Chertoff Says Disciplinary Action Will Be Taken Over FEMA California Wildfires Press Conference

Officials involved in the phony press conference staged by the Federal Emergency Management Agency this week are now facing disciplinary action, says Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff.“I think it was one of the dumbest and most inappropriate things I’ve seen since I’ve been in government,” said Mr Chertoff.

“I have made unambiguously clear, in Anglo-Saxon prose, that it is not to ever happen again and there will be appropriate disciplinary action taken against those people who exhibited what I regard as extraordinarily poor judgment.”

* * * Read the full story at BayouBuzz.com

Louisiana Senator Landrieu Angry About Bogus FEMA Press Conference

Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu (D) is demanding answers from the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency after it was revealed that a bogus news conference was staged by FEMA earlier this week.“I am disappointed to learn that (FEMA Deputy Administrator Harvey Johnson) misled the press and the public by taking questions from his own staff pretending to be reporters and that the agency did not disclose this misrepresentation,” said Senator Landrieu.She also said she hoped the fake press conference was “not a substitute for the necessary reforms” needed to improve FEMA’s delivery of emergency services.

* * * Read the full story at BayouBuzz.com

California Wildfire Response Took Lessons From Katrina

Wildfires burning out of control for the fourth day have forced nearly a million southern California residents from their homes in the largest mass evacuation in the US since hurricane Katrina slammed into the Gulf Coast in 2005.With the eyes of the world on California, the federal government is anxious to ensure there is no repeat of its lackluster response in the aftermath of Katrina.

* * * Read the full story at BayouBuzz.com

California Wildfires Burn as Schwarzenegger Declares Emergency

Nearly a thousand homes have been reduced to ashes and 300,000 residents evacuated as wildfires continue to rage unchecked across southern California.

One person has been confirmed dead and 41 injured, including 25 firefighters.

Homes and businesses have been consumed by sweeping walls of flame that leapt highways and joined forces to torch hundreds of thousands of acres across the state’s southern regions.

California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has declared a state of emergency in seven counties so far. “It is a tragic time for California,” he said.

* * * Read the full story at BayouBuzz.com

US Air Force Fires, Disciplines Officers For Nuclear Missiles Mistake

The US Air Force has fired four officers and disciplined 65 other members after discovering that six nuclear missiles were flown by mistake from North Dakota to Louisiana on August 30.

“In the countless times our dedicated airmen have transferred weapons in our nation’s arsenal, nothing like this has ever occurred,” said Air Force Maj. Gen. Richard Newton, announcing the results of the military’s six-week investigation into the incident.

*** Read the full story at BayouBuzz.com

 

Jena Louisiana Protest: Sharpton, Jackson, King Lead Justice March

Twenty thousand protesters from across the United States converged on the small town of Jena, Louisiana on Thursday to march against what they call flagrant double standards for blacks and whites in the justice system, epitomized in the case of the ‘Jena Six’.

Despite the massive number of protesters, the emotionally charged issues and the threat of white supremacist counter-demonstrations, the event concluded peacefully. “There were no incidents and no arrests during the rally and march,” said Lieutenant Lawrence McLeary of State Police headquarters in Baton Rouge. “It was uneventful.”

Before dawn on Thursday, about 500 buses began bringing protesters into Jena, a town with a population of 3,000 – 85 percent of whom are white.

Communications technology played a major role in the ability of organizers to coordinate the national event, which had been promoted on black and civil rights web sites, blogs and radio programs. At the same time, student protesters had shared information through social-networking web sites such as Facebook and MySpace.

News releases from the Southern Poverty Law Center on Wednesday also warned that white supremacist web sites had indicated that some counter-demonstrations might be staged to confront the protesters – information it had passed onto State Police.

“I think the crowd is a peaceful crowd, in spite of the number,” Dr Doris Small of Natchitoches told the Town Talk of Alexandria. “I feel a spirit of unity.”

The demonstration was addressed by prominent black civil rights leaders including Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton.

Rev. Sharpton, leader of the New York-based National Action Network, told the crowd at the local courthouse that the protest was not a rebuke against the town or its inhabitants. “This is a march for justice,” he said. “This is not a march against whites or against Jena.” He also emphasized the need for a peaceful protest. “No violence,” he stressed. “Not even an angry word. They will try to provoke you. You have to stand strong.”

