Archive for the ‘Climate’ Category

The mainstream media has got a very large portion of the population duped into believing that humans have caused some sort of climate crisis (global warming) and that paying new emissions taxes will somehow fix all that is wrong with the world. This “crisis” is actually the greatest scam of all time and is based on bad science. It is a classic Problem/Reaction/Solution that is being used to line the pockets of fat cat “environmentalists” and further enslave humanity. In this article I will explain why the so called “climate crisis” is fallacy and nothing to worry about, who is behind it, and why you should refuse to pay a tax on living/breathing.

In the mainstream media it appears as though the “global warming” debate is over. We are facing a great problem, our carbon dioxide emissions have caused Earth’s temperature to rise and if we don’t do something to stop it right now we will face great cataclysmic events. The polar ice caps will melt, our ocean levels will rise and displace hundreds of millions of people, species will go extinct, and humanity will be brought to its knees. The truth is that what is presented to us as scientifically proven fact in the mainstream is still hotly contested by tens of thousands of the world’s top scientists, and no real debate has even been done. Today you receive dumbfounded looks or worse if you even begin to question the validity of the idea that man made global warming exists and is caused by CO2 emissions. More likely you are ridiculed and possibly even considered to be suffering from a mental disorder when you present such a blasphemous question. Global warming has developed an almost religious, or cult-like following in the years since Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth was produced and marketed through the mainstream media and was sent to schools as part of a new curriculum to indoctrinate our youth into the new religion of “climate change”. Suddenly and without debate, a pseudo-scientific theory became fact almost over night. To this day Al Gore and his fellow fear-mongering “environmentalists” refuse any sort of debate on the subject and proclaim that it is just too urgent to waste time debating something so silly when what we need to do is focus on the solution. A solution which just happens to make Al Gore very rich. If global warming caused by man made carbon dioxide emissions is such a silly thing to debate, why don’t they just do the debate and get it over with? Why won’t Al Gore and other alarmists debate the issue? I suspect the reason they will not engage in the debate is because they are wrong, and debating it would prove them so. John Coleman, founder of The Weather Channel, along with over 30,000 other scientists are now trying to sue Al Gore for fraud. They feel that since the mainstream media will not cover both sides of the story, there is no other way to get the issue looked at seriously, so they are taking it to the courts.

It is evident that the climate on earth is indeed changing, but the climate on earth is always changing and humans have very little influence over it. A professor by the name of Nir Shaviv from the Institute of Physics at the University of Jerusalem discovered that there have been periods in earth’s history where there was up to ten times as much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as there is now, yet it had next to no impact on earth’s temperature. Professer Ian Clark of the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Ottowa is quoted saying “If we look at climate from the geological timeframe we would never suspect CO2 as a major climate driver. You can’t say that CO2 will drive climate, it certainly never did in the past”. Dr. Piers Corbyn, a weather forecaster who uses sunspots to predict weather patterns, said that CO2 does not explain any past weather patterns. Professor Patrick Michaels of the Department of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia has said that “anyone who goes around and says that carbon dioxide is responsible for most of the warming of the 20th century hasn’t looked at the basic numbers”. One main reason that some people believe CO2 causes warming is the results of ice core surveys that can measure earth temperatures over hundreds of thousands of years. In Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth it is said that for 650,000 years the ice core surveys show correlation between CO2 and temperature. “When there is more carbon dioxide, the temperature gets warmer”. While the ice core surveys certainly do show that CO2 and warming seem to go together, Al Gore and his team make an incorrect assumption when they state that it is the CO2 that causes the warming. Professor Ian Clark says that Al Gore’s team got it backwards, and that the warming actually causes the CO2. The ice core samples show that the warming leads the CO2 by about 800 years which means it could not possibly be the CO2 causing the temperature to change. Clark says that carbon dioxide is a product of temperature, not the other way around, and that completely destroys the fundamentals of the theory behind “global warming”.

If it’s not CO2 that’s behind climate change, then what is causing all this apparent warming (we are actually in a cooling period, more on that later) that is melting the polar ice caps and raising sea levels? I know this might sound crazy so I’m just going to throw this idea out there for you to chew on for a bit… Could it possibly be the sun? When Dr. Sami Solanki, director of the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Germany analyzed sunspot cycles and compared them to temperatures on earth, he found it stunningly obvious that when there are more solar flares, also known as sunspots, the temperature goes up to reflect the increase in solar activity. It’s not only more heat from the sun that causes warming, cosmic rays interacting with water vapour create clouds which effect the temperature of earth. When there is strong solar radiation (more sunspots), fewer solar ray particles get through to the earth, resulting in fewer clouds. When there are fewer clouds, more solar heat is able to get through. When studying cosmic ray and temperature records going back up to six million years, you will find that when there is less solar radiation there are more cloud-forming cosmic rays, and temperatures go down. When solar radiation increases you will find that the temperature goes up, every single time. I have included a graph on my blog which shows the relationship between cosmic-rays and cloud cover, and another graph showing the relationship between sunspots and global temperature. Anyone with half a brain should be able to see that the sun is obviously the driving factor when it comes to the temperature on earth.

Often we are told that our planet is warmer now than ever before in recorded history. What they forget to mention is that “recorded history” means somewhere between 1860 and 1914. Our planet has been through many cycles, some lasting tens or hundreds of thousands of years, so are records from only 150 years ago really all that meaningful? Research by a study team at Harvard University showed that we have had much higher temperatures in the last thousand years, and we are not at an extreme at either end of the spectrum. Between the 9th and 14th centuries the temperatures were much warmer than today and in the 15th century there was the beginning of the “Little Ice Age” during which many rivers and waterways iced over and people had to adapt to the cooler temperatures. We are currently not even in a warm period when compared to the last 60 years or so we are actually in a cooling phase. Below is a graph which shows the current cooling trend. Recent news reports show that 2008 was the coldest year in the last century, with many countries reporting record amounts of snow in places that don’t normally get any. You might find it funny to know that The International Organization for Global Warming had to postpone last years conference due to an unexpected blizzard and record breaking cold weather. These climate changes are natural, ever-present, and are nothing to be afraid of.

