sourced energy to clean energy would be unaffordable. Better, they say, to wait and see how we can adapt to whatever changes come along. The implication is that science doesn’t know what or when the impacts will be so don’t worry until there is clearly something that needs to be reacted to.

“Uncertain” has a special meaning when used in science and scientists seldom claim to be “certain” of anything: after all according to the most advanced thinking in physics there will be occasions when somebody could walk through a wall. What matters most is the likelihood of something happening and for that science talks about “confidence levels”. This is actually a term from the field of statistics and means the likelihood that something you’ve seen happen being caused by the thing you expect to have caused it rather than it just being a “chance” observation. Let me give you an example using coins. Pretty much everybody is comfortable with the thought that if you flip a coin, it can land as a head or a tail so the chance of a head or a tail coming up is 50/50. If you toss again, the chances are still 50/50 because each throw is independent of the last: there is no “law of averages” that says if you have just tossed 4 or 5 head in a row, the next toss must be tail: each toss has just as much chance of being either a head or tail as the last one. However it is quite unusual to toss many heads or tails in a row and how unusual it is can be calculated by probability.

Let’s say we want to know how likely it is to get ten heads in a row. Each time you toss a coin it has two possible outcomes, head or tail so if you toss a coin twice you have four possible outcomes Heads then Heads, Head then Tails, Tails then Heads, Tails then Tails. Each additional toss adds two possible outcomes to each of the possible past outcomes so three tosses gives 8 possibilities, four 16 and so on. Ten tosses gives 1024 possible outcomes of which, only 1 is ten heads in a row. In scientific terms, if you sat down and tossed a coin 1024 times they would be “confident” that at some point during that session you would get ten heads in a row.

In the case of global warming and the resultant climate change, scientist are “confident” that the future is bleak in that crop yields will be affected, more people will get sick from excessive heat and that people, buildings and bridges will be disrupted by flooding. Where the “uncertainty” sits is whether the worst effects will be being felt by 2030 or 2050: either way it is not far away.

Throughout the quest to be able to foretell the future, one thing has become apparent: what will happen in the future will largely be determined by what we do today. It is still possible to change the course of the future by the simple act of reducing the amount of carbon dioxide we put into the atmosphere. You can help bring that about by your own actions through reduced energy use by better insulating your home, using shared or naturally powered transport and reducing the amount of red meat in your diet. But individual action is not enough. You also need to tell your political representatives and the businesses that you deal with that you think this is a big issue and you want action taken on it.

We can never be certain of the future but we do understand cause and effect: it is time to cause change for the better. It is time to implement the solutions to climate change.

A trip to the beach during the summer requires the use of proper suntan lotion to prevent a very bad sunburn. In fact, a hot summer day makes us often retreat from the sun into the cover of nearby shade. However, a cold winter day will often make us long for the warmth of the sun’s direct rays.

When we plan each day, it is around the sun. The sun determines our scheduled activities in the daylight and during the dark of each night. The changing seasons are a function of the number of hours of sunlight. So, if the sun is such a factor in our lives each day, why do we not even consider the sun as a catalyst for future global climate change?

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been looking in the wrong place for the cause of global climate change. It’s global climate change projections do not include the influence of the sun. As a result, it’s computer-generated model, which predicts a one-degree Fahrenheit increase in global temperature in each decade of this century due to human-emitted carbon dioxide gas, is in need of drastic repair.

The truth is that it is becoming clearer with each passing day that global climate change is a function of the sun and not a function of an increase in man-made CO2 emissions. The fact is that global temperatures have not increased in the last ten years, since 1998, even with a significant global increase in CO2. Also, consider that the first half of this year (2008) was actually the coolest of the last five years, according to the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

So, the current trend of global temperature is becoming colder, not warmer, despite the continued increase in CO2. Of course, the reality for the United Nations is that, in all probability, the extent of their error is about to soon get much worse. Since they are looking at the wrong catalyst of global climate change, they really have no idea what is about to happen next. To more adequately predict global temperature in the next few decades, the IPCC should be looking at the activity of the sun.

