How Global Warming is Heating Up America and How We Can Keep Ourselves Cool

Global warming is occurring nationwide and the results are being felt by all Americans. Because the ozone layer is thinning due to toxic air pollution produced by humans, we are suffering the consequences of that behavior. Climate changes and the warming of the earth has been felt over the past decade in all of the states in America. What can you do to fight the heat during the hottest months? It will discuss how to save money by using Louisville air conditioning repair and Louisville air conditioning service to maintain your HVAC system as well as preparing your home to stay cooler from better insulation.
The warming trend has been a concern over the years and has been felt not only in the traditionally warmer climates like the south and southwestern states but also in the colder climate like Alaska and Vermont. One example is of Vermonters that have lived in their green mountain state for 25 or more years. Years ago air conditioning and even a fan was typically not needed during the summer months as the highest temperature usually was in the upper 70's. Now it is not uncommon to have hot, humid days that are well into the 90's requiring some form of cooling for these old farmhouses. Even as early as 15 years ago, new construction never included central air conditioning because it simply was not necessary and now that is no longer the case.
In Alaska the global warming is making an impact on the glaciers and water levels. As the glaciers that had always stayed frozen twelve months out of the year are now melting, it is increasing the areas water levels and causing some erosion of the land. Areas that were once land are now under water due to this melting of glaciers. Many ecologists are afraid that the present generation will be the last ones to be able to see such glaciers exist.
Some states like Florida, Georgia and Texas have always been warm but now have gotten so hot during the summer that is affecting its residents in an alarming way. There are a great number of deaths from extreme heat and humidity in these areas that local news channels are often warning elderly and children to stay out of the heat as it can make them very sick. Air conditioning is a necessity in these areas but not everyone can afford it. Fans in the windows can help a bit but a good idea is to have the insulation in your home replaced that will help keep your home cooler in the summer heat.
In states that have less humidity, swamp coolers are quite popular in cooling residences and work places. This is particularly useful in desert states like Arizona or Nevada where the air is dry and the temperatures are high. The swamp cooler sits on top of the roof and with a fan and water helps to cool the interior space of the home. Many think it is as effective as air conditioning at a fraction of the cost.

New Factors in the Global Warming Debate

In the general public discourse the climate change debate has been, so far, confined almost entirely to the greenhouse gas issue. Our economycarbon footprint utterly dominates all climate change discussions. In actual fact there are several major influences acting on the global climate in terms of raising or lowering atmospheric temperatures. The warming induced by greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane, is the first such influence.
However, while the physics of the greenhouse effect are clear, the chain of causality between greenhouse gas accumulation in the atmosphere and specific weather patterns is not fully understood. At this time the actual consequences of such accumulation cannot be accurately predicted in terms of timing and impact. The second influence comes from periodic variations in the earth orbit around the sun and in the inclination of its axis. These cyclical variations have been relatively well correlated with past ice ages and warmer inter-glacial periods.
According to some recent published research in this area our planet would currently be sliding into another cold period or ice age, although the timing is hard to pin down. The third influence, which has come into prominence only recently, is solar activity as manifested through the sunspot cycle. For the earth, a high sunspot count means warming, a low count cooling. Although the basic cycle has an average periodicity of eleven years, there are also long term variations which are not well understood.
Sunspot activity has just reached a low which may or may not be significant. But if this low persists, significant cooling can be expected. One can conclude that the overall picture is becoming increasingly ambiguous. Greenhouse gas accumulation due to the use of fossil fuels is no longer the only story in town, nor is warming the inevitable future outcome.
The purpose here is not to claim that greenhouse gas accumulation is not significant. It is to warn that other influences are in play which can be equally important, and that our scientific understanding must be increased before major economic measures, such as a tax on carbon emissions, are implemented. One such measure, a so-called cap and trade scheme, is currently under discussion in the US Congress.
Such a scheme has considerable drawbacks. First, it amounts to a highly regressive tax on energy, which will disproportionally affect the lower income fractions of the population. Second, it introduces huge market distortions which vastly complicate efforts to deal with the gradually increasing price and reduced availability of petroleum. To be successful, such efforts require first and foremost a realistic and workable long-term energy strategy, the elaboration of which must precede any large-scale government intervention in the energy area.
The US government at this time does not have such a strategy, which, as far as its impact on climate is concerned, must rest on a much better scientific understanding of the various influences on climate listed above. Funding to increase and test this understanding will have a far greater impact than any of the currently proposed schemes to reduce carbon emissions. Until such understanding is on more solid footing, there is no valid justification for major initiatives in economic policy on climate change grounds.