Even if carbon dioxide was causing warming of our earth, carbon taxes would not be a solution to the problem. Paying carbon taxes to fight carbon dioxide emissions would be about as effective as trying to fix a car that won’t start by changing the rear wheel. Carbon taxes are a sick trick being played on the public by a group of greedy scam artists. Paying a tax makes the environment better? Since when? Even if that tax money went to pay people to plant trees or invest in renewable energy research and development (which it doesn’t) it would not likely make a noticeable or substantial difference to the betterment of our environment or our ability to sustain a non-changing climate. But since CO2 is not behind climate change at all, there is absolutely no reason that anybody should pay taxes on carbon emissions. If such carbon tax legislation ever does pass, I hope that everyone will stand together in protest of them and refuse to pay such ludicrous fees.

Many will accuse people who have done research into the global warming scam to be anti-environment, encouraging pollution, supporting big oil, or a plethora of other things. I personally have been accused of “enjoying toxic air pollution and supporting the scourge of cancer” after speaking out about the truth behind the whole man made climate change scam. For some reason, which I suspect might be television and mainstream media mind programming, people make a connection that links people who are skeptical of man made global warming (“climate change deniers”) to encouraging pollution. To make this perfectly clear, there is no such connection. CO2 isn’t causing temperature changes but that doesn’t mean you should run your car more often or quit recycling. I am in full support of exploring new clean renewable energy sources and better waste management and disposal.

Author: Mitch T
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Provided by: Digital Camera Information

Introduction

Before the Global Financial Crisis came along, Global Warming was the major issue that monopolized media attention. However, the issue has not entirely disappeared and it won’t be long before Climate Change returns to be the main focus for Governments and media alike.

The vast majority of the scientific community is resolute in their view that global average surface temperatures have increased due to the effect of higher levels of gasses such as carbon dioxide, being trapped in the atmosphere. Furthermore, the scientific consensus is that the excess levels of carbon dioxide have been caused by human activity and due to the long life of ‘greenhouse gasses’, further warming is inevitable.

Climate Change will impact on the Disability sector in a number of ways. Firstly, organizations involved in the Disability sector will be required to formulate adaptation strategies to minimize the impacts of further warming on their clients. In particular, disability organizations in Australia will find themselves having to deal with;

• Increases in heat related sickness and deaths from more frequent heat-waves

• Sickness and illness from deteriorating air and water quality

• The potential spread of tropical disease as temperatures rise

Secondly, the disability sector will be expected to adopt and embrace mitigation strategies in order to play their part in reducing emissions along with other business sectors. And thirdly, the call for further funding to fight global warming will create competition to disability organizations in attracting corporate funding.

Global Warming – Fact or Fiction?

According to Professor Ross Garnaut, the scientific community is now almost unanimous in its assertion that rising global average temperatures and related climate change issues are a direct result of human activity (The Garnaut Climate Change Review). In particular, the build-up of carbon dioxide (CO2) caused by the burning of fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas, has resulted in rising global temperatures, since the commencement of industrialization. Scientific records show that the increase in global average temperatures coincides with an increase in CO2 levels over the same period.

The increase in CO2 together with other dangerous emissions has resulted in a thickening of the earth’s atmosphere which in turn has prevented less heat radiation from escaping and subsequently created an increase in air temperatures, similar to the effect of a greenhouse or glasshouse. According to information contained in the Draft Garnaut Report (Garnaut 2008, p 112) global average temperatures have increased by 0.76 since 1850. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 20 per cent of “greenhouse gasses” remain in the atmosphere for over 100 years (IPCC 2007 p824). As a result, the IPCC predict that global average temperatures will continue to increase over the next century by a further two to five degrees. (IPCC 2007, p 12). Whether you agree with these dire predictions or not, the Global Warming issue is here to stay and will impact on the disability sector on a number of levels.

Implications for the Disability Sector

The expected increase in the aforementioned health related issues arising from the continued onslaught of climate change is likely to impact on public and privately funded organizations involved in the care of the disabled. The majority of disability organizations already have their resources stretched due to chronic staff shortages, long waiting lists and limited budgets. Increases in health related issues from heat stress, dehydration, tropical diseases, salmonella and respiratory ailments, to name a few, will put further pressure on disability organizations. As a result, Disability Organizations will need to include climate change adaptation strategies as part of their planning for the future. These adaptation strategies should include:

• Education – Disability organizations have a responsibility to raise awareness of the potential health impacts of climate change amongst their clients and families, in order to minimize the risk of injury or disease.

• Staff skills – Disability organizations also have a duty to advise and educate their staff, not only on the general impact of global warming but also in the specialist treatment of heat related illness and tropical diseases such as dengue fever which to date has been relatively rare, particularly in the southern states of Australia.

• Workforce planning – in future, Disability organizations will need to change the way they organize their workplace planning. Not only will the skills mix need to be able to deal with climate change related health issues but rosters and annual leave schedules will also have to be cognizant of additional activity during more frequent heat-waves in summer.

Mitigation Strategies for Disability Organizations

Although Disability organizations require adaptation strategies to help them prepare for the impacts of rising temperatures, more frequent heat waves etc they also have a duty as good corporate citizens to adopt mitigation strategies against climate change. Potential mitigation strategies include:

• Reduce Carbon Footprint – Many disability organizations are large operations and will be expected to minimize their environmental footprint. This includes reducing vehicle emissions, minimizing energy use, re-cycling, reducing paper etc. and look to embrace “green” initiatives such as renewable energy and carbon offsetting.

• Supply Chain review – Disability institutions can also take a leadership stance by encouraging all stages of their supply change (i.e. suppliers and clients) to embrace climate mitigation strategies wherever possible.

• Buildings – Disability organizations should take a leadership role when building new premises or when funding specialized community housing projects by ensuring that these structures meet high level environmental building codes.

In some cases, failure to adopt green practices may jeopardize corporate funding or the awarding of contracts to disability enterprises. On the other hand, by adopting environmental practices, disability organizations may improve their brand reputation, increase staff engagement and could lower operational costs if energy efficiency programs are employed.

Competition for Funds

Climate Change also poses a threat to the Disability Sector in the competition for raising funds from corporate sources. With climate change increasingly capturing the hearts and minds of the media and public, corporate fundraising activities are now more likely to be directed to environmental advocacy non-profit organizations. However, rather than sitting back and allowing the green movement to dominate the fundraising landscape, disability organizations should look for opportunities to play in the “green” space. This was the approach taken by Minda, a disability organization located in the Adelaide beach side suburb of Brighton.