Martin Luther King III, son of the slain civil rights leader, also attended the rally. He said that while some punishment might be in order for the Jena Six, “the justice system isn’t applied the same to all crimes and all people”.

Wayne Curry, a former executive of Prince George’s County in Maryland, was more emphatic in his criticism. “This is a shocking abuse of justice in the 21st century and harkens to our sort of Neanderthal era of politics in America fashioned around legalized racism,” he told the Washington Post. “For this to be happening now is such a jolt. The absence of dialogue on the subject from many of our elected officials is astounding … Exultations of attempted murder for a fistfight in a school. What’s going on?”  

Although most of the protesters in Jena were black, there was also a sizeable contingent of young white people.

Mallory Flippo, a white university student from Shreveport, told the Associated Press, “I think what happened here was disgusting and repulsive to the whole state. I think it reflected badly on our state and how it makes it seem we view black people. I don’t feel that way, so I thought I should be here.”

As the protesters made their way from the courthouse to Jena High School and back they shouted, “No Justice! No Peace!” and carried banners which read “Enough is Enough” and “Get to the Root of the Problem”. They also chanted, “Hey hey ho ho! DA Reed has got to go!”

In anticipation of the march, and due to fears of violence, the town’s schools and most businesses were closed for the day. Most residents also remained indoors, but many who watched the march felt that the entire town had been accused of racism.

While most of the protesters confined their criticism to the justice system, as requested by the organizers, local resident Pam Sharp heard one woman shout “Shame on Jena!” A furious Ms Sharp told the Los Angeles Times she wasted no time responding to this outburst. “I shouted back, ‘No, shame on you!’ How can they include the whole town? That’s the shame.”

Ms Sharp also noted that the Jena Six case centered on a white student who had been beaten unconscious. “Protesters don’t want to talk about him,” she said.

One black family who sat in lawn chairs at the front of their property sold jambalaya and barbecue to the protesters as they marched past. The Town Talk reported that family member Hazel Epps, who now lives in Shreveport, also felt the need to defend her home town as she talked to some of the protesters.

When one woman from California asked why a local barber doesn’t cut the hair of African Americans, Ms Epps replied, “because they don’t know how”. Ms Epps also corrected the protester’s impression that Jena restaurants don’t serve black people, and said that everyone is welcome in the town’s restaurants.

In one local Jena restaurant, WBRZ television news of Baton Rouge interviewed two men who decided to mark the day with a quiet lunch together. Joe Clement (who is black) and George Ristick (who is white) appeared to be in their 60s and seemed oblivious to the excitement outside.

Mr Clement said he was not surprised by the controversy, while Mr Ristick hoped that the protest would help the country to better deal with the issue of racial equality. “Well, I’m sure other parts of the country have these problems,” he said. “I think it’s a real good eye opener. I really do – that it is being put under the spotlight for everybody.”  

Elizabeth Redding, a 63 year-old resident of Willingboro, New Jersey said she was marching on behalf of her great-grandchildren and recalled how she had participated in the civil rights movement when she was in her twenties. “This is worse, because we didn’t get the job done,” she told the Baton Rouge Advocate. “I never believed that this would be going on in 2007.”

As the procession marched on, some remnants of the Old South were still visible: two white Jena residents watching the march from their pickup truck were flying the confederate flag from their vehicle’s antenna. “It means Southern pride – tradition,” the passenger of the truck (who did not wish to be named) explained to the Town Talk. “The marchers are carrying their flags, so I’m going to have mine.”  

Meanwhile, 17 year-old April Jones, who had travelled from Atlanta with her parents, Diana and Derrick, said she could not understand why the hanging of a noose had not been punished severely. “I just feel like every time the white people did something, they dropped it, and every time the black people did something, they blew it out of proportion,” she told the New York Times.

Latese Brown, 40, of Alexandria, also challenged the perceived disparity in the justice system. “If you can figure out how to make a school yard fight into an attempted murder charge,” she said, “I’m sure you can figure out how to make stringing nooses into a hate crime.”