]]>

Indeed, studying the sun is exactly what astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon, a researcher at the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts, has been doing for years. Dr. Soon has identified a clear link between the sun’s activity as indicated by it’s magnetic activity and temperature variations in the Arctic and Greenland over a period of time of about 130 years.

Dr. Soon chose this area for study since it has good temperature records and is an area sensitive to climate change, so that the signal from any one climatic influence should be easier to spot. He also says he can point to a physical mechanism in the circulation of the ocean linking the sun’s influence on temperature in the region.

Dr. Soon discussed the conclusions of his research work recently as follows: “Global temperature change can be attributed to slight variations in the sun’s energy output, not man-made carbon dioxide emissions.”

He continues, “When the sun is slightly brighter, meaning giving more light to Earth’s system, the temperature warms in the Arctic. With the cooling that we observed in the Arctic from the 1940s to the 1970s, guess what the sun is doing? It’s actually dimming slightly, ever so slightly. And then, guess what happened after the late 1970s? The sun brightens again.”

Meanwhile, a new research paper from the Astronomical Society of Australia also identifies the sun as the catalyst for global climate change. The paper contends that the level of activity on the Sun will significantly diminish sometime in the next decade and remain low for about 20 to 30 years. On each occasion that the Sun has done this in the past the World’s mean temperature has dropped by 1 – 2 degrees C.

Of course, all this recent research just confirms earlier findings about the sun’s role in global climate change. Consider that the sun’s influence in the long term cooling and warming of the planet was discovered by the Danish Meteorological Institute in 1991. The Institute released a study using data that went back centuries which showed that global temperatures closely tracked solar cycles.

Then, several years later, a Hoover Institution Study examined the same historical data and came to a similar conclusion. “The effects of solar activity and volcanoes are impossible to miss. Temperatures fluctuated exactly as expected, and the pattern was so clear that, statistically, the odds of the correlation existing by chance were one in 100,” according to Hoover fellow Bruce Berkowitz.

As world politicians and the United Nations continue a misguided global warming focus on man-made CO2 emissions, evidence of the sun ‘s role in global climate change continues to grow.

So, it should not be surprising that to predict global climate change in the decades ahead we should look to the sun, just like we do in preparation for each calendar day.

Have at least occasionally broke concerns drastic climate changes, that are often not distinguish summer from winter, spring than autumn days and nights? I wonder how they do not reflect our mood, action, nauseate of mental, psycho-social condition of our overall health. Taking anything on a personal level though, the personal, its own environment?

Recent findings and actions to improve the ecological situation in the world-the greenhouse effect (ironically: positive enrichment of the tourist offer), alternative energy and purity, it should at least some time to engage and worry a little laonger.

Can no automobile least one day a year, right now? Let’s try.

Remember:

If one day a week is not used vehicles, all citizens will breathe cleaner air 13%. Vehicles emit harmful gases that are distorting the health of people, but damage and facades of buildings and monuments.

Due to the recession in emissions of greenhouse gases this year, suffered a decline in world strongest in the last four decades. According to the analysis of the International Energy Agency (IEA), carbon dioxide (CO2) in the world, the most common environmentally harmful gas caused by fossil fuels, this year will fall by about 2.6%. The agency report states that there is hope that the world will use this fall to make the passage of economic growth with lower emissions of CO2. However, IEA is concerned about the possibility that this decline governments to use to justify their passivity.

“This decline in emissions and investments in fossil fuels would make sense only if the Copenhagen deals that investors will send a signal about the necessity of reducing emissions of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,” said chief economist the IEA, Fatih Birol;

Today, Eskimos enjoy the sun of 30 degrees Celsius. In eskimskoto village, north of Canada, temperatures in August have reached precisely those values.

Witness the 89 – year-old entrepreneurs Eddie, who has 40 – years ago to monitor developments in this area, melting ice, heat, etc.:

Before 40 years ice cover was 64 km away from the coast, and today only 128 km.

