SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mephisto who wrote (7009)6/19/2003 11:03:46 PM
From: Mephisto  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 15516
 
White House cuts global warming from report:

Environmental study censored, say critics


Duncan Campbell in Los Angeles
Friday June 20, 2003
guardian.co.uk The Guardian

The White House has removed damaging references to global
warming from a major US government report on the environment
due to be published next week.


References tob> health threats posed by exhaust emissions that
were part of the draft report by the environmental protection
agency (EPA) have been removed, according to leaked versions
of the report.

White House officials have cut details about the sudden
increase in global warming over the past decade compared with
the past 1,000 years and inserted information from a report that
questions this conclusion and which was partly financed by the
American Petroleum Institute, according to the New York Times,
to whom the draft documents were leaked.


The removal of controversial passages has caused concern
within the EPA. At the end of April a memo circulated among
staff members and also leaked to the paper said the report "no
longer accurately represents scientific consensus on climate
change".

Another memo warned of the danger to the agency's credibility
posed by agreeing to the deletions, because the "EPA will take
responsibility and severe criticism from the science and
environmental communities for poorly representing the science".

The report was commissioned in 2001 by the agency's head,
Christie Whitman, who has just announced her resignation for
unrelated reasons. Its aim was to provide a comprehensive
overview of the major environmental issues facing the
government and the scientific community.

One of the most striking changes comes in the report's "global
issues" section.

In the draft version the introduction reads: "Climate change has
global consequences for human health and the environment."

This has been replaced with:
"The complexity of the Earth
system and the interconnections among its components make it
a scientific challenge to document change, diagnose its causes
and develop useful projections of how natural variability and
human actions may affect the global environment in the future."

Environmental groups have criticised the changes. Aaron
Rappaport of the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington
said yesterday: "It's ridiculous to leave global warming out of a
report on change in the environment."

The references had apparently been "censored out", he said.

"It shows a serious lack of transparency," Mr Rappaport added.
"I regret to say we're not surprised.

"The administration's prejudice against the scientific consensus
around global warming is well known."

Ms Whitman, who will leave office at the end of next week, has
said she is content with the deletions made by the White
House.

"The first draft, as with many first drafts, contained everything,"
she said.

"As it went through the review, there was less consensus on the
science and conclusions on climate change.

"So, rather than go out with something half-baked or not put out
the whole report, we felt it was important for us to get this out
because there is a lot of really good information that people can
use to measure our successes."

The EPA did not return a call yesterday requesting a comment
by time of going to press.

Mr Bush angered environmentalists early in his administration
by declining to endorse the Kyoto international agreement on
global warming, and subsequently expressing doubts about
whether global warming even existed.

His administration has often clashed with environmental groups.
Environmentalists have accused the government of being too
ready to listen to oil and logging interests.

The major environmental clash has centred around the Arctic
national wildlife refuge where the White House seeks to allow
drilling for oil. The issue remains stalled in the legislature.



To: Mephisto who wrote (7009)6/22/2003 12:52:22 AM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
US 'censored' green report

news.bbc.co.uk

The White House has removed
sections of a report by the US
Government's own
environmental agency to water
down references to global
warming, say senior Democrats.

The major report on the state of
the environment is due for
release from the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) next
week.


Democrat senators have accused the White House of "doctoring"
the report so that it does not challenge President George W
Bush's view that global warming is of minor environmental
importance.

The report will be released as Christine Todd Whitman steps
down as EPA chief, with a Republican closer to White House
thinking on the environment tipped to replace her.


The draft of the EPA report was submitted to the White House
earlier this year.

But the amendments demanded by the president's staff were so
extensive that the climate section "no longer accurately
represents scientific consensus on climate change", according to
an internal EPA memo quoted by the Associated Press news
agency.

Eventually, EPA officials decided
simply to remove most references
to global warming, so that the
other sections could be
published.

The agency "didn't want to hold
up the rest of the report", said
spokesman Joe Martyak.

A White House official denied that
any information was being
suppressed, saying that it was
mainly redundant or inaccurate material that had been removed.