Minda established Envirocare, a disability enterprise that is made up of 20 supported employees who remove rubbish on a daily basis from nearby beaches and help conserve the local environment. Envirocare are contracted by the City of Holdfast Bay and provide garden maintenance at Minda’s Brighton campus. Envirocare also secured a sponsorship deal with Savings & Loans, a large national credit union who openly admit that they were primarily drawn to the partnership due to the environmental involvement. This is a good example of a disability organization taking the opportunity to raise revenue and generate sponsorship funds whilst at the same time playing their part to help save the planet.

Conclusion

The impacts of man-made climate change are wide and varied. Due to the long lifespan of greenhouse gasses, additional warming is certain to occur and health impacts including dehydration in extreme heat, the spread of infectious diseases and injury from extreme weather events will increase. As a result, the climate change cause is here to stay. As a result, Disability organizations need to not only be prepared to deal with the potential health impacts of climate change on their clients but also need to show leadership by adopting “green” practices in order to minimize their own emissions. Disability organizations should also look for opportunities to generate funds by employing environmental initiatives.

Author: Tony Innes
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Provided by: Electric Pressure Cooker

Concerns about dangerous climate change and large biodiversity loss are visible throughout the world: unprecedented rates of temperature increases and species extinctions are a reality. In 1999 Dr. Peter Raven, president of the International Botanical Congress, published a paper in which he states that “current extinction rate is now approaching 1,000 times the background rate and may climb to 10,000 times the background rate during the next century, if present trends continue. At this rate, one-third to two-thirds of all species of plants, animals, and other organisms would be lost during the second half of the 21st century, a loss that would easily equal those of past extinctions”. He then outlined seven “Points to Slow the Extinction of Plants”, including financial and capacity building instruments to help developing countries protect 80% of the world’s biodiversity they host. As far as climate change is concerned, the responsibility of developed countries is high in providing the most threatened regions in the world with good instruments to cope with this challenge (or at least examples of them to implement autonomously).

Climate change plays a significant role in this human-induced mass extinction because it is increasing the already large biodiversity losses caused by habitat destruction and fragmentation, water and air pollution, introduction of invasive species. Marine ecosystems will be affected by an increase in sea temperature, but also by ocean acidification, because of the higher concentration of dissolved carbon dioxide (carbonic acid): in fact this reduces the shell formation ability in many organisms. Polar (and mountain) ecosystems are particularly vulnerable to climate change, with effects such as thawing permafrost, decreased snow cover, losses from ice sheets and changes in ocean temperatures. Large impacts on Arctic biodiversity are already evident, pictures of polar bears wandering lost on small icebergs being a scary and sad symbol of the era we live in (even former U.S. President Bush, at the end of his mandate, recalled this image to show his fellow citizens he cared about climate change …)

In this rapidly changing environment it is therefore extremely important that conservation plans include adaption measures for ecosystems accordingly to the predicted regional climate patterns (but models need still to be improved a lot at this scale): dynamic approaches are needed to set good options for future ecosystems and landscapes. It will be necessary to facilitate the movement of species to new geographical locations, as they follow the shifting habitats.

The public concern is growing: in Africa last 28 February young people organized a march from impoverished urban areas to the summit of Mount Kilimanjaro to raise awareness on climate change, together with the Kilimanjaro Initiative and the UN’s global UNite to Combat Climate Change campaign. It seems though that the global attention on climate change doesn’t fully consider implications for biodiversity yet: while the negotiations and speeches on climate issues are very popular (and the Nobel Prize was awarded to the entire IPCC together with Al Gore in 2007) the meetings and decisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity (http://www.cbd.int/) don’t raise comparable interest. Is it because the anthropocentrism is (still) the prevailing philosophy and animals and plants are mainly seen by people as beautiful “supporting actors” on the planet we live on? Right when we are losing control of the global situation it is probably time to reflect on our role of dominant species and acknowledge the fundamental contribution of other organisms to our livelihoods, despite many of us live in the so called Technosphere.

Policies to protect the climate avoiding irreversible effects on the ecosystems need to be strongly interconnected with conservation strategies: preserving natural areas while helping them adapt to the changing climate means hopefully to leave better, or not as compromised, ecosystems to future generations. Climate and biodiversity, though ever changing and evolving, are common goods and they need common policies: if we reduce the human Ecological Footprint both the atmosphere and the biosphere will be better off (and our children and grandchildren living in them).

Written by Luca Marazzi on behalf of Responding to Climate Change.

Author: Luca Marazzi
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Provided by: Programmable Pressure Cooker

Climate change has a very profound effect on our day to day life. But off late we are seeing instances where our weather patterns have changed and there is an increase in erratic climatic changes all over the world. The sudden climatic change which is occurring is mainly due to global warming. All over the world there are many countries that have a fast and developing economy and as the countries concentrate on their growing economy our planet is being left in a very bad shape. The people have neglected the environment running behind money and the climatic changes have come back to haunt the people.

People were able to live comfortable lives as they were adjusted to the climate and environment, but our own activities have caused the climatic changes which are mostly due to global warming which has left us uncomfortable. The temperature during the summer is on the rise and some places are experiencing very harsh winters. The effects of climatic changes are affecting people, wildlife and our environment. In basic terms, Global warming is the increase in temperature of the earth’s surface and atmosphere. The major reasons of climatic change are the burning of fossil fuel, the green house gases released in the emissions of houses, factories, cars etc.

The climatic changes have been the reasons of melting of glaciers in the Polar Regions, occurrences of large number of hurricanes, tsunamis, high variations in climate, change in the rainfall distribution etc. due to the increase in temperature there have been formation of high and low pressure regions which have caused the formation of hurricanes and extreme climatic conditions. Man, by his carelessness has lead to the climatic change thereby causing destruction to our own property. Hurricanes and other changes have been devastating to both man and animals. Due to the sudden change, it has lead to destruction of property, loss of many lives, occurrence of diseases, floods etc. Floods which are caused due to the climatic change can cause stagnation of water which is perfect breeding grounds for many vectors like mosquitoes which causes diseases like malaria, filarial etc.

Another effect of global warming has been that due to depletion of ozone layer, there is no barrier to prevent the harmful rays of the sun. Thus the temperature increases and also chances of skin cancer due to ultra violet rays. These rays may also create mutations which will be transmitted to next generations and can cause genetic disorders. The melting of ice has lead to slow increase in the sea level and if this continues, it will lead to complete submerging of many islands under the sea in the future years to come.