Real prediction: in the near future tourists will shun heated parts of Florida or Spain a peaceful Arctic without congestion, a pleasant 30 degrees and clear, cooler water in which to enjoy the beach. This is confirmed by research experts and footage Ice sat, which measures the melting of ice in the Arctic from space and shows that from 2004 – so by 2008 – MA, the ice cover has decreased by more than 60 centimeters. Every three days under water disappears one “Germany under the ice.”

The analysis of experts showed that the Arctic instead of the end of this century already 30 years will remain without ice! Will happen to the flora and fauna, still do not know. The change will only be here, but in the flow of sea and fresh water. In the North Sea ice dojdatg some new species, while others will disappear.

It is important to understand the significance that global warming has on not only our earth, but our daily lives as well. It’s also important to understand the effects of global warming that our children and grandchildren will experience in the years to come if things continue the way they are now.

First, it’s important to understand that “Global Warming” is also known as the “Greenhouse effect”. Instead of a plastic or glass shield, the earth has around it a series of atmospheric gases consisting mostly of nitrogen and oxygen molecules. The earth is about 60 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than it would be if it didn’t have those atmospheric gases surrounding it. They keep the earth warm and protected from excess UV (Ultra Violet) rays from the sun. Once warmed, their molecules then radiate a portion of this heat energy back to earth, creating more warming on the surface of our planet. It is this radiation which causes atmospheric gases to move back to earth that scientists call the “greenhouse effect”.

Much debate in the last five years about the greenhouse effect has centered on interpreting temperature numbers generated at weather stations all over the world. The data from these thermometers are averaged and plotted in attempts to determine just how fast the earth has heated up since the measurements began. There is now no doubt the world is getting warmer. The thermometers show that the world is warmer now than at any time since the measurements started. The year 1990 was the hottest year in the last century. Together with 1991, the years of 1983, 1987, 1988, and 1989, have been measured to be the warmest 6 years in the last hundred years. 1991 was the second warmest year of the past century, perhaps due to the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo during that year. The ash from the volcano in the upper atmosphere blocks some sunlight to earth, and is expected to generate a temporary two or three year cooling effect. After that time, most ash particles will have settled back to earth, and most scientists expect to see the global warming trend continue.

According to scientists, we can with “99% confidence conclude that current temperatures represent a real warming trend rather than a chance fluctuation over the 30-year period.” Most scientists agree that the planet’s temperature has risen 0.5 degrees Celsius since 1900, and will continue to increase at an increasing rate. The environment is responding to this warming. For instance, a study of mountain plants in the Alps (Europe), shows that some cold-loving plants are starting to move to higher and cooler altitudes. That is a possible response to increasing temperatures. The global effects of the greenhouse effect cannot be directly predicted simply because we do not have enough knowledge in the subject. However, we have been able to draw direct connections between certain natural phenomenon that supports the idea that something is changing.

Global warming has great effect on crops and weather conditions around the world. The northern hemisphere contains more land area than the southern hemisphere, and conversely, a lower percentage of the world’s oceans. Since oceans absorb more heat than land areas, it is not surprising that most climate models predict faster heating over the northern hemisphere than the global average. In addition, models predict faster temperature increases at higher latitudes. If global warming trends continue, high temperatures everywhere in the US may reduce US agricultural productivity.

Northern continental areas are projected to have drier summer soils, due in part to earlier snow melts in the spring, and hotter, more cloudless summers, causing extensive evaporation of ground moisture. In addition, if the inland areas of the northern hemisphere are expected to receive less moisture, then, lake and river levels will be lower. Some reports predict the level of the Great Lakes will drop between 2 and 8 feet. River flows in the western US may be very vulnerable to increase temperatures expected as result of the greenhouse effect.

There is good news in the wind for environmentalists. Wind turbine capacity has been increasing and the unit cost of power generated by wind energy is expected to drop, much of which is credited to China’s efforts.

The World Wind Energy Association forecasts that by 2020, wind turbine total installed capacity will reach an estimated 1.5 million megawatts worldwide, accounting for 20% of global electricity consumption. This will represent a substantial jump in the role of wind energy in the next decade, where it represented just 1.5% of global electricity consumption in 2008.