"In the last year alone we've produced hundreds of pages on this
very subject," said James Connaughton, chairman of the White
House Council on Environmental Quality.

According to EPA officials, details changed or removed include:


Climate change "has global consequences for human
health and the environment" changed to "may have
potentially profound consequences"
Graphic showing sharp rise in global temperatures during
the 1990s replaced by a study, partly sponsored by the
American Petroleum Institute, disputing that finding
Finding that recent warming was unusual and probably due
to human activity removed, despite being included in a
report commissioned by the White House

Under attack

Christine Todd Whitman, a former Republican state governor,
played down the differences, saying "it was important for us to
get this out" and that changes had been agreed.

"The first draft, as with many first drafts, contained everything,"
she told the New York Times, adding that she was "perfectly
comfortable" with the final version.

But Democratic Senators Joe Lieberman and Bob Graham, both
presidential hopefuls for next year's election, called for action
against "those responsible for doctoring this report".

"It brings into question the ability and authority of the EPA... to
publish unbiased scientific reports," they said.


Another Republican governor, Dirk Kempthorne of Idaho, is now
being tipped to take over the EPA when Mrs Todd Whitman steps
down next week.

Mr Kempthorne received a near-zero rating from the League of
Conservation Voters when he was in the Senate from 1993-98.

He favours reducing the role of federal agencies like the EPA and
dealing with environmental issues at the local level, seeking a
"balance between pollution-free air and water and having a job
for your family".

But Roger Singer, director of the Idaho chapter of the pressure
group the Sierra Club, was unimpressed.

"His record on environmental issues is quite abysmal," he said.


E-mail this to a friend



To: Mephisto who wrote (7009)8/19/2003 12:21:43 AM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
Bush waging a war on parks, forests

boston.com

By T.A. Barron, 8/17/2003

A WAR IS RAGING. It involves lands essential to our nation, and will dramatically affect future
generations. No, I am not speaking of Iraq or Afghanistan. This war is right here: the Bush
administration's radical, all-out attack on America's wilderness and public lands.


What is at stake? These are the lands whose scenery inspired the
song "America the Beautiful." But they are much more than that.

Our national parks, national forests, wildlife refuges, and other public
lands total 623 million acres -- 14 times the size of all six New
England states, or almost six times the size of California. They
constitute a natural engine that cleans our drinking water, purifies
the air, produces medicines, provides resources, and enhances our
quality of life in countless other ways. Most important, these lands
connect Americans directly with the miracle of God's creation.

These natural treasures are also an important part of our heritage.
The idea of a national park was born in America: Yellowstone
became the world's first in 1872. However we define homeland
security, our wilderness and public lands must be at the core of
what we seek to defend.

Not for President Bush and his team, however. Fueled by zealous
anti-environmentalism and corporate special interests, they have
launched what amounts to a sustained and systematic attack on
America's public lands. Instead of honoring the public trust that
requires protecting these national assets for our children and
grandchildren, they have aggressively pushed exploitation by the
mining, timber, oil and gas, and snowmobile industries. Well aware
of the public outcry that such radical policy changes would provoke,
they have pursued this war with stealth and deception.

While Americans are looking at more visible conflicts, this ground
war advances. A few examples:


Right after the 2002 election, the Bush administration decided to
allow a significant increase in the number of snowmobiles roaring
through Yellowstone, despite overwhelming public opposition and
serious pollution. The Bush team is also trying to rip giant holes in a
policy that prohibits road building and commercial logging across
58.5 million acres of roadless lands in our national forests. Recently
Interior Secretary Gale Norton summarily removed any portion of 262
million acres from possible wilderness protection, thereby paving the
way -- literally -- for extractive industries. By renouncing all federal
authority to study or protect wilderness values in these lands, this action removed even the
possibility that future generations might ever choose to conserve them.

These are merely a few of the frontal assaults. Behind the scenes, Bush and company have
forced sweeping changes in public lands management policies, abandoning decades-old
bipartisan approaches in favor of immediate exploitation. They have encouraged Alaska, Utah, and
other states to recognize abandoned trails, burro paths, and even dry washes as public rights of
way across federal lands -- thereby opening up the possibility that trucks could lay down
pavement through national parks, wildlife refuges, and wilderness areas.