The harsh effects of the climatic changes have made people to think about the reasons for the global warming. It has caused an increase in the effort by people to reduce global warming by switching to different energy source other than fossil fuels, recycling, planting trees, electricity conservation and awareness programmes. Even the governments are signing treaties and under taking projects to reduce global warming and thus prevent the climatic changes. If we want to ensure that there are no more adverse climatic changes then we need to take steps to prevent global warming so as to ensure that earth is a place to live for the next generation.

Author: Carl Ganser
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Provided by: US Dollar credit card

Climate change has a number of causes, both natural and man made. However, the last two hundred years have seen changes to the climate occurring more rapidly than ever before. This is predominantly attributed to global warming which in turn has been caused by the burning of fossil fuels since the industrial revolution. The resulting release of greenhouse gases and particulate matter also cause a range of associated processes that also contribute to climate change.

Scientists have used data from ice cores, and other sources to record the planet’s climate for the last 800,000 years. This record shows the fluctuations of temperature, rainfall and sea level that have occurred in this time. This cycle of rise and fall is a result of a complex system of events including solar activity, ocean currents, polar ice caps and atmospheric pressure gradients. Events such as meteor strikes and volcanic eruptions also have significant impacts on the global climate and have been known to cause the onset of an ice age. While changes to Earth’s climate have always occurred, the frequency of the change in the last two hundred years is alarming scientists and governments around the world.

Global warming has been linked to the rapid change in climate observed since the industrial revolution. The burning of fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases that in turn trap more of the sun’s heat in the planet’s atmosphere. This raises global temperatures causing a range of other impacts that can affect the climate. One of the most serious impacts of global warming is the melting of ice caps in the north and south poles. They are both important in regulating the planet’s climate by maintaining polar albedo (the reflection of solar energy back to space) and the ocean currents that affect major weather systems. As the ice melts less heat is reflected, and the planet becomes warmer. Fresh water entering the ocean in large volumes can also alter ocean currents, further affecting weather systems resulting in changes to the planet’s climate.

Changes to the surface of the planet’s land masses have also been found to affect climate. Deforestation, urban development and agricultural practices all change the amount of the sun’s heat reflected or absorbed by the surface. The carbon cycle is also disrupted; resulting in less atmospheric carbon being sequestered, further increasing global warming that leads to climate change.

The burning of fossil fuels releases particulates into the atmosphere causing acid rain. The particles in the atmosphere can also reduce global warming by reflecting sunlight before it reaches the planet’s surface. This process is known as global dimming and has actually been found to counteract the causes of climate change in some instances. Scientists have even suggested purposely releasing sulphur particles into the stratosphere to increase the amount of sunlight reflected back to space. While this would slow climate change, there are a number of negative impacts, particularly on the health of living creatures from the higher levels of particles in the air that they breathe.

Although the planet’s climate is influenced by a complex system of natural processes, global warming is the principal cause of recent climate change. Reducing our reliance on fossil fuels, therefore cutting greenhouse gas production is the most important action that humans can take to minimise climate change.

Author: Michael Duggan
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Provided by: PCB Prototype & Manufacturing

Introduction

It is now well documented that humans are causing climate change by adding huge amounts of carbon dioxide (C02) and other greenhouse polluting gases into the atmosphere. Despite its relatively low population total of approximately 22 million, Australia is not only a significant contributor to the current carbon problem it will suffer major impacts if the trend of increasing temperatures continues. The main reasons for this claim are as follows:

Australia is a major contributor to Climate Change

Australia is a major contributor to the current climate change situation for two main reasons. Firstly, Australia has large amounts of coal reserves and has been a leading exporter of coal to Japan and Europe for many years. The biggest source of greenhouse pollution is burning fossil fuels such as coal for energy. As a result, Australia has provided the resource for many countries to emit large quantities of carbon and as such has a moral obligation to tackle climate change. However there are many factions within Australia who are opposed to fighting climate change. The Australian Coal Industry sees action against climate change as a direct threat to their livelihood and will threaten the job security of its employees. They fear that as the rest of the world moves to renewable energy sources in order to meet their carbon reduction commitments, the demand for Australian coal will reduce. Rather than allowing a drop in the demand for coal to impact their business, forward thinking Australian coal producers should be looking to develop alternative energy sources. There is a great opportunity for Australian energy producing organizations, located in the sun blessed country, to become world leaders in renewable energy such as solar power, creating thousands of jobs and providing new export opportunities.

Secondly, statistics show that per head of population, Australia is at the top of the rankings when it comes to carbon emissions. There are many theories on why this is the case, ranging from the large distance between major cities to the high availability of cheap coal fire energy. In any event it is a statistic that Australia cannot ignore and the countries politicians must show leadership to nearby developing nations by taking a stance on climate change. Unfortunately some sections of Australian politics are taking the opposite approach by deliberately stalling any serious action on climate change for fear of the impact on the economy. These groups fail to see the reality that the impacts of climate change can also result in large scale economic losses. This was the case in 2006 when the combined impact of Cyclone Larry, severe drought and bushfires wiped billions off the Australian economy and impacted on the hip pockets of ordinary Australians through increased food prices and higher insurance premiums.

Australia is vulnerable to continued climate change

Australia is particularly vulnerable to climate change as it is one of the driest inhabited continents on the planet on par with Africa. Australia is currently enduring a record breaking drought and water rationing is now a standard practice in most capital cities during the summer months. The economic and psychological impacts on Australian farmers have been particularly devastating and a number of rural communities have been decimated by the ferocity of this unprecedented drought. Continued climate change will only make Australia drier and drought conditions will become the norm in many areas. Water shortages in large cities will be commonplace, further forcing up the price of essential food produce. The likely alarming impacts on future generations should be sufficient incentive for any Australian to do everything they can to fight climate change and in fact any behaviour to the contrary could be deemed as criminally irresponsible.

The majority of renowned climate experts and scientists agree that large parts of the Arctic and Antarctica are melting at alarming rates as higher global average temperatures continue to rise. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to work out that as large areas of land base ice continue to melt, the inevitable result is an increase in overall sea levels. As an island continent with the majority of the population living in cities located in coastal areas, Australia is particularly vulnerable to rising sea levels. There have been a number of reports of luxury waterfront properties in some areas of New South Wales and Queensland coming under threat of rising tides, forcing home owners to flee their property. This trend has not escaped the notice of insurance Companies who are have sharply increased home insurance premiums in some coastal areas to match the higher risk.

