Tax fossil fuels or risk kid's future (James Hansen)

Tax fossil fuels or risk kids' future: US climate scientist

By Kerry SHERIDAN Miami (AFP) Oct 4, 2016 All but two photos are from 2000 to 2016 by John Shanahan and family. The two photos of Woods Hole, Massachusetts are by friends of White House Science Advisor, Dr. John Holdren in 2015! Compare climate in pictures with Dr. Hansen’s predictions in text.

See important questions at the end.

Woods Hole, Massachusetts, USA– ice on ocean thick enough to walk on Levels of the planet's three most dangerous greenhouse gases are rising, and fossil fuels must be taxed to protect children from the turmoil of rising seas and extreme storms, climate scientist James Hansen warned Tuesday.

Otherwise, young people face the "dubious" proposition of somehow sucking carbon dioxide from the air at a price tag of hundreds of trillions of dollars in the next century, said Hansen, who leads the climate science program at Columbia University's Earth Institute.

"The science has become crystal clear," Hansen told reporters on a conference call to discuss his latest research paper, entitled "Young People's Burden: The Requirement of Negative CO2 Emissions."

"We have to phase out carbon emissions over the next few decades," said Hansen, describing the actions of the US government up until now as "grossly inadequate."

Page 1

Hansen, formerly of NASA, is suing the US government along with 21 youths across the country, including his 18-year-old granddaughter.

Near Woods Hole, Massachusetts, USA – ice on ocean thick enough to walk on The suit alleges that by continuing to burn fossil fuels and causing climate change, the United States is failing to protect essential "public trust" resources such as clean air and water, thereby depriving future generations of their constitutional rights to life, liberty and property.

The paper, published Tuesday in Earth Systems Dynamics Discussion, has not yet been peer-reviewed, but Hansen said he wanted it released now because time is of the essence.

"Some people might object to discussing such a paper before it has gone through the peer-review process. But I am going to do that simply because we are running out of time on the climate issue," Hansen said.

- Leaving 'a mess' for young people The paper, authored by Hansen and 11 prominent climate scientists, warns that the global average temperature is already 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.3 Fahrenheit) warmer than pre-industrial times, defined as 1880-1920.

Page 2

That is perilously close to the level agreed during last year's Paris talks, when global leaders committed to holding the increase of global average temperature to well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

Colorado, USA Meanwhile, the heat-trapping gases carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide are all rising, ensuring more global warming in years to come.

Already, fossil fuel burning has unnaturally propelled the Earth to a temperature range last seen 115,000-130,000 years ago, "when sea level was six to nine meters (20-30 feet) higher than today," said the paper.

As a result, glaciers and ice sheets are melting, the oceans are acidifying and rising seas will engulf coastal cities worldwide in the coming centuries.

"That's not fair. Today's adults benefit from fossil fuel burning and leave the waste for young people to clean up," said Hansen's granddaughter, Sophie Kivlehan, in a video message released along with Hansen's paper.

"We should be moving on to clean energy, leaving dirty energy in the ground."

- 'Like a cancer ' Page 3

"The assumption that young (people) will somehow figure out a way to undo the deeds of their forebears has crept into and spread like a cancer through United Nations climate scenarios," said the paper.

Colorado, USA In the absence of sharp cuts to emissions, future generations are saddled with figuring out some way to extract CO2 from the atmosphere in order to limit climate change, Hansen argued.

That would require risky, unproven technologies such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), at a price tag of between $104-570 trillion this century.

"It is a very dubious idea and the cost of it is not negligeable," Hansen said.

- Proposed solutions Hansen said the way to reverse course is to place a gradually rising tax on carbon and end government subsidies for polluting fossils fuels like coal, oil and natural gas.

"Make the price of fossil fuels honest. Stop subsidizing them. And make them pay their cost to society," Hansen said.

Page 4

"If we put a gradually rising fee on carbon emissions, it will spur the business community and entrepreneurs and the public to develop carbonfree energies and energy efficiency, and it will spur the public to change their choices so that we move rapidly to reducing emissions and move to clean energy."

France Hansen said he was optimistic that the lawsuit, organized by Our Children's Trust, will go forward.

In April, the case survived an attempt by the fossil fuel industry and US government to get it tossed out of court, and is currently under review by US District Judge Ann Aiken.

She heard oral arguments on September 13 and is expected to announce her decision by mid-November. Then, the case will head either to trial or appeal.

Poll finds vast gaps in US climate views Washington (AFP) Oct 4, 2016 - The American public is sharply divided on the issue of climate change, with liberals far more likely than conservatives to trust scientists on the science of global warming, a poll said Tuesday.