They have removed protections from America's wetlands and small waterways. They outright
revoked the longstanding Wilderness Inventory handbook, which guides land managers in
assessing appropriate uses of potential wilderness.

Aware of the radical extent of these changes, the Bush team has worked hard to hide them from
public view.
Norton's action affecting 262 million acres, for example, came after no public
hearings, open debate, or congressional oversight. It was not even announced on the Interior
Department's web site. It was simply revealed in a legal settlement with Utah and released on a
Friday night, after reporters' 5 o'clock deadlines, just after Congress had left for spring recess.

Such stealth attacks have enabled Bush and company to radically alter environmental policies
without changing the laws or risking negative public outcry. Their methods include inviting lawsuits
that could weaken protections, then settling them out of court; simply burying potentially
embarrassing information such as the files on Vice President Dick Cheney's energy commission;
and quietly dropping enforcement of key environmental policies.

And with a flair for public relations, they have cynically named new policies: The Healthy Forests
initiative aggressively promotes logging in the national forests, and the Clear Skies program is
really a major rollback of Clean Air Act protections.

As a nation, we are what we save. The value of America's public lands cannot be measured in
board feet, tons of coal, or sales of all-terrain vehicles. Once wilderness is lost, it is lost forever.
And the biggest losers will be generations of Americans yet unborn.

Bush's war on our public lands is unwise, unjustified, and unprecedented. It is tantamount to an
assault on the national treasury. But defending our public lands does more than protect valuable
physical assets: It protects our homeland security of the soul.

T. A. Barron is an author from Colorado.

© Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company.



To: Mephisto who wrote (7009)8/19/2003 12:47:42 AM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
Bush Misuses Science Data, Report Says
The New York Times
August 8, 2003

By CHRISTOPHER MARQUIS

W ASHINGTON, Aug. 7 - The Bush administration persistently
manipulates scientific data to serve its ideology and protect the interests of its
political supporters, a report by the minority staff of the House
Committee on Government Reform says.


The 40-page report, which was prepared for Representative
Henry A. Waxman, the committee's ranking Democrat, accused the administration of
compromising the scientific integrity of federal institutions
that monitor food and medicine, conduct health research, control disease and protect
the environment.

On many topics, including global warming and sex education,
the administration "has manipulated the scientific process and distorted or
suppressed scientific findings," the report said.

"The administration's political interference with science
has led to misleading statements by the president, inaccurate responses to Congress,
altered Web sites, suppressed agency reports, erroneous international
communications and the gagging of scientists," the report added.

The White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, dismissed the report.
He contended that its sponsor, Mr. Waxman, who is widely known for his
aggressive inquiry into the tobacco industry, was seeking to score political points.

"This administration looks at the facts, and reviews the best
available science based on what's right for the American people," Mr. McClellan said.
"The only one who is playing politics about science is Congressman Waxman.
His report is riddled with distortion, inaccuracies and omissions."

Some of the examples from the report's 21 subject areas
have already been reported in the media. They include the Environmental Protection
Agency's decision last year to delete a section on global warming
in its comprehensive report on the state of the environment and President Bush's
overstatement of the number of stem cell lines available for research
under controls imposed by the administration.


The report's authors say federal agencies have jeopardized
scientific integrity in many ways, including stacking scientific advisory committees with
unqualified officials or industry representatives, blocking publication
of findings that could harm corporate interests and defending controversial
decisions with misleading information.

With respect to sex education, the report said, the Bush administration
has advanced what the report described as an unproven "abstinence only"
agenda and abolished an initiative at the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention that listed scientifically validated safe-sex techniques that
included using condoms.

On agricultural pollution, the Agriculture Department has issued tight
controls on government scientists seeking to publish information that could
have an adverse impact on industry, the report said. It cited the case
of a microbiologist, James Zahn, who was denied permission to publish
findings on the dangers of antibiotic-resistant bacteria near hog farms in the Midwest.

