If Paul Revere Were Alive Today, and Spanking His Horse to it's Fastest, Would He Say, 'Climate Change is Coming! Climate Change is Coming!"

"The British are coming! The British are coming!" he yelled. But this time, nobody was listening. "Okay," he said, "it's not the British, but it is climate change, and we should be mounting our horses to fight it."

He scurried and found a large, 8,500-page book. Opening it and pointing his finger at a spot on one page, he read to them. "Global surface temperature has increased faster since 1970 than in any other 50-year period over at least the last 2000 years."

They gave him a look of annoyance and waved him off. 

"Hey, he said. "it says right here that we are not meeting the Paris Agreement goal of cutting emissions. You know that don't you?"

"Well, there's your problem right there," they said. "That Paris Agreement is nothing but communist junk. Those guys are tied in with the United Nations, and you can't trust the United Nations. They just want to control the world, and dumb crumbs like you listen to them. 'The sky is falling! the sky is falling!' Yeah, right."

"No, I didn't say that. I said the British are coming! The British are coming!" he said. "And I only said that because this is serious, just like that was. Back in that day, they heeded warnings. But, I have to  wonder if today, they would just greet Paul Revere with, 'Yeah, right."

And, so it is, warnings don't mean what they used to.

Back in Paul Revere's day, they didn't have communists. Good thing, because if they did, he would have been accused of being a communist.

(Index -- Climate change info)

The Farmer can be Front of the Line in Fighting Climate Change

 We can never survive as a planet by despoiling the Earth. And, those in rural communities respect the Earth as much as anyone. They look to the cities and see the belching fumes and feel fortunate to be living in their cleaner, rural air. They visit the mountains and streams so close to them, and are grateful for their beauty and serenity. The farmer is, by nature, a lover of nature.

But, these same farmers and ranchers often do not realize how much climate change is impacting them. Poor agriculture practices cause soil erosion, which leads to a loss of nutrients in the soil, the nutrients being swept away into the rivers. 

Also an impact: When crops are raised where there are high carbon dioxide concentrations, they have fewer nutrients. So, the farmer provides a better product when carbon dioxide levels are reduced. Not to mention that the whole world would be eating better, since the food is more nutritious. 

Does tilling affect the environment? This centuries-old practice loosens the soil, aerates the soil, and kills weeds. But, the practice also has  harmful effects, drying the soil, removing  nutrients, and killing earthworms and useful microbes.

And, causing dust storms. The loosened soil dries and is blown away when the next wind comes. Some dust storms have been so severe as to blind drivers and bring traffic pileups and accidents. Dust storms have claimed the lives of hundreds during the past decade. Surprisingly, they have a death rate similar to that of hurricanes and wildfires. 

Enter no-till (or low-till) farming. Instead of tilling before planting, the farmer uses equipment to create a narrow channel where the seeds can be planted, thus minimizing how much the soil is disturbed. With lower erosion rates, no-till farming is a viable option for farmers. There will be situations where it is not practical, however, such as when the leaves of a crop are mowed, rendering it impossible to cut a small channel in which to plant the seeds. (Cover crop systems, though, do allow the channels to cut through the mulch, or whatever you want to call it.)

At a recent climate summit here in Utah, innovation was lauded as a key to fighting climate change. In addition to the things being done that are described above, another innovation is drip irrigation. As much as 40-50 percent of the water from a sprinkler system can be lost, some to wind, some to evaporation, and some to runoff. It will not always be that a farmer can use drip irrigation, as opposed to line sprinkling, but when it is possible, it can be a big benefit. As much as 70 percent of the world's fresh water is used to irrigate crops and water livestock. Why not try to save water, especially in a desert-type state such as Utah?

Drip systems, also called trickle irrigation, can use hoses with holes in them, or use tubing, or pipes. Sometimes the water drips directly above the root system, and other times the piping is underground. (Though underground systems would be rare in farming. They are more for lawns and gardening.) Thus, drip irrigation is more efficient than sprinkler or surface irrigation. Speaking again of innovation, finding ways to make drip irrigation more practical to farmers would be a great innovation to pursue.

Installing smart systems and rain sensors are other ways farmers can reduce their water usage. 

Agroforestry, cover crops, and permaculture, are among the many other agricultural practices that tie in with climate change. All we learn and all we do can make a difference. Since we have acknowledged that climate change is real, we should want to make our agricultural practices part of the solution. One of the world's greatest environmentalists, John D. Liu, at the climate summit in Utah, discussed how agriculture practices can bring huge change in ecosystems. Applying some of the practices described above would carry the spirit of what Liu has done around the world.

(Index -- Climate change info)

The Swarming Waters Will Swarm Their Homes

 You know those stories about how if the Arctic melts, the world's sea levels will rise? All wrong, all wrong. You can rest assured, it isn't going to happen.

See, when water freezes, it expands. So, when the Arctic melts, it is actually going to contract.

Okay, I'm lying. I'm deceiving you. Typical, typical. Yes, when ice melts, it does contract. True. But we have another couple things to consider. 

1.) Ice that floats above the level of the Arctic Sea is going to add volume to the sea when it melts. Some icebergs are very tall, say 75 meters. When that melts, that counts for a walloping increase in water. 