Conclusion

As a major exporter of coal and leading the table on carbon emissions per head of population, Australia has an obligation to take a leadership role in the global fight against climate change. Furthermore, as one of the driest continents Australia will be particularly impacted by increasing temperatures and its coastal regions will be vulnerable to rising sea levels. As a result Australia has many reasons to play a leadership role in the global fight against climate change for the sake of current generations and future generations to come.

Author: Tony Innes
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Provided by: Programmable Pressure Cooker

Nepal is a small landlocked country in South Asia. The nation of the Mount Everest and the great Himalayas is now facing several consequences of climate change.

“No country on earth has some much natural diversity and no where apart from the poles is climate change happening so fast. The glaciers are retreating, the monsoon rains are becoming more intense and farming is getting harder than ever.”

Although the share of Nepal in the global emission of greenhouse gases is negligible, many bitter consequences having started ruling Nepal. In the recent years, Nepal is witnessing continuous disturbances in its ecology due to climate change resulting floods, severe landslides, soil erosion and effects of the climate change.

Climate Change refers to any change in climate over time, whether due to natural variability or as a result of human activity. The changes are attributed directly or indirectly to human activity which alters the composition of the global atmosphere and that is in addition to natural climate variability.

This bridge, at Phunki Tengi in Sagarmatha National Park, was destroyed in a flood in the summer of 2007. Climate change is also responsible for erratic weather patterns such as the thick haze that covers many parts of the southern plains of the country during winter seasons which destroys crops and livelihoods. The intensified monsoon is also creating hundreds of different environmental refugees. The unpredicted rainfall is making farming difficult. Thousand hectors of agricultural lands have turned into sand bank. Nepal is on the front line of climate change and variations which for some people the changes are catastrophic.

The rain is now very different and are increasingly unpredictable.It’s more concentrated and intense. It means that crop yields are going down. Many cultivable land are being progressively washed by big and small rives like Narayani river,Koshi river, Tirshuli river and others. Observations records that some of the fastest long-term increases in temperatures and rainfall is seen in Nepal. At least 44 of Nepal’s and neighbouring Bhutan’s Himalayan lakes, which collect glacier meltwater, are said by the UN to be growing so rapidly they they could burst their banks within a decade. Any climate change in Nepal is reflected throughout the region. Nearly 400 million people in northern India and Bangladesh also depend on rainfall and rivers that rise there.

Street in Gaighat. This was taken during the rainy season in Nepal. The flooding is not usually too severe in Gaighat, but it can ruin fields and destroy crops in the nearby villages. Causes of floods in the country are often triggered by rapid melting of snow and ice in high mountain regions. The increasing melting of the Glacier Lakes in the Himalaya due to exposure to warmer temperature, is main cause of floods in the nation. Due to this, several people are killed and thousands are rendered homeless in this nation adding to the poverty of this poor nation.

Rise of temperature in the capital city of the nation, Kathmandu is also a severe consequences of the global climate change in Nepal. The mean temperature during summer and winter season raised by more than 1 and about 2 degree Celsius progressively in recent years. This is an severe consequences of the human induced climate change. Similar trends are seen in southern Terai plains. In these regions extreme temperatures including heat wave and cold stream are witnessed frequently during summer and winter season respectively. Loss of human lives due to cold stream is always reported every year in Nepal.

A group calling themselves Climate Change Refugees gathered on 17th Avenue in Calgary, Alberta on December 8th, 2007 for the International Day of Action on Climate Change The increasing developments that causes emission of green house gases in the developed countries is resulting is a severe environmental problems in many poorer nation like Nepal. The shift in weather conditions causes these nations to face several calamities like flood, droughts, landslides, soil erosion, shift in farming practices and productivity and many other social consequences. With further increase in global temperature its impacts on human being is increasing tremendously. So this is time that we realize the impacts of the global climate change and start action to counter attack it.

Author: Ujjwol Lamichhane
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Provided by: Canada duty

Issues in retrospective

The world has been looking for answers to the emerging and expectant environmental problems. Such blatant expectation has been towards the industrialized world including but not limited to the United States, Europe (EU) and emerging economies (China, India) in Asia. However, problems pertaining to the environment are very widespread and so the onus of its remediation, mitigation and sustainability cannot rest only with the economic powers of the world. Candidly, these economies have contributed immensely to the production of green house gases (predominantly water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxides, ozone, CFCs) leading to global warming (rising temperatures on the surface of the earth) and depletion of the ozone layer. Some concurrent problems include acidification of soil and water sources and climatic disasters such as rising sea levels, ice melting at the poles, floods and biological diversity life destruction among others. Chemistry tells us that ozone layer depletion and increased carbon dioxide is predominantly from two sources: first ozone (unstable and strong oxidizer) reactions with carbon and nitrous fumes released in the atmosphere and secondly ozone’s reactions with emissions of CFCs and similar chlorinated and brominated organic compounds. Other prominent sources of increased carbon dioxide are fossil fuels and wood or deforestation. Unfortunately, human activities such as combustion of fossil fuels and deforestation are fast becoming primary contributors to atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration increase.

Certainly, it can be deciphered that these reactions and activities have dual effects. First, it leads to increased carbon dioxide far beyond its background levels (that is permissible levels) in the atmosphere. Second, is the depletion of the ozone layer which means the Ultraviolet (UV) rays from the Sun cannot be filtered efficiently to avoid its harmful effects to life forms including humans on earth. Preposterously, there are some scientists who argue that the correlation between global warming and ozone depletion is not strong. That is to say, ozone depletion is not causation for global warming. Whatever, their theories are, the world is witnessing today increasing warming of the surface of the earth, melting of ice at the poles and concealed damage to life forms besides other climatic disasters. Again, some environmental activists do want to categorize climatic changes as an isolated scenario of the world’s environmental problems. Unfortunately, this is absurd and is contradictory to the proverbial statement which says that “whatever goes up must definitely come down”. The question is: Where do stack emissions from industrial plants (point sources of greenhouse gases such as Carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous fumes, water vapor and other gases such as sulphur dioxide) go? These gases when released go up into the air undergo reactions or not and eventually fall back with a different chemistry onto the ground. Thus contaminating soil and water through their acidification potential and sometimes fatally affecting biological diversity. A typical example is when sulphur dioxide, a waste product from coal plants, causes acid rain through its reactions with water and falls back into soils and waters acidifying them. There is a general school of thought that these emissions and their chemical reactions produce heat which is responsible for rising temperatures and that floods and droughts are part of the natural climatic variations. In fact, it must be accepted that human activities is explicitly exacerbating the rising temperatures and natural climatic variations. Generally, the rising temperatures affect life in the air, in water and in the soil which are active players in climatic variations. Apparently, it is erroneous to isolate climatic changes as a separate entity in environmental degradation issues. For it’s evident from the preceding texts that climatic changes brim over into water and soil media of the terrestrial environment. Ultimately, it is expedient that one assesses climatic changes from the perspective of environmental stability which stems from air, soil and water management techniques based on holistic pollution control policies. Again, whatever the altercation is between scientist, activist and the rest of the world, something is wrong with the environment and remedial measures are needed. The pace of economic growth by some developing and developed nations do suggest that world emissions are likely to increase and likewise the environmental problems. Thus, world governments do not need to drag their feet anymore as posterity is waiting to judge us if nothing is done. In fact, the current environmental issues must be categorized not only as a debauchery but also a social stigma or anathema.