*   *   *   *   *

This article was first published at BayouBuzz.com

Jena Six Timeline – The Events

Aug 31, 2006:  During a Jena High School assembly, a black male freshman student asked permission to sit in the shade of the “white tree” (where traditionally only white students sat). The principal responded that the students could “sit wherever they wanted”. That afternoon, he and his friends sat under the tree.

Sep 1, 2006:  That morning, three nooses were found hanging from the tree – a clear reference to the historical lynching of blacks once widely practiced by white racists, especially in the southern states of the US.

When the principal learned that three white students were responsible, he recommended expulsion from the school which was overruled by the local Board of Education. They were instead punished with a three day in-school suspension.

School Superintendent Roy Breithaupt agreed with the Board and said, “Adolescents play pranks. I don’t think it was a threat against anybody.”

Local black residents said this further inflamed racial tensions in the town.

Sep 6, 2006:  The principal called a student assembly, in which students sat in segregated black and white sections. LaSalle Parish District Attorney J. Reed Walters addressed the assembly and is alleged to have threatened the protesters that if they didn’t stop complaining about an “innocent prank”, he could “take [their] lives away with the stroke of a pen”.

Sep 7, 2006:  Police began patrolling the halls of Jena High School.

Sep 8, 2006:  The school was declared to be in “total lockdown”.

Sep 10, 2006:  Dozens of black students attempted to address the school board but were refused because the board believed “the noose issue” had been resolved.

Racially charged confrontations between white and black students continued throughout the fall.

Nov 30, 2006:  The main building of Jena High School was set on fire and later needed to be gutted and demolished. Black and white students blamed each other for the arson.

Dec 1, 2006: At a mostly-white party held at the Fair Barn, five black students attempted to enter the party but were told they were not allowed in without an invitation. They persisted and said they had friends who were already at the party. A white man confronted the students and a fight ensued, which caused him to also be banned from the party.

Outside, the black students became involved in another fight with a group of white men (not students). Sixteen year-old Robert Bailey (later one of the Jena Six) alleged that a beer bottle had been broken over his head, although there are no medical records to indicate treatment was provided.

Dec 2, 2006: A white student who had attended the previous night’s party encountered Mr Bailey and his friends at a convenience store. An argument ensued and the white student is alleged to have run back to his pickup truck and produced a 12-gauge shotgun. Mr Bailey said he wrested the gun from the white student and took it home with him. Because the white and black students’ versions of events contradicted each other, police formed a report based on the testimony of an independent witness.

Mr Bailey was charged with theft of a firearm, second-degree robbery and disturbing the peace. The white student was not charged.

Dec 4, 2006: Jena High School student Justin Barker, 17, was allegedly beaten unconscious by black students including Mr Bailey. It was reported that Mr Barker had boasted earlier in the day that Mr Bailey had been beaten by a white man at the party on Dec 1, which Mr Barker denied. Mr Barker was treated at the local hospital and released after two hours. He attended a school function that evening.

Meanwhile, the six black students accused of the attack were arrested. Robert Bailey, Mychal Bell, Carwin Jones, Bryant Purvis and Theo Shaw were initially charged with assault. The sixth suspect, Jesse Ray Beard, was charged as a juvenile because he was 14 years old.

District Attorney Walters upgraded the assault charges to attempted murder.

June 26, 2007:  On the first day of Mychal Bell’s trial, in which he was tried as an adult, Mr Walters agreed to reduce the charges for Mr Bell to aggravated second-degree battery and conspiracy to commit the same crime, arguing that the “deadly weapon” used was Mr Bell’s tennis shoes, to which the jury agreed. There were conflicting witness accounts on whether Mr Bell had been involved in the attack.

Mr Bell was found guilty and faced a sentence of up to 22 years in prison. He was remanded in custody to be sentenced on September 20, 2007. There was public outcry because Mr Bell’s public defender did not call any witnesses in his attempt to defend his client.

Later, Mr Bell received new defense attorneys who requested a new trial on the grounds that Mr Bell, who was 16 years old at the time of the incident, should not have been tried as an adult. They also argued that the new trial should be held in another parish.

Aug 24, 2007: A request to lower Mr Bell’s $90,000 bond was denied due to his juvenile record, which showed that he had been previously convicted of four violent crimes.

Sep 4, 2007: A judge dismissed the conspiracy charge but upheld the battery conviction, although he agreed that Mr Bell should have been tried as a juvenile.

