climate change research

2

Donald Trump plans to cut NASA’s “politicized” climate research division 

  • President-elect Donald Trump reportedly plans to yank funding from climate change research conducted by NASA.
  • Senior adviser Bob Walker described it as an attempt to cut down on “politicized science.”
  • Walker said the president-elect favors exploration of deep space, and has vowed to explore the entire solar system by the end of the century.
  • “Politically correct environmental monitoring,” Walker said, has no place at NASA.
  • Meanwhile, Trump said this on the Paris Climate Agreement: “I’m looking at it very closely. … I have an open mind to it.” Read more

follow @the-future-now

From the first issue of the Journal of Alternative Facts.

Other forthcoming articles:

Spicer, S. (2017). Quantifying Crowd Size with Empirical Data: A Wishful Thinking Approach. Journal of Alternative Facts 1(1).

Amaleauthor, I.A. (2017). Reduced Access to Contraception Reduces Abortions. Journal of Alternative Facts 1(1).

Trump, D.J. (2017). An Exhaustive Account of Terrorist Acts Committed by Computer Science PhD Students. Journal of Alternative Facts 1(2).

Trump, D.T. (2017). Definitions & Etymologies of the Words “Fake” as It Applies to News Organizations. Journal of Alternative Facts 1(2).

Trump, D.J. &  Peña Nieto, E. (2017). Badly Needed Walls: The Case of Mexico. Journal of Alternative Facts 1(2).

Find more at our official Twitter account, @JournalAltFacts. This work is all peer reviewed by the very best politicians. 

(Also, please feel free to “submit” article titles here or on Twitter.)

The administration is acting like a caricature of the cruelhearted scrooges Democrats would like everyone to believe they are. The program that helps fund Meals on Wheels, Mulvaney said, is “just not showing any results.” I mean really — how many of those elderly shut-ins have pulled themselves up by their bootstraps and gotten jobs? And as for after-school programs for kids, “There’s no demonstrable evidence,” Mulvaney said, that “they’re actually helping kids do better in school.” He said about climate change research that “we’re not spending money on that anymore.” As a result, even some Republicans are recoiling from the administration’s budget. Rep. Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), who used to chair the House Appropriations Committee, called the cuts “draconian, careless and counterproductive.”
— 

Why liberals should be happy about Trump’s appalling budget proposal

I mean really — how many of those elderly shut-ins have pulled themselves up by their bootstraps and gotten jobs? And as for after-school programs for kids, “There’s no demonstrable evidence,” Mulvaney said, that “they’re actually helping kids do better in school.”

Yeah, those elderly people who just want to have a little dignity, a little food, and aren’t able to get out of their homes for some reason or another … fuck those goddamn parasites, right, Mulvaney?

And hungry kids who are so poor they can’t get a good meal before they go to school? How are those little ingrates ever going to learn how to do high-frequency trading and get ready to argue about the carried interest deduction if they’re wasting all that time eating instead of watching Morning Bell on CNBC? Fuck those little shits, right?

nytimes.com
Climate Change Conversations Are Targeted in Questionnaire to Energy Department

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald J. Trump’s transition team has circulated an unusual 74-point questionnaire at the Department of Energy that requests the names of all employees and contractors who have attended climate change policy conferences, as well as emails and documents associated with the conferences.

In question after question, the document peppers Energy Department managers with pointed queries about climate science research, clean energy programs and the employees who work for those programs. More broadly, the questionnaire hints at a significant shift of emphasis at the agency toward nuclear power, and a push to commercialize the research of the Energy Department’s laboratories, long considered the crown jewels of federal science.

Energy Department employees, who shared the questionnaire with The New York Times and spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly, described the questionnaire as worrying. Mr. Trump has just tapped Scott Pruitt, the attorney general of Oklahoma and a climate change denialist, to head the Environmental Protection Agency, and the president-elect has made it clear he intends to roll back eight years of regulatory efforts by President Obama that aimed to control planet-warming emissions.

The questionnaire “suggests the Trump administration plans a witch hunt for civil servants who’ve simply been doing their jobs,” Robert Weissman, president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, said in a statement. “Democrats and Republicans alike should unite to condemn any action that intimidates, threatens or retaliates against civil servants for lawfully doing their jobs.” VIA

Basically, Trump is looking to extract climate science and research out of the DOE.

Turning Poop into Fuel

UCLA alum David Wernick is essentially trying to solve two problems at once. One is that he’s trying to find a renewable alternative to fossil fuels. The second problem is the 1 billion tons of manure that the U.S. produces each year alone.

That mountain of excrement not only poses a disposal problem, it also creates a potent source of methane emissions and nitrous oxides — greenhouse gases that are more potent than CO2.