Where news of environmental pollution is an issue of concern in China, it is also China that is set to take the lead in the global wind energy revolution, ahead of the United Kingdom or the United States, who have long been its strongest advocates.

It’s a paradox that in the West, proponents of the green movement protest against the very infrastructure that is needed to drive sustainable energy practices. There is a ‘not in my back yard’ mentality. This paradox is not seen in China. China will not only become a global leader in wind energy, but may be an important supplier to fast growing emerging Asian economies, such as Vietnam, Thailand and Indonesia, who themselves have limited development in the wind energy technology sector.

The Chinese government’s firm commitment

The Chinese government regards the development of wind energy as a key priority. At the end of 2008, China overtook India in having the highest installed capacity of wind energy in Asia with a total 12.2GW of total installed capacity versus India’s 9.6GW.

The Chinese wind power equipment manufacturing industry has been attracting the investment from many enterprises. With market capacity of wind power equipment forecasted to reach 32 billion US dollars by 2010, investing in China is important for many foreign enterprises wishing to take advantage of the substantial and rapid build up of wind energy in China.

In addition, overseas turbine companies have made substantial investments in China, in order to comply with an earlier government stipulation requiring at least 70 percent of components to be sourced domestically for use in Chinese wind energy projects.

In order to meet the demands of the growing market, domestic production and technology of wind turbines and components also had to step up. With this accelerated development of manufacturing, China is gearing up to meet both the domestic demands as well as preparing to supply components to the international market.

Key trends in China’s wind energy industry

1. Supply shortage for wind turbines and associated components predicted

The demand for wind turbines and related components in many countries is increasing. Together, the United States, the European Union and China are targeting to have installed capacity of about 400 to 500 gigawatts by 2020.

Only a number of specialised suppliers are able to produce key parts for higher capacity wind turbines however, and demand may overwhelm some suppliers, especially for those specialising in gearboxes and bearings. In addition, other industries also use similar wind turbine components for their equipment and machinery.

As an emerging technology, wind turbine designs are still evolving. Parts made are mostly customised and non-interchangeable, making replacement suppliers hard to find. Moreover, the advanced technology required to enter the wind turbine industry is a barrier for new entrants.

Currently, most Chinese wind turbines and components for higher-megawatt products are licensed or jointly developed with overseas players, whilst local manufacturers still lack the independent capacity to build higher wattage turbines. With fewer players supplying the higher-megawatt products, there are bottlenecks affecting the supply shortage for wind turbine related equipment, particularly with the government’s emphasis on higher wattage turbines.

Price volatility for raw materials, notably steel, copper and carbon, is a critical factor in some of the wind turbine parts. Steel is used in towers, gearboxes and rotors; copper used in generators and carbon in rotor blades. Any price volatility can result in bottlenecks in the supply chain.

2. More partnerships amongst wind turbine industry players

In order for foreign players to ease their market entry and secure consistent supplies and services, partnerships in the form of mutual agreements, joint ventures or acquisitions between market players; such as wind farm developers or operators, wind turbine manufacturers and wind turbine component manufacturers, will continue. Through such ventures, local players will in turn get to secure proprietary technology.

Examples include Shanghai Electric’s joint effort with German Aerodyn, and Zhejiang Windey’s partnership with Garrad Hassan and Partners Ltd (GH) from the United Kingdom.

3. Local technological advancement

Due to market regulation in China that favours locally made products, foreign players wanting to enter China need to work with local Chinese companies. This in turn, promotes technology transfer amongst Chinese companies and builds local expertise.

An example of this is Sinovel’s joint program with Austria Windtec. Sinovel is developing a three megawatt double feedback, variable shift and constant frequency wind turbine system, the first high-tech Chinese offshore wind turbine system, which will be installed in the first offshore wind farm, the Shanghai Donghai Bridge Wind Farm.

4. China as a major supply chain centre within wind energy industry

If current trends persist, China will become an important global supplier for the wind energy market, especially in key wind turbine components and services. High local demand, China’s strategic location to supply Asian markets with parts and equipments, coupled with development of local research and development skills may encourage a future role as a global wind energy hotspot for services and equipment.