These Facts Will Help You Understand Global Warming

According to Wikipedia, global warming is "the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth's near-surface air and oceans in recent decades and its projected continuation."

Many observations indicate that global warming has taken place during the 20th century. This has resulted in an increase of the average surface temperature, a decrease in the snow cover and ice extent, and a rise in the sea level. The amount of precipitation, the amount of cloud cover, and the presence of extreme temperatures, especially in places where it's unusual to have extreme temperatures, are affected by global warming.

There are natural reasons that will affect global warming, as carbon dioxide is naturally in the air due to the fact that all living organisms that breathe in oxygen, exhale carbon dioxide, which is then taken in by trees and other plant life, which in return, give out oxygen for humans, animals, and other organisms that utilize oxygen. However, human activities over the last 50 years have significantly increased the levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other household gases in our atmosphere. This has led to the global warming that is occurring on Earth today. CO2 and other greenhouse gases tend to warm the Earth's surface, while anthropogenic aerosols tend to cool the Earth's surface.

Other current facts about global warming include

- The average surface temperature has increased by about 0.6 C (1.0 F) over the last 100 years. - Snow cover and ice extent have decreased. - The sea level has risen by 4-8" (10-20 cm) over the past 100 years. - About 75% of the annual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is due to the burning of fossil fuels, while the other 25% is attributed to anthropogenic changes in land use, like deforestation, overgrazing, and over cultivation, that reduces the net uptake of carbon dioxide. - In the 20th century, precipitation has likely increased in some land areas and decreased in others. - There has been some increase in cloud cover. - It's very likely that there has been less extreme low temperatures and slightly more extreme high temperatures. - There have been more warm episodes of the El Nino since the mid-1970s. - There's been an increase of droughts in some regions (especially in parts of Asia and Africa) over the last few decades, which is different from the pattern of small global increases in severe drought or severe wetness over the 20th century.

However, it seems that global warming has NOT changed some important aspects of climate:

- Some areas of the globe, like parts of the Southern Hemisphere oceans and parts of Antarctica, have not warmed in recent decades.

- There are no significant trends in the Antarctic sea-ice extent since 1978, the first year that reliable satellite measurements were used.

- There are no significant trends of global changes in tropical and extra-tropical storm intensity and frequency evident over the 20th century. Instead, there are variations within decades and across different decades, but not enough evidence to conclude that there were any significant changes across the 20th century itself.

- There are no systematic changes in the frequency of tornadoes, thunder days, and hail events in the limited areas that were analyzed.

It is clear that there is much evidence present in today's world that global warming is a real phenomenon, not something that is made up to scare people. Knowing these facts should help you learn what global warming exactly is and what you can do to help reduce or reverse global warming.