But to Wernick and his colleagues at UCLA, it’s not just a big pile of poop: it’s a really big – and renewable – source of biofuel. What’s the big deal about poop? It’s the protein.

Typically, bacteria look for protein in the environment and then use that to grow.

But Wernick engineers the metabolism of bacteria (Bacillus subtilis) so that instead of just growing on the protein, it takes a portion of it and uses it to produce biofuels.

Poop in; fuel out.

Manure isn’t the only material that can be used in this process. Protein-rich byproducts like wastewater algae and fermentation leftovers from wine and beer production could also work.

Learn more about how they’re turning poop into fuel in the video below:

The E.P.A. is among the hardest-hit agencies. The budget calls for the elimination of about 3,200 staff positions — over 20 percent of the department. It would also eliminate all funding for enactment of the Clean Power Plan, the regulations designed to curb greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. It would also discontinue funding for climate change research and international climate change programs.

It includes a $1.4 billion increase for public and private school choice programs while eliminating funding for before- and after-school and summer programs.

About $2.6 billion would be dedicated for border security technology and infrastructure, including the early stages of a wall between the United States and Mexico. The budget sets aside $314 million to hire and train 500 Border Patrol agents and 1,000 Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel next year. Another $1.5 billion would go toward supporting the detention and removal of illegal immigrants.

Who Wins and Loses in Trump’s Proposed Budget

theguardian.com
Bjørn Lomborg centre got $640,000 for report saying limiting warming rise to 2C not worth it
Revealed under freedom of information, cost came before Copenhagen Consensus Centre’s controversial $4m Australian program dropped
By Paul Karp

Interesting. Seems Lomborg is about to be exposed as a fraud. We’ll see…

Limiting catch of one type of fish could help save coral reefs

Limiting the take of just one type of fish could protect coral reefs around the world from the most serious immediate impacts of climate change, researchers have found.

Studying Caribbean coral reefs, Peter Mumby and colleagues from the University of Queensland found that enforcing a rule limiting the fishing of a single type of herbivorous fish – parrotfish – would allow coral reefs there to continue to grow, despite bleaching and other impacts associated with climate change.

Coral reefs damaged by bleaching or storms can recover when new baby corals settle and grow on the dead old corals. But the new recruits must compete with seaweed. If the seaweed outcompetes the coral, the reef can be lost forever, transforming into a seaweed-dominated ecosystem, where most of the biodiversity is lost.

But herbivorous fish can eat the seaweed, giving the baby corals a fighting chance.

No safe haven for polar bears in warming Arctic

Not a single polar-bear haven in the rapidly warming Arctic is safe from the effects of climate change, researchers have found.

Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) rely on sea ice for roaming, breeding, and as a platform from which to hunt seals. When the ice melts in the summer, the bears spend several months on land, largely fasting, until the freeze-up allows them to resume hunting. So if they are to survive, they need pockets of ice to persist almost year-round.

Some climate models suggest that most of the Arctic may be ice-free in summer by mid-century[1]. But icy refuges near the North Pole currently support 19 populations of polar bears, totalling some 25,000 individuals.  Scientists weren’t sure about the exact rate of ice retreat in these habitats, or whether some refuges might not yet be dwindling.

All of the Arctic refuges are in fact on the decline, a detailed examination of satellite data now suggests. Mathematician Harry Stern and biologist Kristin Laidre at the University of Washington in Seattle used a 35-year satellite record to examine each of the 19 population areas, which range from 53,000 to 281,000 square kilometres in size. For each, they calculated the dates on which sea ice retreated in the Arctic spring and advanced in the autumn, as well as the average summer sea-ice concentration and number of ice-covered days.

Polar bears’ sea-ice habitat is dwindling as the Arctic warms. Theo Allofs/Minden Pictures/FLPA

10

This is the Miley Cyrus people willingly choose to ignore in order to justify picking apart and tearing down a young woman. Has she made a couple mistakes and said questionable things? Of course. We all have. But Miley Cyrus has a good heart and her intentions aren’t malicious or self serving, she draws controversy to herself in order to have a platform to speak out on numerous issues including homelessness, lgbt rights, animal welfare, climate change, feminism, aids/hiv research, body confidence and individuality. Does this excuse her cultural appropriation? No, but it also doesn’t make her a bad person. There are far worse people in the industry to focus your anger on. I understand it’s trendy to hate on Miley Cyrus after the VMAs debacle, but please don’t fall victim to mob mentality and let people paint someone in a negative light to push their personal vendettas and biases. We all make mistakes, and we should all be given the benefit of the doubt and an opportunity to grow and better ourselves. Miley Cyrus is no exception.