Next, the redemption of the environment from the perspective of declining climatic changes and its corollary would require the collective effort of all people from every continent of the world. Accordingly, strategies and programs to be pursued should not be regionalized, politicized or polarized but rather based on a general consensus and objectivity. What’s more, this is not the time to be judgmental tagging certain nations and continents as perpetuators of environmental pollution and demanding accountability probably because of their unscrupulous emissions and inordinate waste disposal activities. We are in it together and united we stand divided we fall. Now, in the context of the discussions so far, this article would seek to address the problem of climatic changes from the view point of environmental stability.

The model must change

Many believe the world would be a better place if there is political stability and economic stability and this has created the tendency to relegate environmental stability to the background. However, experience portrays a high degree of association between political stability, economic stability and environmental stability. Also, this is an indisputable fact which supports a paradigm of mutual dependence between political stability, economic stability and environmental stability in the design of effective mitigative measures to deal with the climatic changes. Surprisingly, in the past, world economic powers have failed to back their words or agenda with actions. They have failed to actuate any pragmatic policies primarily due to financial constraints and also their propensity not to pursue the economics of social benefit against social cost. Clearly, social benefit which has long-term socio-economic beneficiation outweighs social cost. However, financial capability has been the central focus instead of social benefit. Now is the time for change and prompt action. It is the fervent wish of all that the summit on climate change in Copenhagen would be unprecedented leading to the enacting of holistic, pragmatic, dogmatic and sustainable policies and not ad hoc policies which has been the trend of the past. Rationally, policies should encompass the integration extensively of economic growth, industrial development and potent environmental policies. Honestly, what the world needs now is not agendas made up of the setting of unattainable emission targets and cuts by players of industrialization such as U.S (17% by 2020 – Washington Post Newspaper source) and China (45% by 2020 – Washington Post Newspaper source) or smaller cuts by poorer nations but sustainable policies that amalgamate political stability, economic stability and environmental stability. Also, the rational for the pursuit and success of this amalgamation is the designing of policy models that simulate the effect of the environmental stability from the perspective of political and economic stability.

Hypothetically, in the policy model, environmental stability should be seen as the mediation between political stability and economic stability. To consider environmental stability as mediation is to count it as part of the solution to the attainment of economic stability. Anyway, this is paradoxical for supporters of democracy who claim that political stability provides good governance which is antecedent to economic stability and prosperity besides being a causal link between them. Sorry to say, it is plausible that political stability provides the platform for economic stability but plausibility is not a proof. Technically, the association of political stability and economic stability and prosperity is not sustainable unless it is linked consciously with environmental stability and mitigation. As a matter of fact, the effect of political stability on economic stability is confounded with the effect that environmental stability has on economic stability. That is to say changes in political stability can be associated with changes in economic stability but environmental stability can be associated judiciously with economic stability, growth and sustainability. Obviously, it is right to say that political stability effect on economic stability and sustainability is confounded with the effect of environmental stability on economic stability and sustainability. Also, if the relationship between environmental stability and economic stability growth and sustainability is practically significant then it is conclusive that environmental stability mediates to confound the effect of political stability on economic stability and sustainability. This does not mean that the association between political stability and economic stability, growth and sustainability does not exist. Rather, this effect is confounded by the effect of environmental stability. So, there is the urgent need to tie environmental stability to economic stability and sustainability when designing action plans for environmental problems mitigation.

Realistically, economic growth is not sustainable in the absence of articulate environmental policies. Why? In simple terms, lack of articulate environmental policies would escalate diseases which in turn would affect the labor force capability and consequently slow down industrialization and economic growth. This problem is common in developing countries where the labor force capability has been enervated by worker turnover due to upsurge in health problems. Truly, in pursuits of economic growth some countries have consciously and unconsciously relegated to the background environmental stability. The aftermath is degenerative economic growth because of weakened labor force strength stemming cumulatively from health issues and reduced life expectancy. It is in the light of these developments that the author of this article is opting for change in the model from old to new. The old model sees political stability as causation to economic stability and sustainability whilst the new commends environmental stability as causation for sustainable economic stability.

Some Reflections and Recommendations

The world governing body (presumably United Nations) for the climatic changes summit should come out with binding guidelines for all nations involved. The binding guidelines shall be based on a new model of political stability, environmental stability and economic stability as afore discussed. The binding guidelines shall also encompass annual report of environmental performance measures by respective countries together with environmental audits by the governing body (presumably United Nations) to ensure implementation and assess progress. For each participating country or region, environmental performance measures in the form of measurement and reporting shall include

Quantitative and qualitative measurement of emissions (including cost) by country
Institutional framework involved in the measurements
Models used and the measured impact of emissions (including terrestrial water and soil environment). This should be preceded by the performance of impact assessment to establish a baseline for the respective country or region.

The governing body (United Nations) shall then perform annual environmental audits on these countries and this shall include

Assessing measurements and costs
Verifying compliance with the laid guidelines agreed upon at the summit
Assessing the effect of the models used for the measurements
Identifying any problems or deficiencies
Making suggestions for improvements
Feed back to countries.

Currently, there is the agitation for treating of carbon emissions as a tradable financial commodity and this is a very commendable cost effective measure which would augment the level of sanity and accountability invariably changing the attitude of nations towards industrial activities. Having to pay for the amount of carbon emitted during production activities would rationalize ones level of consciousness towards the environment.

