| Sourced From Canadafreepress |
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) science deliberately kept public focus on warmer temperatures and blamed it all on radiative forcing due to CO2. They virtually ignore water in all its forms, partly because terms of reference directed them to only human causes and because any consideration of the role of water destroys the CO2 hypothesis.
Chief of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Rajendra Pachauri should not resign succumbing to media pressure, according to Yvo De Boer, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Continue Reading at Â
Well it’s not surprising that members of the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are eager to get the rich countries of the world to sign on to plan to pour billions if not trillions of dollars into a fund to help fight the effects of global warming on poorer, developing nations around the world.
Continue Reading atÂ
| Sourced From Heartland.org |
The Science and Public Policy Institute has launched a new online publication, Monthly CO2 Report, edited by Christopher Monckton.
| Sourced From Telegraph.Co.UK|
Barack Obama faces a “revolution” if he imposes emission cuts on the US similar to those set in Europe, the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has conceded.
| Sourced From ICIS.com |
CARBON CAPTURE and sequestration (CCS) technology might still be at an experimental and development stage, but several companies, including those in the chemical industry, are lining up to take advantage of its opportunities.
Researchers from Australian National University (ANU) reveal untouched natural forests have the potential to stock up 3 times more CO2 than formerly thought, which makes their storage capacity around 60% more than that of plantation forests.
The researchers, who have conducted a study on green carbon, further claim that UNs Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) does not differentiate between storage capacity of untouched and plantation forests; at present, the perceived amount of CO2 forests can store is based on calculations that are true for plantation forests but are significantly less than the capacity of untouched forests.
The researchers also blamed a variation in forests definition for the dispute.
Network on Linkedin
Get daily news
Subscribe to RSS
Follow on Twitter
Add us to iGoogle
Become a Facebook Fan
© 2009 Carbon Offsets Daily. All Rights Reserved.
This blog is powered by Wordpress and Magatheme by Bryan Helmig.