On the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the report said that Interior
Secretary Gale A. Norton, a firm advocate of drilling for oil in the region,
misrepresented to Congress her agency's scientific opinion on how
drilling would affect the region's caribou population. She told lawmakers most of
the caribou calving occurred outside the refuge; her scientists
said the opposite was true.


nytimes.com
Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company



To: Mephisto who wrote (7009)9/5/2003 12:57:08 AM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
Global economy consuming more than earth can yield,
expert warns


Thu Sep 4, 6:11 PM ET

story.news.yahoo.com

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The hungry global economy is eating up the
earth's natural resources at a far faster rate than they can be renewed, a US
environmental expert warned.


The bleak warning was made by Lester Brown,
president and founder of the Washington-based
Earth Policy Institute, who has published his
findings in a United Nations funded book.

"We are releasing carbon dioxide into the
atmosphere faster than the earth can absorb it,
creating a greenhouse effect," Brown said.

"Our existing economic output is based in part on
cutting trees faster than they can grow, overpumping acquifers, and draining
rivers dry. On much of our cropland, soil erosion exceeds new soil
formation. We are taking fish from the ocean faster than they can
reproduce," he cautioned.

"We are creating a bubble economy, an economy whose output is artificially
inflated by drawing down the earth's natural capital," Brown wrote in his
book which was funded by the United Nation's Population Fund.

"Each year the bubble grows larger as our demands on the earth expand.
The challenge for our generation is to deflate the global economic bubble
before it bursts."

Brown explained that economic bubbles are not new, and recalled the
Internet bubble of 2000 and Japan's real estate bubble of 1989.

Unlike those bubbles, however, Brown warned that if the global economic
bubble bursts, "it will affect the entire world" with repercussions for the
whole planet.

In order to avoid this, Brown said political action must be taken immediately
to reduce water consumption to a more sustainable level.

He also called on governments to address population stability, particularly in
developing countries, as well as urging them to stabilize industrial
emissions.

In sum, "avoiding the damaging effects of higher temperatures on crop yields
means moving quickly to stabilize climate," he said adding "I suggest
cutting global carbon emissions in half by 2015."

Brown's book, "Plan B: Rescuing a Planet Under Stress and a Civilization in
Trouble," has been published by W.W. Norton in New York and London.

story.news.yahoo.com



To: Mephisto who wrote (7009)9/13/2003 1:34:43 PM
From: Mephisto  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 15516
 
Climate change threatens environment: WWF
Tue Sep 9, 7:32 AM ET

story.news.yahoo.com

DURBAN, South Africa (AFP) - A radical change in global climate
patterns is causing irreversible damage to the environment, the WWF
ecology group warned at an international conservation conference in South
Africa.

"It has become abundantly clear that climate
change is a new and major threat to protected
areas," WWF International Director General
Claude Martin said at the World Parks Congress
in the eastern port city of Durban.

"World leaders must take steps immediately to
reduce carbon dioxide emissions if the world's
protected areas are to avoid irreversible damage,"
he told reporters on the second day of the event
attended by some 2,500 environmentalists from
more than 170 countries.


Delegates at the once-a-decade conference hosted by the World
Conservation Union (IUCN) will take stock of the world's 44,000 protected
areas and set priorities to safeguard them.

A study by the WWF shows that climate change is threatening coral reefs
due to bleaching from warmer sea temperatures.

It is also causing glaciers to melt and is forcing species and communities to
migrate, which has already resulted in losses of rare species.

The phenomenom is caused by the burning of fossil fuels for energy, the
WWF has said, and accounts for over 80 percent of global warming pollution.

The atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide are currently the highest in the
past 420,000 years, according to scientific tests.

"This parks congress must recognise that climate change is going to have a
severe impact on the implication of parks management and the future of
protected areas," Martin said.

"It will be very shortsighted if we do not consider what we have to do."

The 10-day conference opened here Monday.

The fifth of its kind and the first to be held in Africa, the congress will
address a range of issues related to protected areas such as national parks,
UNESCO (news - web sites) World Heritage sites, nature reserves and
marine sanctuaries.

Previous congresses played an important role in helping governments create
new protected areas and direct more resources toward the conservation of
local biodiversity.

