Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Hurst who wrote (618153)	7/4/2011 7:25:41 PM
From: tejek	1 Recommendation Respond to of 1584438

Study of 800-year-old tree rings backs global warming The decline in recent decades of the mountain snows that feed the West's major rivers is virtually unprecedented for most of the past millennium, according to new research published today. By Craig Welch Seattle Times environment reporter This year, the Columbia River is swollen with massive runoff from mountain snowpacks, making for wild and sometimes perilous conditions for barge traffic. But new research shows that the long-term trend in the Columbia Basin and throughout the West is just the opposite: Snowpacks in most years are far below historic highs, thanks in part to climate change. They looked at the rings of thousands of ancient trees in the mountains above the most important rivers in the West. What they found may influence how water gets used from Arizona to Canada — and particularly in the Columbia River basin. Despite odd years like this one, researchers have long reported declines in the mountain snows that power Western rivers. But on Thursday a group of scientists said they now also know this: Those declines are virtually unprecedented throughout most of the last millennium. Scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and University of Washington measured tree-ring growth from forests that included 800-year-old trees. They learned that snowpack reductions in the late 20th and early 21st centuries were unlike any other period dating to at least the year 1200, according to new research published in the journal Science. The precise amount of those declines, particularly in the Cascades, has been the subject of fierce debate even within UW climate circles. But no more than half of the declines can be explained by natural shifts, the study shows. "I think the findings are pretty significant," said lead author Greg Pederson, with the USGS. "It means trees are telling the same stories as computer models and instrument records — that human greenhouse-gas emissions are contributing to the loss of snowpack." Pederson said the research suggests the runoff that fuels the Columbia, Missouri and Colorado River systems will continue to decline as global temperatures rise — even if precipitation increases. Those rivers supply water to 70 million people, and 60 percent to 80 percent originates as snowpack. The hardest hit will likely be the Columbia River system, where balmier mountain winters mean very small temperature increases can cause massive melting. That makes the snow that fuels the Northwest's signature river more susceptible to warming than the high, cold snows of the Colorado basin. Fundamental flaw The findings also highlight a fundamental flaw in how the U.S. views Western rivers, researchers said. Assumptions about how to allocate water have largely been based on early 20th century hydrology and flow patterns that may not be sustainable. "Nature allowed us to expect things that we probably shouldn't expect in the long term," said study co-author Jeremy Littell, a professor with the University of Washington's Climate Impacts Group. "We made a lot of investments and built up infrastructure based on expectations that don't appear tenable." Given all the variables that influence the pace of climate change, it's difficult to project how and when snowpack reductions may translate into significant declines in river systems. Along the Colorado, for example, the Bureau of Reclamation and the seven states that rely on its water are in the middle of a multiyear study to answer that very question. In fact, the nine authors of Thursday's paper were motivated in part by the need for research that could help water managers plan better. Samples tell story Every April since the Dust Bowl days in the 1930s, federal officials have taken snow-moisture samples in the mountains. Since some trees grow less and others grow more in high snow years, the researchers knew that by looking at tree-growth rings they could reconstruct past snowpack levels. So they sampled thousands of trees at 66 sites in key runoff areas of the West. Some were dead, and some were live. From the live trees they withdrew harmless pencil-thin core samples. They compared historic snowpack levels to temperature histories and charted the results. "For us, it had this 'Oh my God' moment,' " said co-author Lisa Graumlich, dean of UW's College of the Environment. "We hadn't appreciated — until the day Greg [Pederson] made those maps — that the last few decades were truly unusual compared to the last 800 years." Here's why: Throughout most of that time, much like this year, wet northern winters in the West typically came amid dry Southern ones, and vice versa. This year, for example, while snowpack in parts of the north are double or more above normal, the Southwest is scratch-dry and seeing record spring wildfires. Throughout history, as seen through tree-ring data, even as weather fluctuated year to year — sometimes following decades-long El Niño and La Niña patterns — this climatic seesaw almost always held. Only in the 1350s and 1400s, during two unusually warm periods, did snowpack decline throughout the West — until the late 20th century. And "the decline now is bigger, longer and more widespread," said Littell. That suggested to the researchers that temperature, far more than precipitation, is now influencing snowpack levels. Temperatures, on average, have increased throughout the West. And mountain snowpack across the landscape since at least the early 1980s — perhaps since the 1950s — has been in a declining trend, too. Even years like this one are not inconsistent with that trend, the scientists said, since weather can vary dramatically year to year. For snowpack, "This year is basically just a blip on what otherwise has been a pretty consistent long-term downward trend," Pederson said. o.seattletimes.nwsource.com

To: Don Hurst who wrote (618153)	7/5/2011 2:25:43 PM
From: tejek	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1584438

Paul Ryan’s peek behind the curtain We haven’t heard too much lately from House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.). Since becoming one of the nation’s least popular politicians, he seems to be keeping a slightly lower profile. He hasn’t disappeared entirely, however. This morning, the right-wing Wisconsinite chatted with Laura Ingraham about David Brooks’ provocative new NYT column. To briefly recap, Brooks argued that today’s Republican Party “has separated itself from normal governance” and may no longer be “fit to govern.” To prove the point, the conservative columnist pointed to the GOP’s opposition to a debt-reduction deal that includes massive spending cuts and scrapping unnecessary (and unpopular) tax subsidies. Ryan pushed back, arguing that Republicans can’t follow Brooks’ advice. “What happens if you do what he’s saying, is then you can’t lower tax rates. So it does affect marginal tax rates. In order to lower marginal tax rates, you have to take away those loopholes so you can lower those tax rates. If you want to do what we call being revenue neutral … If you take a deal like that, you’re necessarily requiring tax rates to be higher for everybody. You need lower tax rates by going after tax loopholes. If you take away the tax loopholes without lowering tax rates, then you deny Congress the ability to lower everybody’s tax rates and you keep people’s tax rates high.” Let’s take a moment to translate this. Ryan realizes that if policymakers ended these tax subsidies, it would help lower the deficit, and make it less necessary to make other cuts that would hurt working families. But debt-reduction isn’t Ryan’s principal goal; cutting tax rates is. When the Republican House Budget Committee chairman argues that we’re facing some sort of debt crisis, it’s really just a shell game — Ryan wants tax cuts. Period. Full stop. Sure, policymakers could scrap needless tax expenditures, but Ryan prefers to use those savings to pay for more tax cuts, not to pay for debt reduction. And why is that? Because the lowest American tax burden in more than a half-century is, in Paul Ryan’s mind, too “high.” Let this be the latest in a series of reminders: Republicans don’t really care about reducing the deficit or the debt. Their goal is to reduce government for ideological reasons, and they use the fiscal shortfall that they created as a thin pretense to pursue this agenda.