2.)  When water warms, it expands. So, its a matter of whether the warm and therefore expanded water will be greater than what the frozen and therefore expanded water was. 

Let's get back to the idea that when the icebergs come down, it means the world's sea levels will rise. Did you know that some people say, don't worry -- it's just the Earth passing through cycles it has endured before? Don't get your shirt sleeves twisted before you try slipping your arms in them.

Thing is -- even if that were true -- you've got to concede that people weren't living on the shores of Florida and New York back all those eons ago.  There weren't people, period. So, there wasn't anyone around to be impacted by the rising waters. 

Regardless whether you believe man-made emissions are causing icebergs to melt, they are melting. And, that means the water levels in Florida are going to rise by as much as six feet. Some house floors will be beneath the water level. Are you fine with that? No problemento? Somewhere between 250 million to 400 million people will be displaced. 

Right now, from the back of the crowd, I hear a guy yelling, "Do something! Do something!" He's right. See, if we increase our efforts to curb emissions, the sea might only rise two feet. That's a lot of difference, two feet versus six. Homes can be saved.

(Index -- Climate change info)

In a Distant Future -- Will the Arctic Sea Be Just Another Swimming Pool?

   Okay, the ice is melting in the Arctic Sea. How long will it take before it is all gone? Not in our lifetime, right?

   Actually, it could. In fact, the boys with their science hats on suggest it might even happen as early as the 2030s. You expect to be alive that long, don't you? Oh, the ice freezes in the winter and is lost in the summers, you understand. So, it would just be in the summers -- say each September -- that the waters would be snowless and iceless. 

  The amount of ice in the winter in the Arctic has deceased by a third over the past 20 years, and the rate of melting is accelerating. Greenland is projected to lose ice at a faster rate this century than it has in 12,000 years. 

   Have we reached the tipping point? Are the emissions packing our skyways already so great and do they linger so long that the melting is inevitable and irreversible. Apparently so. 

  Hey, I was beginning to look forward to vacationing on a beach somewhere in the Arctic. But then somebody reminded me there's no land mass under all that snow and ice, so I guess the party is off.  Oh well, maybe I will be able to go deep sea diving.

(Index -- Climate change info)

Float the Solar Panels, Especially Behind Hydro Dams

 Cover the lake with solar panels. Mandate that there not be a lake in all of the land that isn't topped with solar panels from shore to shore.

Okay, that's a little much. In truth, who knows how many lakes and reservoirs would be suitable for floating solar panels, certainly not many. And, in most every case, only a portion of the surface could be covered, due to such things as a desire to not kill algae.

But, put up floatingsolar panels wherever we can, especially behind existing hydro power plants, since the distribution system would not even need to be expanded. Projects on most lakes and reservoirs, though, would not be viable due to too little energy being generated to justify laying new distribution lines.

One wonders how much electricity could be generated if just one percent of the Great Salt Lake was covered with floating solar panels. Probably not much, but perhaps it would still be worth it if only a thousand homes were served.

We are told we are facing an energy crisis. If so, we should be scrambling to get every component of energy in place that makes sense. Floating solar makes sense, and it can make a little bit of a difference.

(Index -- Climate change info)

If Batteries Aren't the Answer, how about Pumped Storage?

If you relied solely on wind turbines, you'd be in trouble when the wind wasn't blowing. And, if you relied solely on solar energy, there would be no power at night.

My answer has always been: Haven't you heard? They've invented batteries. Store the energy in batteries for when the wind isn't blowing, and store the energy for when the sun is up, and everything will be all right.

Today, I found out I was wrong. The large-project batteries can only store energy for a limited amount of time, say, four hours. I did read of one grid battery operation in New York that is to store for up to eight hours, but that still isn't enough to meet our needs.

Enter what is called pumped storage. You pump water from a lower level to a higher level. The water stays there as long as you don't need more energy, and, when you do, you release it through the hydro power station, and, viola, you have the energy you need when solar power is lost to the night and wind power is lost to no wind.

I don't believe a single pumped storage plant has been built in more than 30 years. Why not? It may be that so many hydro power plants are facing decommission that it doesn't make sense to put new pumped storage facilities behind them.

We should save more hydro stations, and then build the pumped storage stations behind them. True, hydro cannot be the only thing in our energy mix, as in times of drought, you lose it. But it should remain a large component. 

And, what is called "floating solar," should also be placed behind the dams. But, that is a story for tomorrow.

(Index -- Climate change info)

Speaking of Climate Change, We Can Easily Turn This into a Cakewalk

Would you think we are doing better, or does this sound about right? About 84 percent of the world's energy comes from oil, natural gas, and coal. And, about 77 percent of the U.S.'s energy comes those three sources.

After all these years of screaming, "Climate change is coming! Climate change is coming! We must shed ourselves of coal, natural gas and oil!"

Now, go ahead and be amazed that we aren't doing better than this. Go ahead and point out the whole world could be powered by solar and wind, alone, if we were only to do it. But, the good part is, if we are doing that bad and can do that good, then, if we want, we should easily conquer climate change.

(Index -- Climate change info)