Effects Of Global Warming In The Arctic

The Arctic and the Antarctic regions play very important roles. How? First, like the human eyes, they are the mirrors to the soul; they are the first to manifest adverse effects like global warming. We witness these changes rather most drastically in these polar regions. Another correspondingly direct effect of global warming is: any change in the polar conditions affects those of all the other regions. Once the polar ice melts, this flushes more freshwater from the region's rivers, consequently holding the ocean from circulating fast enough, thereby causing higher sea levels. With more ice melting, more land and bodies of liquid water are exposed to the heat of the sun. These two, which naturally absorb more heat than snow and ice, causes more warming oceans and land masses. Worst of all is borne by the Arctic's perennially frozen soil - melting of the polar ice releases the greenhouse gases (carbon and methane) trapped within. This is very dangerous as the Arctic permafrost contains a third of the planet's total soil carbon content. Man-made emissions would fade in comparison is all this carbon were released. The National Center for Atmospheric Research has also predicted that the Arctic could be ice-free starting 2040 and sea ice reduced by 80% in the next couple of decades.
Warming of the Arctic has already been felt and is now a cause for apprehension. According to the Polar Bear Specialist Group (the absolute scientific authority on everything involving polar bears) several (5) of their populations in the world are now stamped as declining.
Just recently, the US. Fish and Wildlife Service (USF & WS) announced that the polar bears who once roamed the territory freely may soon be classified under the list of endangered species. The agency has, in fact, done the initial steps already formally proposing to do such that, include the polar bears in the critical registry. This alarming announcement has, in effect, granted the request (later escalating to a demand by way of a lawsuit against the USF & WS) of 3 organizations (the Center for Biological Diversity, the National Resources Defense Council or NRDC, and Greenpeace. For years, these three have been urging the US government precisely to act on the problem. It could be victory for the group, but not much since it has taken the concerned authorities this long ; it will now take painstaking effort to save the polar bears from extinction. An NRDC executive strongly referred to global warming as the one major threat to the survival of the polar bears. He urged further to stop delaying the action and to go full-force; no more half-measures.
Enlisting the species as endangered is not even the culmination of the unified effort; it is only the initial part of a long process. It should take the US Fish and Wildlife Service around one year to study the proposal before they decide on an action to take. Meantime, there is imminent danger that the polar bear would totally lose its sea-ice habitat as this one year rolls by. Loss of sea ice also means loss of their main source of food which are ice seals. This could also result to more mortality as the bears would tend to cannibalize their ranks in the absence of prey. Why? Mainly because enlisting a species as endangered does not necessarily mean ready plans would immediately be implemented. Steps would involve a stoppage on all activities that threaten the bears survival, before developing and implementing of a recovery plan are put to order by the Fish and Wildlife Service. Faced with the rate greenhouse gases are being emitted from the Arctic, this will indeed be a daunting task.
Talking about populations, it is not just that of the polar bears which lie victim to global warming. The Inuits, (a member of the Eskimo peoples living in northernmost North America down to eastern Canada and Greenland) depend on the sea ice for food. The dismal and continued shortening of their hunting season by 50% has had drastic effects on their lives. Will it not be long till a people and an era vanished from the face of the earth? Can we do something about it?

How Global Warming Could Cause An Ice Age

An Ice Age brought on by global warming was the scenario depicted in the movie THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW. While the science on which the movie based has been called into question, there may be some merit in the theory that global warming could cause an Ice Age.
Why is Europe's calimate comparitively milder than other places at the same latitude? Alaska and Greenland, both the same distance to the North Pole as Europe, are covered with ice and permafrost while most of Europe is not.
The ocean currents called the Gulf Stream bring warm waters up to Europe from the Caribbean. This water brings warmth to the countries in its path. Cooler water from Europe feeds back into the loop and causes the water to flow back to the Caribbean in a continuous cycle.
The Gulf Stream has been significantly weakened in every major cooling event, including the last great Ice Age. In the past this weakening has been brought on by natural events. In current times, global warming brought on by human activities could be the cause of slowing or even stopping the Gulf Stream. If this were to happen, the cold waters would stay in the area of Europe and the Northeastern US and could mean an Ice Age for those regions.
If an Ice Age occurs, it will likely be due to the melting of polar ice. This will dump large quantities of cold, fresh water into the ocean. It would disrupt the Gulf Stream and cause the cooling of many areas that now have milder climates. The return flow of cold water from Greenland, which goes back to the Caribbean, has already showed a weakening over the last 50 years. There has been a twenty percent decline in the amount of current flowing in this direction. It stands to reason that the warm waters returning from the Caribbean have also decreased in volume. The change would not be gradual. This is a phenomenon that takes place rather quickly. Perhaps it does not happen as fast as depicted in THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW. However, it could happen within a few short years.
A slowing or stoppage of the Gulf Stream would affect the entire earth. Observations have been made of current data and historical information gleaned by studying the ocean and the lands around it. With all the information at hand, it appears that it is indeed possible that global warming could bring about a modern Ice Age.