On this day, charges against Carwin Jones and Theo Shaw were reduced to aggravated second-degree battery and conspiracy.

Sep 10, 2007: Charges against Robert Bailey were reduced to aggravated second-degree battery and conspiracy.

Sep 14, 2007: Mr Bell’s conviction for battery was overturned by Louisiana’s Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Lake Charles on the grounds that he should not have been tried as an adult. District Attorney Reed appealed to the Louisiana Supreme Court.

Sep 20, 2007: On the day Mr Bell was initially due to be sentenced, the Third Circuit Court of Appeal in Lake Charles ordered a district judge to hold a hearing on why Mr Bell is still being held in jail.

Source: Wikipedia and media reports.

*   *   *   *   *

This article was first published at BayouBuzz.com

IPCC: Mitigation of Climate Change Summary

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its Working Group III report on Friday in Bangkok titled “Mitigation of Climate Change”, which focuses on scientific, technological, environmental, economic and social aspects of mitigating climate change.

The report builds on the two previous IPCC reports released this year which confirmed that climate change is “very likely” the result of human activity, and that global warming is already adversely affecting human, animal and plant life.

The Working Group III study identifies the most effective technologies and policies to combat climate change through the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the cost of implementing the recommended changes. 

Here are the report’s key points, at a glance:

1.         GHG Emission Trends

Global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions increased 70% between 1970 and 2004 (24% between 1990 and 2004). Carbon dioxide emissions accounted for 77% of total anthropogenic GHG emissions in 2004, mostly from the energy supply sector. Emissions will continue to increase by 25-90% to the year 2030, with approximately 75% of the projected increase from developing nations.

2.        Mitigation in the short and medium term

Mitigation of global GHG emissions is necessary to offset the growth of emissions or reduce emissions below current levels. A number of currently available mitigation technologies have been identified by sector:

 Energy Supply – improved supply and distribution efficiency; fuel switching from coal to gas; nuclear power; renewable heat and power (hydropower, solar, wind, geothermal and bioenergy); combined heat and power; early applications of Carbon Capture and Storage 

Transport – more fuel efficient vehicles; hybrid vehicles; cleaner diesel vehicles; biofuels; modal shifts from road transport to rail and public transport systems; non-motorized transport (cycling, walking); land-use and transport planning

Buildings – efficient lighting and daylighting; more efficient electrical appliances and heating and cooling devices; improved cook stoves, improved insulation ; passive and active solar design for heating and cooling; alternative refrigeration fluids, recovery and recycle of fluorinated gases

Industry – more efficient end-use electrical equipment; heat and power recovery; material recycling and substitution; control of non-carbon dioxide gas emissions; also a wide array of process-specific technologies

Agriculture – improved crop and grazing land management to increase soil carbon storage; restoration of cultivated peaty soils and degraded lands; improved rice cultivation techniques and livestock and manure management to reduce methane emissions; improved nitrogen fertilizer application techniques to reduce nitrous oxide emissions; dedicated energy crops to replace fossil fuel use; improved energy efficiency

Forestry/forests – afforestation; reforestation; forest management; reduced deforestation; harvested wood product management; use of forestry products for bioenergy to replace fossil fuel use

Waste – landfill methane recovery; waste incineration with energy recovery; composting of organic waste; controlled waste water treatment; recycling and waste minimization

Estimated global costs in the year 2030 have been calculated for least-cost trajectories for a range of stabilization levels from 445-710 CO2 parts per million:

Stabilization levels (CO2 ppm)

Median GDP reduction (%)

Range of GDP reduction (%)

Reduction of average annual GDP growth rates

Benefits that may offset mitigation costs include increased energy security, increased agricultural production and reduced pressure on natural ecosystems.

3.        Mitigation in the long term (after 2030)

Mitigation efforts over the next 20-30 years will determine humanity’s ability to achieve lower stabilization levels and avoid the worst affects of climate change.  

Lower stabilization levels are best achieved through a system of appropriate and effective incentives for the development, acquisition, deployment and diffusion of technologies and for addressing related barriers.

Economic costs of more rapid emission reductions now need to be balanced against the corresponding medium-term and long-term climate risks of delay.