China’s increasing ability to manufacture more affordable wind power equipment might even push South East Asia’s wind energy utilization, especially for small to medium scale projects. While the Chinese government is actively promoting the production of turbines with capacities of over two megawatts, Chinese suppliers are still catching up to the technology. For now, their strength will continue to be in small to medium scale wind energy projects, which are a good fit for South East Asia markets.

5. China wind energy suppliers go global

Chinese suppliers’ interest in European companies may be of strategic geographical importance in the long term.

Chinese market leader Goldwin has acquired majority share of German Vensys in order concentrate on the development of its direct drive wind turbine technology. After the acquisition of Vensys, Goldwind also bought the subsidiary companies that produced converters and variable propeller systems for Vensys, through Vensys in Germany.

For Goldwin, this ensures a local foothold in Europe with spin-off benefits both in Germany as well as in China. It has also absorbed a number of cross-border talent with management experience in the domestic and international markets from companies such as Shenzen

Huawei, Motorola, General Electric, the bearings industry SKF, Siemens and ABB.

China has been described as the world’s factory. In wind energy, the global environment would be the benefactor of its manufacturing prowess.

In February 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated in their Fourth Assessment Report that human actions are “very likely” (i.e. with 90% or greater probability) the cause of global warming, indicated by an increase of 0.75 degrees in average global temperatures over the last 100 years. This statement is the result of very tough discussions on a worldwide scale between thousands of climate researchers whether human activity is the main cause of global warming. The results of this discussion were presented to the public in many publications, for instance in Martin Durkin´s documentary “The Great Global Warming Swindle”, presented in March 2007 at UK´s Channel 4. The main message of this production was that man-made global warming is “a lie” and “the biggest scam of modern times.” Martin Durkin and coworkers argue that the scientific consensus on climate change is the product of “a multibillion-dollar worldwide industry, created by fanatically anti-industrial environmentalists, supported by scientists peddling scare stories to chase funding and propped up by complicit politicians and the media”. The documentary showcases scientists, politicians, economists, writers, and others who are sceptical of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic (or man-made) global warming. Some of the scientists, opposing the main stream of greenhouse gas theories, simply argue that it has not yet been ascertained whether humans are the primary cause of global warming or if there are other natural variations responsible for this phenomenon like increased solar activity, cosmic rays or variations in natural climatic cycles. There is also a series of scientists questioning the temperature records used in the databases as temperature differences attributed to the greenhouse effect are reasonable small (fractions of a ºC). The so-called “urban heat island” effect leads to a local warming in more populated areas, showing slightly higher temperatures due to to increased heat generated by cities, rather than a global temperature rise. Anyhow, this argument was confuted by the IPPC, indicating that the effect of the urban heat island on the global temperature trend is no more than 0.05 °C (0.09 °F) degrees through 1990.

Other facts presented by the film were shown to be incorrect or misinterpreted. The film asserts for instance that records of atmospheric CO2 levels since 1940 show a continuing increase, but during this period, global temperature decreased until 1975, and has increased since then. Anyhow, it is well recognized that this cooling was driven mostly by aerosols (i.e. pollution) in the atmosphere. There is nothing contradictory about this cooling when all sources of radiation changes are considered. A second argument that easily can be invalidated is the impact of the so-called “solar variation theory” on global warming. According to the authors, solar activity (and involving cosmic rays as well as heat from the sun aiding cloud formation) is currently at an extremely high level and directly linked to changes in global temperature. The film argues that solar activity is far more influential on global warming than any other anthropogenic or natural activity on Earth. What the film does not mention is that solar activity has declined over the last 30 years – at the same time as the major spike in global temperature.