Global Warming - The Significance of Rising Water Temperatures And Climate Change

An alarm is being raised about global warming causing dramatic rises in the temperature of ocean waters. Scientists are studying warming waters all over the globe to determine the extent of this rise in temperatures.

The consequences of global warming are far-reaching. One of the most devastating effects of global warming is an impact on tropical storms. Hurricanes that would have been category 3 storms in years past are now category 4 or above because they are energized when they pick up warmer-than-normal ocean water. There has been a significant increase in these higher intensity storms over the last 35 years. In 2005, the Atlantic was bombarded with 27 tropical storms powerful enough to receive a name, and fifteen of them developed into hurricanes. Five of these storms were classified as category 4 hurricanes and four reached the level of category 5. Hurricane Katrina made a terrible mark on history in August of 2005. It became the costliest hurricane in American history and also one of most lethal.
Earth's ice is crucial in order to maintain the delicate balance in the environment. As global warming causes temperatures to rise in the oceans, glaciers and icecaps are melting more rapidly. One particular ice shelf in Antarctica, the northern section of the Larson B shelf, collapsed in recent years. Scientists suddenly realized how fast the ice shelf could disintegrate. The polar ice cap is dissolving at an astonishing rate as well--9% per decade. This recent phenomenon is a definite cause for alarm. In the last half century, the thickness of ice in the Arctic has decreased by 40%.
Perennial sea ice in the Arctic has been receding as well. In 2005 there was a record low in square miles of sea ice. Just two years later, in 2007, the record was broken again with half a million square miles less perennial ice than in 2005. Some scientists predict that all the sea ice will be gone by 2040.
Melting ice will also cause sea levels to rise. When this happens, islands are lost and coastal communities are flooded. Various suggestions have been made about the levels that the water could reach, anywhere from 10 to 23 inches by 2100.
Global warming has the potential to make the earth a very inhospitable place to live. Rising temperatures in ocean waters are a clear indication that the process has begun. With the melting of ice in the glaciers, icecaps, and on the sea, it is a matter of time before global warming has even more harmful effects. It is up to the people of the world to do what they can to stop or slow this alarming environmental problem.

Global Warming - Truth or Tale?

No matter where you are, no matter the time of day, no matter the weather, it seems you can find someone talking about it. Recently it was at the grocery store. Two checkers couldn't agree. Global warming? Or not? Still stinging from the recent cold crunch, my vote was with the not. But what is true? Certainly the mainstream media is no help.

I must admit, I am a skeptic. After all, as Kenneth Chilton, director of the Institute for the Study of Economics and the Environment said, "These guys are going to try to tell you what the climate's going to be like in 2100, and the weatherman can't tell you what it's going to be like in five days. Weather is simple compared to climate. Let's get real here." 1

Yet the Associated Press continues to print headlines such as, "Climate report warns of droughts, starvation, disease." In fact, reporter Seth Borenstein prophesies, "Tens of millions . . . will be flooded out of their homes each year as the Earth reels from rising temperatures and sea levels. . . Tropical diseases will spread. By 2050, polar bears will mostly be found in zoos, their habitats gone. Pests like fire ants will thrive." 2 [emphasis mine]

Not until later does Mr. Borenstein regain some realism adding the term, 'could.' Why? What is his basis? His purpose? A dose of reality? A well-crafted rumor?

Can't we trust the news? Don't they present the 'facts'? If so, why the sensationalism? The contradictions? The mud-slinging?

A good example of today's conflicting propaganda is revealed in the comparison of two recent 'news' reports. Canada Free Press, which calls itself Canada's Fast Growing Independent News Source, presents one side. A guest essay by Ross Gelbspan, posted on 'The Grist', a website dedicated to environment news and commentary, expounds the other.