Page 5

The survey by the Pew Research Center, based on a nationwide sample of more than 1,500 adults, also found a vast divide on acceptable solutions for climate change.

Switzerland Only 36 percent of Americans said they are "deeply concerned about climate issues," said the survey, which was taken from May to June, some five months before the US presidential election.

"Liberal Democrats are especially likely to see scientists and their research in a positive light, while conservative Republicans are considerably more skeptical of climate scientists' information, understanding and research findings on climate issues," said the findings.

For instance, 70 percent of liberal Democrats said they "trust climate scientists a lot to give full and accurate information about the causes of climate change," compared to just 15 percent of conservative Republicans.

More than half of liberal Democrats (54 percent) said climate scientists understand the causes of climate change very well, and 55 percent believe there is "widespread consensus among climate scientists" about the causes of global warming.

Page 6

Among conservative Republicans, just 11 percent and 16 percent respectively said the same.

Colorado, USA Meanwhile, conservative Republicans were far more likely to say "climate research findings are influenced by scientists' desire to advance their careers (57 percent) or their own political leanings (54 percent) most of the time," said the Pew report.

Among liberal Democrats, just 16 percent believed in such influences.

- Divided on solutions Views on solutions were also quite different among political groups.

More than three quarters of liberal Democrats said restricting emissions from power plants could make a big difference, compared to 29 percent of conservative Republicans.

A similar divide was seen on the question of the usefulness of an international agreement to limit carbon emissions -- with 71 percent of liberal Democrats in favor compared to 27 percent of conservative Republicans.

Page 7

Two thirds of liberal Democrats back tougher fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks and corporate tax incentives to encourage greener business practices, compared to just about one quarter of conservative Republicans.

Italy Even the worthiness of individual efforts to reduce one's "carbon footprint" were seen quite differently, with 52 percent of liberal Democrats saying this can make a big difference compared to 21 percent of conservative Republicans.

Having a base of science knowledge did not make a sweeping difference in people's beliefs.

"To the extent that science knowledge influences people's judgments related to climate change and trust in climate scientists, it does so among Democrats, but not Republicans," said Cary Funk, lead author and associate director of research at the Pew Research Center.

"For example, Democrats with high science knowledge are especially likely to believe the Earth is warming due to human activity, to see scientists as having a firm understanding of climate change, and to trust climate scientists' information about the causes of climate change," said Funk.

"But Republicans with higher science knowledge are no more or less likely to hold these beliefs."

Page 8

The poll did find "strong bipartisan support for expanding solar and wind energy production," with 89 percent of Americans favoring more solar farms and 83 percent more wind turbine farms.

Ukraine QUESTIONS: 1) The photos of winter in the United States and Europe taken in the last 20 years show conditions within the normal range for much longer periods of time. The photos of frozen salt water on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA show conditions that the local people described as “ENDLESS WINTER” in 2015. Very rarely does the ocean water off Cape Cod freeze so solid as it did that year. Photos of spring, summer and fall shown at the end of this article are likewise in the normal range for the United States and Europe. It is a beautiful world. See all the photos of nature on the website: efn-usa.org. Dr. Hansen says that we must phase out use of fossil fuels within the next few decades or face dire climate consequences.

Where is the physical evidence in nature that such drastic steps as stopping use of fossil fuels in the next few decades will do anything but put the world in a rapid retreat from the wonderful benefits of the modern economy enabled by use of fossil fuels?

2) Dr. Hansen’s main suggestion is that urgently taxing fossil fuels (in the United States) before this paper could even be peer reviewed is necessary to prevent drastic man-made climate change that will harm American children.

Page 9

Who thinks that taxing fossil fuels in the United States (China, Russia, Africa, South America, and India aren’t going to place a “save the climate” tax on fossil fuels.) will have any measurable ameliorative effect on the world’s climate? Isn’t Earth’s climate mainly controlled by the Sun and very larger scale physical, chemical, and biological processes on Earth?

3) Wouldn’t it be better to focus on obvious, very pressing challenges for improving health and economy for people the world over, the environment and maintaining biodiversity than establishing a tax on fossil fuels in the United States to supposedly solve these questionable predictions of man-made climate change?

In closing,we present pictures one for each of the other seasons: spring, summer, autumn.

Isn’t it a beautiful world in many places? Can we work together to spread this natural beauty and good living to places that don’t have it?

SPRING

Page 10

SUMMER

AUTUMN

Page 11