This year the focus will extend to communities living in the protected areas,
which cover more than 10 percent of the Earth's land surface.



To: Mephisto who wrote (7009)9/18/2003 2:52:41 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
U.N. Says 'Ozone Hole' Hits Record Size
Wed Sep 17, 1:31 PM ET
story.news.yahoo.com

By ERICA BULMAN, Associated Press Writer

GENEVA - The ozone hole over the Antarctic this year has reached
the record size of 10.8 million square miles set three years ago, the
United Nations' weather organization said
Wednesday.


Measurements over and near Antarctica
show that ozone decreased more rapidly
this year than in previous years and that the
size of the ozone hole is now as large as it
was in September 2000, the World
Meteorological Organization said.

The hole could continue to grow to its
largest size ever in the next couple of
weeks, the WMO said, but it also could
suddenly decrease.

"It's impossible to predict," said Michael Proffitt, a leading expert on the
ozone hole at WMO. "Judging from previous years it usually continues to
increase for one or two weeks at this point.

"But I don't think it would increase by that much," he added. "It would be
very surprising if it increased by 20-30 percent."

The hole, a thinner-than-normal area in the protective layer of gas high up
in the earth's atmosphere, has started forming at the end of Antarctic
winter every year since the mid-1980s. In August, when the sun starts to
rise again over Antarctica, it triggers accelerated ozone loss following
extremely cold South Pole winters when the area remains in darkness.

One cause of ozone depletion is the chlorine and bromine released by
manmade chemical compounds such as chlorofluorocarbons, which
were contained in some aerosols and refrigerants.

Reduction of the ozone layer can let harmful ultraviolet rays from the sun
reach the earth's surface. Too much UV radiation can cause skin cancer
and destroy tiny plants at the beginning of the food chain.

In recent years, the ozone hole has tended to near its largest size during
mid-September, with the maximum sometimes reached in late
September. Later, it mostly gets filled back in with ozone from the rest of
the layer.

This year's phenomenon is in stark contrast to the ozone hole last year
when it was the smallest in more than a decade after splitting in two
during late September.

"The general trend seems to be that the ozone hole is starting earlier,
lasting longer and is deeper," said Proffitt, adding that last year's smaller
and shorter-lasting phenomenon was likely an oddity.

Emission of chlorofluorocarbons have been curbed under a global
accord. As a result, measurements show they are now decreasing in the
lower atmosphere and have just peaked and stabilized in the critically
important ozone layer in the stratosphere.

Scientists predict it will take about 50 years for the ozone hole to close.

"This is the worrying part," Proffitt said. "People will stop observing the
emissions standards. Things will go back to the way they were before
we started reducing chemical emissions."

The ozone hole forms in the polar vortex, the circular wind pattern that
forms annually in the stratosphere over Antarctica, and this year the
vortex is on the scale of 2000, with an area of 13 million square miles.



To: Mephisto who wrote (7009)9/20/2003 8:20:33 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
Bush covers up climate research:
White House officials play down its own scientists'
evidence of global warming


"Both Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are former oil
executives; National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice was a
director of the oil firm Chevron, and Commerce Secretary Donald
Evans once headed an oil and gas exploration company. "


Paul Harris New York
Sunday September 21, 2003
The Observer

White House officials have undermined their own government
scientists' research into climate change to play down the impact
of global warming, an investigation by The Observer can reveal.

The disclosure will anger environment campaigners who claim
that efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions are being
sabotaged because of President George W. Bush's links to the
oil industry.

Emails and internal government documents obtained by The
Observer show that officials have sought to edit or remove
research warning that the problem is serious. They have enlisted
the help of conservative lobby groups funded by the oil industry
to attack US government scientists if they produce work seen
as accepting too readily that pollution is an issue.

Central to the revelations of double dealing is the discovery of an
email sent to Phil Cooney, chief of staff at the White House
Council on Environmental Quality, by Myron Ebell, a director of
the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). The CEI is an
ultra-conservative lobby group that has received more than $1
million in donations since 1998 from the oil giant Exxon, which
sells Esso petrol in Britain.