Next, there is the need for a magnitudinal shift in harnessing of energy from non-renewable resources to renewable resources. That is to say a shift from non-renewable energy (unsustainable and unreplenishable) to renewable energy ( sustainable and naturally replenishable). Thus, reducing the pressure on non-renewable resources and slowing down the climatic changes. Fossil fuels are non-trivial examples of non-renewable resources for energy production. A greater percentage of the world’s energy is obtained from burning of fossil fuels which includes energy production from coal, natural gas, petroleum e.t.c. With the world’s population expected to grow, dependence on fossil fuel energy is expected to grow as well and one wonders if energy production from fossil fuels is sustainable considering its impact (that is production of carbon and other toxic substances) on the environment. Additionally, overdependence on non-renewable energy suggests dependence on oil aggravating the situation when oil prices rise. Hence, there is the need for a shift primarily to renewable energy production. As at 2006, renewable energy accounted for only 18% of world energy production which means there is still room for improvement [Global Status Report, 2007]. Now, renewable energy includes wind energy, solar energy, bio-energy, geothermal energy and tidal energy. They are better because they are pioneered by natural resources such as the wind, sunlight, biomass, heat from the earth’s crust and water tides. In addition, renewable energy production tend to have moderate – high starting cost but lower operating cost. Unlike renewable energy, non-renewable energy has higher starting cost as well as higher operating cost even in the absence of environmental issues cost. Now, following is some engineering economics of renewable energy production.

Wind energy uses the power of airflows to run vanes and turbines converting wind power into electrical energy. Solar energy uses solar panels or thermal collectors that are installed to collect the Sun’s energy (rays) and convert it into electrical energy or heat energy respectively for homes and offices. Geothermal energy uses harnessed steam or heat from the earth’s crust through heat pumps and some sophisticated accessories to produce heat and electrical energy and this makes it suitable for heating offices and homes. One may argue that geothermal energy generation may be suitable for cold regions of the world and not the warm regions. However, its generation in warm regions can find other uses reducing the pressure on non-renewable energy resource. Truly, wind and geothermal energy technologies are currently being used pervasively in Scandinavian countries like Denmark and Iceland. Also, several places in the world are endowed with suitable geologic units whose heat power can be harnessed for geothermal energy production. There are also abundant wind (airflow) and Sun in places like Africa and South America that would be suitable for production of wind and solar energy. Regarding bio-energy, chemical energy from biomass (animal waste, landfill or plant materials) or fermentable material is converted into heat or electrical energy. Bio-fuels energy is also obtained through ethanol fuel production from fermentable substances such as sweet sorghum, sugar cane, corn similarly converting chemical energy into heat or electrical energy. In fact, there is abundance of these resource materials in many places in the world today available for conversion into energy. If the world governing body would want to support funding programs which promotes mechanized or sustainable irrigation systems in the developing and under-developed world then it might as well as support massively production of renewable energy so as to reduce dependence on energy from non-renewable resources. Coincidentally, promotion of renewable energy would stimulate economic growth through the creation of more green jobs besides ensuring sustainable growth.

Next, countries would at this time be seeking for funding for these programs that are pioneered towards mitigating threatening environmental instability in their respective countries but this should call for extra graveness, accountability and probity by their governments and communities. If the rich nations are making pledges to the needy nations or developing nations at the summit to help curb the deteriorating climatic changes, it should be conditional on graveness, accountability and probity to avoid misappropriation of funds and a fiasco. Developing countries and under developed countries instead of asking for funding should manage their business environment well to create favorable investment climate that would attract Direct Foreign Investment into the renewable energy sector. Also, the world governing body should encourage developing and under-developed world to embark on tax-breaks and if possible government rebates for foreign and local investors who invest in the renewable energy sector in their economies. Likewise, developed countries governments should encourage investments into the renewable energy sector in their economies through tax breaks incentives for this sector so as to stimulate economic growth and promote environmental stability. Countries with budget surpluses can embark on meticulous spending in the renewable sector of their economies. Technically, these action plans would stimulate job growth in the renewable energy sector which has a chain reaction of sustainable economic growth and environmental stability.

Finally, it is not what happens at the summit that is important but what happens afterwards. Whether nations are reluctant to adhere to the guidelines and agenda laid down and how the world governing body is going to enforce that without violating a country’s sovereignty.

Conclusion

The world’s climatic changes problems continues to be a matter of concern. Governments, research scientists are at the crossroads because of the differences in perception of each with regards to the real causes of these problems. In spite of the diffuse perspectives, a consensus may have been reached that emissions of carbon and other gases are primarily the driving force for these climatic changes. Regrettably, past encounters on this issue were accompanied by passive response from nations supposedly signaling nations indifferent attitude to climatic changes. Nevertheless, there is a new sense of awareness and urgency on this issue and new strategies are being drawn under the auspices of the world governing body the United Nations. Whatever the outcome, policies that is conducive to attainment of environmental stability and sustainability is needed. Such policies must reconcile political stability, environmental stability and economic stability. Additionally, the policies would call for new direction in the production of energy favoring renewable energy a candidate for job growth, economic growth and sustainability.

Author: Charles Ampong
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Provided by: Guest blogger

Introduction
In the current debate on climate change, one of the frequent questions posed by climate change skeptics to those advocating action against climate change is “What if it turns out you are wrong?” In this article I will address this question and will also pose the same question back to climate change skeptics. I will then compare the risks of each camp getting it wrong and weigh up the potential ramifications for current and future generations.

Background
The vast majority of scientists and climate experts are of the opinion that the planet is warming and that this warming has been brought on by human activity since the start of industrialization. Furthermore, the majority of the scientific community are of the view that greenhouse gasses such as carbon dioxide (produced by burning fossil fuels i.e. coal, oil and gas) are the main culprits. This view is shared by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) who point to data showing that the global average temperature has increased by 0.76 degrees over the past 100 years at the same time as carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have increased from 250 parts per million to now almost 400 parts per million – a coincidence that the scientific community finds hard to ignore. Furthermore, as carbon dioxide has a lifespan of over 100 years, climate experts believe that further warming is inevitable and that the challenge is to reverse this trend in the future by reducing carbon emissions now.

However, there are still many factors to be understood around climate change and issues need to be resolved relating to the reliability of the forecasting models used to predict future temperature trends and the impact of continued warming. This has led many to query the basic assertion that the warming trend has been caused by human activity and they point to previous warming periods to back up their argument that the current warming is merely a cyclical function of nature. There are also many who still debate that any warming is actually occurring and argue that data is available that shows average global temperatures have in fact declined over the last 10 years. A small minority of conspiracy theorist even go as far as to suggest that global warming is a massive hoax that has been created to line the pockets of those involved in the green movement.