But there are some statements related to the influence of the oceanic mass and water vapour on climate change which are more difficult to confute. Water vapour makes up about 98% of the greenhouse gases by volume and provides something between 40 to 80 percent of the natural greenhouse effect. It probably has the largest impact on the planet’s temperature and climatic conditions, much larger than CO2. Water particles in the form of clouds act to reflect incoming solar heat, but the film argues that the effects of clouds cannot be accurately simulated by scientists attempting to predict future weather patterns and their effects on global warming. This argument probably is correct and it is well recognized that water vapor is responsible for the natural warming up of the surface temperature to approximately 30-35ºC. Anthropogenic greenhouse effect, according to the film’s argumentation, is only about 2% of the total “natural” greenhouse effect, which corresponds to a 0.6-0.7 ºC increase in temperature. This estimate is somewhat smaller compared to the results of much more sophisticated simulations (0.9 – 2.7ºC), but there is undoubtedly an anthropogenic effect of CO2 increasing the average surface temperature.

One example of the complexity of climatic simulations is the prediction of future storm events considering global warming effects. According to a recently published study, published online by research meteorologist Tom Knutson in the journal Nature Geoscience and resumed in the New York Times (May 18, 2008), global warming isn’t to blame for the recent jump in hurricanes in the Atlantic. The study predicts that by the end of the century the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic will fall by 18 percent. In the past, Knutson has raised concerns about the effects of climate change on storms. His new paper has the potential to heat up a simmering debate among meteorologists about current and future effects of global warming in the Atlantic. And Knutson is not alone with this view. Another group of experts, those who study hurricanes and who are more often skeptical about global warming, also say there is no link between global warming and hurricane frequency. They attribute the recent increase to a natural multi-decade cycle. According to the prediction, the number of hurricanes touching land in the US and its neighbors will drop by about 30 percent because of wind factors. However, the biggest storms, those with winds of more than 110 mph, would only decrease in frequency by 8 percent. The biggest decrease is forecasted for storms with winds between 39 and 73 mph (normal tropical storms), who would decrease by 27 percent.

It’s not all good news from Knutson’s study, however. His computer model also forecasts that “hurricanes and tropical storms will be wetter and fiercer. Rainfall within 30 miles of a hurricane should jump by 37 percent and wind strength should increase by about 2 percent”, Knutson’s study says.

There are already critical reactions on this new publication. MIT hurricane meteorologist Kerry Emanuel claims that the computer model used by Knutson is not adequate enough to look at storms and according to Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., Knutson’s computer model is poor at assessing tropical weather and ”fail to replicate storms with any kind of fidelity.” It also does not considering well enough the intensity, duration and size of the storm events, as not only the number of hurricanes is important to evaluate.

Positive feedback comes from NOAA hurricane meteorologist Chris Landsea , who wasn’t part of this study, praised Knutson’s work as ”very consistent with what’s being said all along.” ”I think global warming is a big concern, but when it comes to hurricanes the evidence for changes is pretty darn tiny,” Landsea said.

More Greenhouse Effect Articles

The simplest explanation is that global warming is climate change in one direction. Specifically it is where net energy in the atmospheric system has increased sufficiently for a measurable warming. More energy in the system means that in many parts of the world it gets hotter.

One way that the Earth gets hotter is due to an increase in the atmosphere of gases that result in the greenhouse effect. The brief explanation of the greenhouse effect is that the wavelength of energy arriving on the Earth’s surface through the atmosphere is shorter than that reflected back towards space – a simple law of physics. Some gases in the atmosphere let the shorter waves through but block the longer wavelengths, so the energy is bounced back down to Earth, trapped, effectively heating things up.

In the absence of the greenhouse effect mother Earth would be frigid and the planet’s surface too cold for water to be liquid. The logic of this important phenomenon is that warming will happen when the concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere increase.

And this is where the confusion comes because we have attributed the current warming trend to a specific cause – us.

But climate can also cool. This is because there can be a reduction in the net energy balance. During periods of lower atmospheric energy in the geological past, the surface if the Earth has been much cooler than the present. These periods were so cold that we called them ice ages, and there have been lots of them, some short, others long and intense.

So climate change means any change in climate conditions, warmer or colder. Global warming is a directional shift to a more energetic, hotter and more dynamic atmosphere. It is a phase of global warming that the scientific data suggest we are experiencing now.