The email, dated 3 June 2002, reveals how White House officials
wanted the CEI's help to play down the impact of a report last
summer by the government's Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), in which the US admitted for the first time that humans
are contributing to global warming. 'Thanks for calling and asking
for our help,' Ebell tells Cooney.


The email discusses possible tactics for playing down the report
and getting rid of EPA officials, including its then head, Christine
Whitman. 'It seems to me that the folks at the EPA are the
obvious fall guys and we would only hope that the fall guy (or
gal) should be as high up as possible,' Ebell wrote in the email.
'Perhaps tomorrow we will call for Whitman to be fired,' he
added.

The CEI is suing another government climate research body that
produced evidence for global warming. The revelation of the
email's contents has prompted demands for an investigation to
see if the White House and CEI are co-ordinating the legal
attack.

'This email indicates a secret initiative by the administration to
invite and orchestrate a lawsuit against itself seeking to discredit
an official US government report on global warming dangers,'
said Richard Blumenthal, attorney general of Connecticut, who
has written to the White House asking for an inquiry.

The allegation was denied by White House officials and the CEI.
'It is absurd. We do not have a sweetheart relationship with the
White House,' said Chris Horner, a lawyer and senior fellow of
CEI.

However, environmentalists say the email fits a pattern of
collusion between the Bush administration and conservative
groups funded by the oil industry, who lobby against efforts to
control carbon dioxide emissions, the main cause of global
warming.


When Bush first came to power he withdrew the US - the world's
biggest source of greenhouse gases - from the Kyoto treaty,
which requires nations to limit their emissions.

Both Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are former oil
executives; National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice was a
director of the oil firm Chevron, and Commerce Secretary Donald
Evans once headed an oil and gas exploration company.

'It all fits together,' said Kert Davies of Greenpeace. 'It shows
that there is an effort to undermine good science. It all just
smells like the oil industry. They are doing everything to allow
the US to remain the world's biggest polluter.'


Other confidential documents obtained by The Observer detail
White House efforts to suppress research that shows the world's
climate is warming. A four-page internal EPA memo reveals that
Bush's staff insisted on major amendments to the climate
change section of an environmental survey of the US, published
last June. One alteration indicated 'that no further changes may
be made'.

The memo discusses ways of dealing with the White House
editing, and warns that the section 'no longer accurately
represents scientific consensus on climate change'.

Some of the changes include deleting a summary that stated:
'Climate change has global consequences for human health and
the environment.' Sections on the ecological effects of global
warming and its impact on human health were removed. So were
several sentences calling for further research on climate change.

A temperature record covering 1,000 years was also deleted,
prompting the EPA memo to note: 'Emphasis is given to a
recent, limited analysis [which] supports the administration's
favoured message.'

White House officials added numerous qualifying words such as
'potentially' and 'may', leading the EPA to complain: 'Uncertainty
is inserted where there is essentially none.'

The paper then analyses what the EPA should do about the
amendments and whether they should be published at all. The
options range from accepting the alterations to trying to discuss
them with the White House.

When the report was finally published, however, the EPA had
removed the entire global warming section to avoid including
information that was not scientifically credible.

Former EPA climate policy adviser Jeremy Symons said morale
at the agency had been devastated by the administration's
tactics. He painted a picture of scientists afraid to conduct
research for fear of angering their White House paymasters.
'They do good research,' he said. 'But they feel that they have a
boss who does not want them to do it. And if they do it right,
then they will get hit or their work will be buried.'

Symons left the EPA in April 2001 and now works for the
National Wildlife Federation as head of its climate change
programme. The Bush administration's attitude was clear from
the beginning, he said, and a lot of people were working to
ensure that the President did nothing to address global warming.

Additional reporting by Jason Rodrigues

observer.guardian.co.uk



To: Mephisto who wrote (7009)9/30/2003 7:32:04 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
160,000 Said Dying Yearly from Global Warming
Tue Sep 30, 1:36 PM ET



By Alister Doyle

MOSCOW (Reuters) - About 160,000 people die every year from
side-effects of global warming ranging from malaria to
malnutrition and the numbers could almost double by 2020, a group of
scientists said on Tuesday.