4.        Policies, measures and instruments to mitigate climate change

National strategies can create incentives for action, and can be evaluated using four main criteria: environmental effectiveness, cost effectiveness, distributional effects (including equity) and institutional feasibility.

The following strategies have been demonstrated as environmentally effective:

Energy Supply

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>reduction of fossil fuel subsidies

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>taxes or carbon charges on fossil fuels

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>feed-in tariffs for renewable energy technologies

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>renewable energy obligations

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>producer subsidies

Transport

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>mandatory fuel economy, biofuel blending and CO2 standards for road transport

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>taxes on vehicle purchase, registration, use and motor fuels, road and parking pricing

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>influence mobility needs through land use regulations and infrastructure planning

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>investment in attractive public transport facilities and non-motorized forms of transport

Buildings

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>appliance standards and labeling

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>building codes and certification

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>demand-side management programs

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>public sector leadership programs, including procurement

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>incentives for energy service companies

Industry

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>provision of benchmark information

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>performance standards

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>subsidies, tax credits

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>tradable permits

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>voluntary agreements

Agriculture

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>improved land management

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>maintenance of soil carbon content

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>efficient use of fertilizers and irrigation

Forestry/forests

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>increase forest area (at the national and international levels)

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>reduce deforestation

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>maintain and manage forests

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>land use regulation and enforcement

Waste Management

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>improved waste and wastewater management

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>renewable energy incentives or obligations

<!–[if !supportLists]–>·        <!–[endif]–>waste management regulations

Government support through financial contributions, tax credits, standard setting and market creation is important for effective technology development, innovation and deployment. Transfer of technology to developing countries depends on enabling conditions and financing.

5.        Sustainable development and climate change mitigation

Implementation of sustainable development policies can make a major contribution to climate change mitigation. However, there will be multiple barriers and resources will need to be allocated to assist adaptation.

Decisions concerning macroeconomic policy, agricultural policy, multilateral development bank lending, insurance practices, electricity market reform, energy security and forest conservation can potentially significantly reduce emissions.

Making development more sustainable can enhance both mitigative and adaptive capacity to substantially reduce emissions and vulnerability to climate change.

Read the full text of the IPCC’s summary report:

http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM040507.pdf

*   *   *   *   *

This article was first published at BayouBuzz.com

Recovery Czar Ed Blakely Outlines New Orleans Reconstruction

“When you turn on the radio, you hear New Orleans. No matter where you are in the world. If you’re in Leningrad, the taxi driver puts on New Orleans music. It’s a city we all know about and should care about.”

With these words Dr Ed Blakely began his public lecture, at the University of Sydney on 5 April, on the rebuilding of the world’s jazz capital.

A professor of Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Sydney, Dr Blakely was recently appointed to head the reconstruction of New Orleans, which was virtually destroyed on 29 August 2005 when the storm surge from Hurricane Katrina burst through levees meant to protect the low-lying city from the Mississippi River and Lake Pontchartrain. Eighty per cent of the city was inundated.

In the aftermath the world watched as the Bush administration’s failure to respond left tens of thousands of people stranded for days without food or water. This failure was later widely linked to the fact that most of the city’s residents were poor and black.

Dr Blakely believes such incompetence and indifference would not be tolerated under Australia’s parliamentary form of government. “The Prime Minister would be gone because you couldn’t have a leader who had disappointed the electorate that badly,” he said.

Nineteen months later, about half the pre-Katrina population has returned to New Orleans only to find their neighbourhoods are still a disaster zone.

Traffic lights remain broken and many roads are impassable. Schools are badly damaged and some are rodent-infested. In March, 18 months after the flood, the city’s first hospital and emergency room re-opened. Some neighbourhoods in the city still have no electricity or drinkable water.

The US government has refused to release $1.1 billion in disaster aid under a reimbursement process which requires that the city first fund its own repairs, despite being bankrupted the day Katrina hit. Federal emergency loans to New Orleans also have not been forgiven, even though such debts were forgiven within the first month for every other major disaster to hit the US.

In its April Katrina Index, independent research organisation The Brookings Institution says New Orleans may have turned a corner with the January appointment of Dr Blakely, dubbed the city’s ‘Recovery Czar’. He has brought to the role extensive experience helping cities recover from disasters.