With such polarizing views from climate change activists and climate change skeptics it begs the question “what is the risk from each camp if they have it wrong”. After all – one of the camps must be right but unfortunately it will be some time into the future before we know which one for certain.

What are the risks if climate change activists have got it wrong?
The main strategy for climate change activists in the fight against climate change is to reduce further build up of greenhouse gasses. In particular they target the high volume of carbon dioxide that is a by-product of the process of burning coal to produce electricity. However the proposed strategy of reducing coal fired production techniques has a wide impact across the industrialized world and ultimately will cause many traditional industries to close down, in turn resulting in massive job losses. Proposed emission trading schemes and carbon taxes will also add a further layer of cost to consumers around the world at a time when many countries are still reeling from the impacts of the Global financial crisis. As a result the main risk of climate change activists being wrong is the financial and economic impact of closing down traditional industries and the subsequent job losses.

However the impact of reducing the number of traditional industries is offset in part by the creation of new clean tech and renewable energy industries that will result in new job opportunities. The development of renewable energy sources such as solar, wind (and to a lesser extent geothermal generated energy) will see new industries spring up, creating a large number of job opportunities in these new areas. Even if the global warming theory proves to be wrong, the transition from using scarce natural resources for power generation to a process using renewable energy sources is only bringing forward the inevitable. At some point in the future, supplies of coal, oil and gas will be ultimately be exhausted, forcing alternative energy sources to be developed in any event.

What are the risks if climate change skeptics have got it wrong?
If we are to give in to climate change skeptics and suspend all carbon reduction strategies, fossil fuel driven industries will be free to continue releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. If it is subsequently proven without doubt that high levels of carbon dioxide do in fact contribute to global warming then the impacts will be devastating. Although job losses in traditional coal fired would have been abated, the impact of higher average global temperatures will see future generations being exposed to:

- A higher frequency of extreme weather events such as storms, floods and bushfires
- More water shortages and longer droughts
- Rising sea levels from the melting of large expanses of land based ice regions
- Irreversible loss of biodiversity in natural habitats, plants and animal species
- A wider coverage of tropical diseases such as malaria and dengue fever
- A higher frequency of heat related injuries and deaths

If climate change skeptics are proven wrong, their actions in stalling the reduction of global carbon levels could well be viewed as being criminally irresponsible by future generations. Skeptics will argue that their actions will prevent economic loss but it could be counter argued that a robust economy is irrelevant if the health of the planet is severely impacted. It could also be argued that the economic cost of addressing the impacts of climate change ( e.g. loss of life and rebuilding from extreme weather events), will outweigh any economic benefit from saving traditional fossil fuel fired industries.

Conclusion
The net risk of proponents of action against climate change being wrong is minimal against the net risk of climate change skeptics being wrong – particularly for future generations. Climate skeptics are gambling the fate of future generations and by ignoring the wide body of scientific evidence of global warming- this is a high risk gamble and one that is morally wrong.

Author: Tony Innes
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Provided by: Digital Camera Information

The greatest environmental challenge of our time is without a doubt climate change. Over the coming years and decades this will have a stark influence on our lives. Not only through the physical changes in the climate, but also through changes in our energy consumption, travel patterns and many other aspects of our life. Companies will not be unaffected by these changes. Markets will change, as will client requirements and there will be a steep rise in legislation with regards to climate change and greenhouse gas emissions. Developing a comprehensive corporate climate change strategy is therefore an essential part of good business management. This article gives a brief description of the elements that such a strategy should include.

The management of climate change should adopt two distinct strategies: mitigation and adaptation. Mitigation deals with the reduction in greenhouse gases to the earth’s atmosphere. Carbon foot-printing and carbon accounting form typical measures that are used within the framework of this strategy. Adaptation revolves around measures that address the changes and vulnerabilities of the organisation that will be present as a result of the inevitable physical change in our climate. A good corporate climate change strategy addresses both mitigation and adaptation.

1. Understanding greenhouse gas emissions of the organisation

An understanding of the organisation’s greenhouse gas emissions is fundamental in every credible corporate climate change strategy. To achieve this a comprehensive greenhouse gas inventory should be made. The inventory is a first step to manage and reduce the emissions, which are also key elements of a the strategy. The inventory combined with the management and reduction form the core of a greenhouse gas accounting system. At this moment there are two internationally recognised systems for greenhouse gas accounting available. These are the ISO 14064 standard and the Greenhouse Gas Protocol.

2. Understanding climate change vulnerability

Most large organisations have started to make a greenhouse gas inventory and have adopted measures to reduce their carbon footprint. As I described in the introduction, adaptation also forms an important part of a comprehensive corporate climate change strategy. To develop an understanding of an organisation’s vulnerability to changes in the climate a review of the operations, products and services, transport needs should be made as well as an understanding of the physical changes to the climate in which the organisation operates. There are no clear guidelines on how to develop an understanding of the vulnerability to changes in the climate, although the United Nations Panel on Climate Change has published a range of reports documenting the predicted changes to the climate in each of the global regions over the course of the current century. In addition to these global publications, many governments have funded research predicting the potential change in climate at a national level.

3. Commit to reduction in greenhouse gas emissions

As part of credible strategy, a commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions should be made at the most senior level in the organisation.

4. Develop internal corporate capacity

Development of internal capacity is an essential element to drive through improvements to both the greenhouse gas emissions and the climate change vulnerability. It is the people within the organisation that are best placed to identify practical solutions that will support any improvement programme. Ensuring an adequate level of knowledge and understanding within the members of staff with regards to the climate change issues that are facing the organisation is therefore a key element in the strategy.

5. Work with supply chain and engage with stakeholders

A significant contribution to the carbon footprint of a product that an organisation produces is made during the processing by suppliers. In addition an organisation should be aware of the climate change vulnerability of its own supply chain. The strategy should therefore address the role of the supply chain in managing climate change issues.

6. Adopt and implement improvement action plan

The first five elements provide a thorough understanding of the issues facing an organisation as a result of changes to our climate. Based on this understanding an improvement plan should be drawn up. As with any credible action plan the actions should consist of SMART targets, be fully funded, and be relevant to the organisations climate change threats and opportunities.

7. Publish an annual report

The final element is the publication of an annual report that demonstrate progress against the action plan, re-affirms the commitment to improvement and accounts for the carbon emissions.

Author: Paul Giesberg
Article Source: EzineArticles.com
Provided by: How Electric Pressure Cookers Work