Ross, a 30-year journalism veteran, maintains the pace of global warming has kicked into overdrive. He claims, "the hollow optimism of climate activists, along with the desperate responses of some of the world's most prominent climate scientists, is preventing us from focusing on the survival requirements of the human enterprise." He contends we have "failed to meet nature's deadline."3

Miguel A. Guanipa, reporter for the Canada Free Press, disagrees. He says, '. . . no consensus is to be found among the 400 scientists that are listed on [the U.S. Senate Committee] report, other than the nearly unanimous agreement that the claim of Global Warming as a legitimate threat to humanity is more an ideological juggernaut than a proven scientific certainty . . .' 4

But, Ross goes on to say, "within the last two years, a number of leading scientists . . . have all declared that humanity is about to pass or already has passed a "tipping point" in terms of global warming. The IPCC, which reflects the findings of more than 2,000 scientists from over 100 countries, recently stated that it is "very unlikely" that we will avoid the coming era of "dangerous climate change." "5

Wait! Aren't they the same group who, in 2001, said we could expect the world's oceans to rise as much as 35 inches. But, in their 2007 report, reduced their forecast to 16.5 inches? 6

Mr. Guanipa contends, '[The 400 scientists'] consensus is based in the scientifically verifiable notion that . . . periodic Hemispheric warming (and cooling) of the earth are natural cyclical phenomena, caused primarily by fluctuations in the sun's electro-magnetic radiation, water vapor, and a host of other culprits meaner than the rise in carbon dioxide levels, which is actually an effect rather than a cause of warming. This natural cycle has taken place - and will continue to take place - over millennia. This means that the net impact that man - in all his industrial fury - has over any significant climate variations, is no more distinguishable - as a contributing former meteorologist puts it - than a "fart in a hurricane".'7

400 scientists? Why don't we hear more about them? According to the Canada Free Press, they feel their voices are being suppressed, their opinions ridiculed, and their jobs threatened. "They also contend that stripped of its thin veneer of scientific legitimacy, the theory of A.G.W. is nothing more than an ideological doctrine, and a dangerous one at that. . . [which stifles] healthy debate . . . on an issue that could have serious and lasting global economic and social repercussions."8

Still Mr. Gelbspan persists, 'This slow-motion collapse of the planet leaves us with the bitterest kind of awakening . . . For anyone anywhere who truly absorbs this reality and all that it implies, this realization leads into the deepest center of grief . . . There needs to be a vision that accommodates both the truth of the coming cataclysm and the profoundly human need for a sense of future.'9

This leaves one reeling. Is this just a war of words? Is it a spitting match? A power play? One has to wonder. Especially when one reads some of the comments on Mr. Gelbspan's commentary. One worker in the Environmental Protection field who has a science and mathematics background said, "I have studied this issue for many years, reading everything I can find on the subject, including all the IPCC reports (not just the executive summaries). I have yet to come across any credible evidence that increasing atmospheric CO2, man-made or otherwise, is causing global warming. To the contrary, all of the research-backed theories that seem to explain past climate changes have nothing to do with CO2. . . .So far, all this hype appears, in my view, to be based on computer models that are seriously flawed.' 10

It is enough to make one cry. Not only is this controversy, regardless of who is right, throwing a bad light on the scientific community, fueling the fires of controversy, separating friends, and making reporters sound like fools, but it is downright depressing.

One wonders how many people echo this reader's comment, "the future is going to s- - -, we just don't know how badly." Or this one, "This article kind of makes me want to go home, eat a handful of Xanax and stare at a wall for a while." Or even this one, "What the h- - - am I supposed to do now?" 11

What we don't need is more sloppy science, weeping politicians, false accusations, and blind denial. Pure and honest reporting from the mainstream press would be a great start. However, whether an environmentalist, Christian, or unconcerned citizen, everyone has a responsibility to their environment. What we do will effect future generations.