This is the explanation of the physical phenomenon, the objective one used by the scientists.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), made up of scientists, defines the phenomenon as coming from any cause, human or natural. This carries the implication that the world might cool as readily as it might warm up – an understandable assumption given the scientific evidence and the definitions we are given by the scientists.

Politicians are less precise with their rhetoric. Their policy statements tend to confound the scientific explanation.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the forum for the politicians, defines the phenomenon as attributed solely to human causes. The implication is that the world will warm and this warming is because of human actions.

However, during the first term of the George W Bush administration, politicians, commentators and, increasingly the media, dropped the term global warming in favor of climate change.

Why? Well that depends on how cynical you want to be. And how cynical depends on whether you think that the global climate change we are experiencing is due to human action or is just part of the normal scheme of events on a dynamic Earth.

The important thing is to realize that, be it objective fact, concept or fanciful idea, climate can get warmer and it can get colder. It can get wetter or drier; more stormy or calmer; more predictable or more uncertain. And all of these are aspects of climate change that usually do have many, often interacting causes.

The politicians and their spin-doctors were clever. They dropped global warming in favor of climate change when they realized that the consensus view of global warming held the anthropogenic label. Better for them to widen the discourse, otherwise they would be forced by public pressure to try to do something about the warming, actions that would be costly and difficult to agree on. They dropped global warming for the more general and, they thought, less contentious term climate change.

So instead they began to add an adjective and began talking of dangerous climate change or catastrophic climate change… and that is another story.

Interestingly we were not fooled. Currently there are over 3x more Google searches for global warming than there are for climate change. Most of us have understood that the current change in climate is a warming one.

J. Mark Dangerfield, PhD is a scientist, consultant and educator. If you would like more ideas that will sharpen your thinking and help you feel good about the world, grab a copy of his book ‘Awkward news for Greenies and everyone else’ at http://www.createspace.com/3379619

2009 Deep Research Report on Global and China Offshore Wind Energy?was published by QYResearch Wind Energy Research Center on July 2009. It was a professional and depth research report on Global and China Offshore Wind Farm Operation. We make a detailed analysis on 12 major offshore wind energy countries including Denmark UK Sweden etc in the world. We analysis their offshore wind energy policy offshore wind farm construction and offshore wind farm operation, then we get relevant experience conclusion. We combine the current development status of China offshore wind power to study abjectly of China offshore wind energy prospects and obstacles which may encounter in the future. At the beginning of the report, we compare onshore and offshore wind energy; we make a statistic of offshore wind turbine R&D and interpret many technical problems one by one. At the second Chapter of the report, we make a statistic of all the countries in the world about their offshore wind farm installed capacity Wind turbine model and online time, we also make statistics of proposed offshore wind farms in the world. Finally, we make feasibility analysis of new offshore wind farm project, including technical and economic feasibility analysis. Objective parameters are adopted in the analysis which can be referred by offshore wind farm project investors. China is rich in offshore wind resources, by far, Development and Reform Commission of China has taken Donghai Bridge offshore wind power project as a pilot operation and get some successful experience. Though there are many technical difficulty to develop offshore wind energy, we still believe China will make a great progress in offshore wind energy projects in the future as the onshore wind energy. We estimate China Offshore Energy Development Planning programme will be launched before the end of the year, which will greatly support the development of China offshore wind energy in the policy.

In a word, it was a depth research report on Global and China Offshore Wind Farm operation. And thanks to the support and assistance from wind power experts and related enterprises during QYResearch Wind Energy team survey and interview.

Table of Contents:

Chapter One Offshore Wind Energy Overview 1

1.1 Offshore Wind Energy Overview 1

1.1.1 Offshore Wind Energy Definition 1

1.1.2 Offshore Wind Energy development 2

1.1.3 Comparison of Offshore Wind Energy and onshore wind Energy 3

1.1.4 Offshore Wind Energy Installation technologies and standards 4

1.1.5 Offshore Wind Turbine Foundation anaysis 7

1.2 Offshore Wind Energy Relevant policies 14

1.3 Offshore wind turbine 15

1.3.1 Offshore wind turbine introduction 15

1.3.2 Offshore wind turbine Design 15

1.3.3 Offshore wind turbine transportation and installation 16

1.3.4 Offshore wind turbine R & D status 17

1.4 Offshore Wind Energy Status and prospects 19

1.4.1 Offshore Wind Energy Cost analysis 19

1.4.2 Offshore Wind Energy status and prospects analysis 21

Chapter Two Global Offshore Wind Farm Distribution and Development 26

Chapter Three Global Offshore Wind Energy analysis 30

3.1 UK 30

3.1.1 UK Offshore Wind Energy Overview 30

3.1.2 UK Offshore Wind Energy Policies and Effect 34

3.1.3 UK Offshore wind power development status and prospect 35

3.1.4 UK main offshore wind farm operation analysis 36

3.2 Denmark 38

3.2.1 Denmark Offshore Wind Energy Overview 39

3.2.2 Denmark Offshore Wind Energy Policies and Effect 43

3.2.3 Denmark Offshore wind power development status and prospect 44

3.2.4 Denmark main offshore wind farm operation analysis 44

3.3 Holland 49

3.3.1 Holland Offshore Wind Energy Overview 50

3.3.2 Holland Offshore Wind Energy Policies and Effect 51

3.3.3 Holland Offshore wind power development status and prospect 52

3.3.4 Holland main offshore wind farm operation analysis 53

3.4 Germany 54

3.4.1 Germany Offshore Wind Energy Overview 54

3.4.2 Germany Offshore Wind Energy Policies and Effect 57

3.4.3 Germany Offshore wind power development status and prospect 61

3.4.4 Germany main offshore wind farm operation analysis 62

3.5 Sweden 63
3.5.1 Sweden Offshore Wind Energy Overview 63

3.5.2 Sweden Offshore Wind Energy Policies and Effect 65

3.5.3 Sweden Offshore wind power development status and prospect 67

3.5.4 Sweden main offshore wind farm operation analysis 67

3.6 Finland 70

3.6.1 Finland Offshore Wind Energy Overview 71

3.6.2 Finland Offshore Wind Energy Policies and Effect 73

3.6.3 Finland Offshore wind power development status and prospect 75

3.6.4 Finland main offshore wind farm operation analysis 76

3.7 Ireland 77

3.7.1 Ireland Offshore Wind Energy Overview 77

3.7.2 IrelandOffshore Wind Energy Policies and Effect 80

3.7.3 Ireland Offshore wind power development status and prospect 82

3.7.4 Ireland main offshore wind farm operation analysis 83

3.8 Belgium 84

3.8.1 Belgium Offshore Wind Energy Overview 84

3.8.2 Belgium Offshore Wind Energy Policies and Effect 86

3.8.3 Belgium Offshore wind power development status and prospect 87

3.8.4 Belgium main offshore wind farm operation analysis 88

3.9 Italy 92

3.9.1 Italy Offshore Wind Energy Overview 92

3.9.2 Italy Offshore Wind Energy Policies and Effect 95

3.9.3 Italy Offshore wind power development status and prospect 102

3.9.4 Italy main offshore wind farm operation analysis 103

3.10 Norway 103

3.10.1 Norway Offshore Wind Energy Overview 103

3.10.2 Norway Offshore Wind Energy Policies and Effect 109

3.10.3 Norway Offshore wind power development status and prospect 110

3.11 USA 111

3.11.1 USA Offshore Wind Energy Overview 112

3.11.2 USA Offshore Wind Energy Policies and Effect 114

3.11.3 USA Offshore wind power development status and prospect 117

3.12 Canada 122

3.12.1 Canada Offshore Wind Energy Overview 122

3.12.2 Canada Offshore Wind Energy Policies and Effect 129

3.12.3 Canada Offshore wind power development status and prospect 131

For more information kindly visit :http://www.bharatbook.com/detail.asp?id=103058&rt=Deep-Research-Report-on-Global-and-China-Offshore-Wind-Energy.html

Or

Contact us at :

Bharat Book Bureau
Tel: +91 22 27578668
Fax: +91 22 27579131
Email: info@bharatbook.com
Website: www.bharatbook.com