In New Orleans, his first task was to secure private funding to kick-start infrastructure projects by selling bonds and borrowing against the redevelopment of abandoned properties seized by the city.

His recovery strategy involves developing cluster housing on higher ground in 17 districts across New Orleans and reviving these areas’ commercial centres. Residents of the lowest-lying neighbourhoods will be encouraged to swap their land for a nearby property on higher ground. This strategy was unveiled on 30 March to wide acclaim.

Five principles drive the strategy:

• Continue the healing and consultation;
• Insure safety and security in all neighbourhoods;
• Build 21st and 22nd century infrastructure;
• Diversify the economy; and
• Design a sustainable settlement pattern.

Conscious of the ongoing distress felt by local residents, Dr Blakely gives daily media interviews to reassure people that New Orleans will recover and that local government remains deeply committed to rebuilding the city.

The major objectives of the 15-year recovery plan are to enable the city to survive and grow sustainably, while preserving the culture that has made New Orleans such a unique historical treasure.

“New Orleans already has a very well-defined and excellent urban fabric, with unique architecture,” said Dr Blakely. “We have to build onto this fabric.”

* * * * *

This article was first published at Reportage

IPCC: Global Warming Highway to Extinction

Climate change is paving a “highway to extinction” which could see billions of people perish from hunger, malnutrition, disease, extreme weather events, heat-induced stress and lack of drinkable water by the year 2050, according to the latest report of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change due to be released in Belgium next Friday.

Climate scientist Andrew Weaver of the University of Victoria in British Columbia told the Associated Press that the report maps out the consequences of climate change degree by degree, as temperatures rise. He said this presents a clear “highway to extinction, but on this highway there are many turnoffs. This is showing you where the road is heading. The road is heading toward extinction.”

Dr Weaver is one of the lead authors of the first IPCC report, issued in February. That report confirmed the strong scientific consensus that climate change is real and is caused by human activity related to greenhouse gas emissions.

If the global temperature rose by 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) up to 1.7 billion people would not have enough water. Infectious diseases and allergenic pollens would also substantially increase, and amphibians would begin to go extinct.

A further increase of 1 degree Celsius would see one-third of the world’s species approach extinction and at least 2 billion people facing death as a result of hunger, malnutrition, disease, extreme weather events, heat-induced stress and lack of drinkable water. Life on the planet would reach this threshold by the year 2050 if greenhouse gas emissions were not reduced substantially.

A further doubling of temperatures would see one-fifth of the world’s population affected by catastrophic flooding, up to 3.2 billion people facing extreme water shortages, and major extinctions around the globe.

Achim Steiner, the head of the UN Environment Program, told Reuters that “We are talking about a potentially catastrophic set of developments.” He believes the public, governments and businesses now realize that the substantive debate is over and that there is overwhelming consensus on climate change in the scientific community.

“We’ve passed the tipping point,” he said. “It’s no longer about whether climate change is happening – but about how we deal with it.” The next report of the IPCC, due out in October 2007, will assess the range of options for limiting greenhouse gas emissions and otherwise mitigating climate change.

Reports of the IPCC draw on the research of 2,500 climate scientists and reviewers. Only conclusions and projections beyond dispute make it into the final drafts of the reports, which are then signed off by more than 120 governments. 

A draft of the current IPCC report has been circulated to major media organizations and lists a range of potential climate change related consequences including:

• vast tracts of low-lying nations, island-states and coastlines around the world being swallowed by rising sea levels;   
• Himalayan glaciers melting by the 2030s;
• powerful heat waves recurring across the United States;
• Australia’s Great Barrier Reef being destroyed; and
• agricultural production plummeting world-wide (after a brief boost in Russia, Canada, New Zealand and Scandinavia).

Despite the dire warnings contained in this second report of the IPCC, scientists remain optimistic that humanity will act on climate change.

Oceanographer James McCarthy of Harvard University, one of the key authors of the current report, is one such optimist. “The worst stuff is not going to happen because we can’t be that stupid,” he told Reuters. “Not that I think the projections aren’t that good, but because we can’t be that stupid.”

*  *  *  *  * 

This article was first published at

http://www.bayoubuzz.com/News/World/Politics/IPCC_Global_Warming_Highway_To_Extinction__3305.asp