The study, by scientists at the World Health Organization (news - web
sites) (WHO) and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine,
said children in developing nations seemed most vulnerable.

"We estimate that climate change may already be causing in the region
of 160,000 deaths...a year," Professor Andrew Haines of the London
School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine told a climate change
conference in Moscow.

"The disease burden caused by climate change could almost double by
2020," he added, even taking account of factors like improvements in
health care. He said the estimates had not been previously published.

Most deaths would be in developing nations in Africa, Latin America and
Southeast Asia, which would be hardest hit by the spread of
malnutrition, diarrhea and malaria in the wake of warmer temperatures,
floods and droughts.

"These diseases mainly affect younger age groups, so that the total
burden of disease due to climate change appears to be borne mainly by
children in developing countries," Haines said.

Milder winters, however, might mean that people would live longer on
average in Europe or North America despite risks from heatwaves this
summer in which about 15,000 people died in France alone.

Haines said the study suggested climate change could "bring some
health benefits, such as lower cold-related mortality and greater crop
yields in temperate zones, but (that) these will be greatly outweighed by
increased rates of other diseases."

Russia is hosting a World Climate Change Conference this week to
discuss how to rein in emissions of gases like carbon dioxide from
factories and cars that scientists blame for blanketing the planet and
nudging up temperatures.

Russian President Vladimir Putin (news - web sites), who opened the
conference on Monday, suggested in jest that global warming could
benefit countries like Russia as people "would spend less money on fur
coats and other warm things."

But Putin also backed away from Russia's earlier pledge to swiftly ratify
the key Kyoto pact on curbing global warming, a plan that will collapse
without Moscow's backing.

He told 940 delegates to the conference Russia was closely studying
the issue of Kyoto. "A decision will be taken when this work is finished,"
he said, giving no timetable.

Haines said small shifts in temperatures, for instance, could extend the
range of mosquitoes that spread malaria. Water supplies could be
contaminated by floods, for instance, which could also wash away
crops.



To: Mephisto who wrote (7009)1/12/2004 4:00:44 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
Study Warns of Global Warming Extinctions

Wed Jan 7, 1:58 PM ET

story.news.yahoo.com

By RICK CALLAHAN, Associated Press Writer

Hundreds of species of land plants and animals around the globe could
vanish or be on the road to extinction over the next 50 years if global
warming continues, scientists warn.

The researchers concede that there are many uncertainties in both
climate forecasts and the computer models they used. But they said
their prediction could come to pass if industrial nations do not curtail
emissions of greenhouse gases that trap heat in the atmosphere.

"We're already seeing biological communities respond very rapidly to
climate warming," said Chris Thomas, a conservation biologist at the
University of Leeds in England, and the study's lead author.


The findings by Thomas and 18 other researchers appear in Thursday's
issue of the journal Nature.

They found that more than one-third of the 1,103 native species they
studied could disappear or approach extinction by 2050 as climate
change turns plains into deserts or alters forests.

Among the already threatened species that could go extinct are
Australia's Boyd's forest dragon, a tree-dwelling lizard, and Europe's
azure-winged magpie.

Alastair Fitter, a University of York ecologist who was not involved in the
research, said climate change could hasten the effects of deforestation
and the impact of invasive, nonnative species.

"I think this is going to be third horseman in that particular apocalypse,"
said Fitter, who has documented how global warming already is allowing
some spring flowers to bloom increasingly early in Britain.

The researchers assessed the habitat and distribution of plant and
animal species spread across six regions that included Mexico,
Australia, Brazil, South Africa and Europe.

They applied climate change models developed by a U.N. panel that
predicted Earth's warming trend will increase average global
temperatures by 2.5 degrees to 10.4 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100.

Depending on the temperature increase, the researchers found that 15
percent to 37 percent of the studied species will go extinct or be on the
road to extinction by 2050. A mid-range forecast of three possible global
warming scenarios would claim about a quarter of the species, they
found.

Earth has an estimated 14 million plant and animal species.
Conservationists estimate 12,000 are threatened with extinction,
although thousands of others are probably also on the brink.

___

On the Net: