O'Malley: Human survival at risk from warming
SPARROWS POINT STEEL MILL
Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley is making the case that limits on global warming pollution could cost businesses in the short term. But in the long term, O'Malley argues that the cost of inaction is much greater -- the flooding of waterfront businesses and homes, and eventually, the extinction of humans.
“We need to move into a much more sustainable future or else we cease to exist as a species,” O’Malley, a Democrat, said while surrounded by environmental activists during a press conference at the State House yesterday. “People can talk about the increased cost of things. But what sort of increased costs will come from a four foot rise in sea level for businesses located at Sparrows Point (the steel mill) or in Annapolis or in downtown Baltimore?”
Business representatives and unions argued during a senate hearing that factories such as the ArcelorMittal steel plant in Sparrows Point could close if the state adopted proposed cuts in carbon dioxide pollution of 25 percent by 2020 and 90 percent by 2050.
Although six other states -- California, New Jersey, Oregon, Washington, Hawaii and Minnesota -- have limits on greenhouse gases similar to those being considered by Maryland, none of these states is next door. So some business advocates worry that power companies, for example, will build future power plants in Pennsylvania instead of in Maryland, meaning fewer jobs here.
These predictions of economic fallout were disputed by state Del. Kumar Barve, co-sponsor of the Global Warming Solutions Act. He said that the auto industry made similar predictions of ruin before fuel-efficiency laws were first passed in the 1970's, and the warnings turned out to false.
O'Malley's assertions about widespread death coming in the long-term from climate change were backed up by Dr. Cindy Parker of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. She told a senate committee yesterday that unchecked global warming would mean worsening air pollution, flooding and increases in diseases including asthma, she said.<
“As a public health physician, I believe that climate change poses the greatest risk to our health of anything this century,” Dr. Parker said. Action by Maryland and other states could prompt federal action, and if this convinces governments around the world to act, it "has the potential to save lots of lives, thousands and millions worldwide,” Dr. Parker said.
Mike Tidwell, an author and climate activist, said that businesses and homeowners are already facing higher costs because of climate change. He noted that Allstate Corp. and other insurance companies are refusing to issue new insurance policies along the Atlantic Coast and in other areas at heightened risk from hurricanes.
O'Malley picked up this same line of argument -- saying that capping carbon dioxide is a matter of long-term cost avoidance for businesses.
“These are things that we must do, that we have to do, that we have a moral imperative to do in order to turn around the impending damage that is coming to all of us on this planet because of unchecked climate change," O'Malley said. "This bill recognizes that not only that global warming is a battle we all share. But for too long our aim in this fight has fallen too short. We are faced with the sad fact that our coastlines are eroding, that the planet is warming, and we have to do a better job of reducing the damage that human consumption and patterns in energy use are doing to our planet.”
Many business owners and Republicans aren't buying it.
Bill Pitcher, a lobbyist for the NewPage paper mill in Western Maryland (formerly known as the Westvaco plant). suggested that the limits could imperil the jobs of all of the factory's 950 employees.
“These kinds of reductions, given the existing technology, would be well neigh impossible,” said Pitcher. "When this plant hiccups, everybody feels it in Western Maryland.... This is a global problem, let’s have a global solution.”
Robert E. Driscoll, CEO of the Mirant MidAtlantic power company, complained that the Global Warming Solutions Act puts too much power in the hands of the Maryland Department of the Environment, which would write regulations to require emissions cuts by industry.
“This bill will subject our industry to additional costs…requirements that cannot be met with technology today," said Driscoll. "So the only solution is to reduce generation at a time of rising demand for power.”
Outside the hearing yesterday, Driscoll said that demand for electricity is likely to keep going up, not down as environmental activists would like. For example, he said, next year a change in federal regulations will require most people to buy new TV's -- and these new plasma screens require three or four times more electricity than the models today. People also want electric cars, and these demand more power, he said.
“There is no technology to meet these limits," Driscoll said. "For industries that burn fossil fuels, the only alternative is to shut down generation, at a time of rising demand.”
State Sen. Jim Rosapepe, a Democrat from Prince George's County, scolded industry for denying the facts about global warming for years, and trying to put off action instead of facing reality. He said that, eventually, federal law will limit greenhouse gas pollution -- and if Maryland's industries adjust first, they will more likely survive.
"In reality, this is going to be dealt with at the national or international level," Rosapepe said. "But every year we put this off, aren’t we putting our industries at a competitive disadvantage?”
State Sen. Paul Pinsky, one of the sponsors of the Global Warming Solutions Act, said that businesses need to examine the costs of sea level rise that could hit five feet over the next century if polar ice melts at an accelerated rate.
“Imagine a five foot sea level rise, and Ocean City, the state’s center of tourism, gone," Pinsky said. "Eastern shore agriculture, the farming communities, the food" also flooded, he suggested. "Commercial areas like the Inner Harbor... will those office buildings remain straight with five foot sea level rise?…Downtown Annapolis under water.... early reductions in emissions are crucial," to prevent devastation, he said.
Donald Boesch, president of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, said that the science about climate change is clear. “We are entering an era where there will be large losses of our valued ecosystems," said Boesch. "There will be more extreme (weather) events that we have to contend with…and processes will be unleashed that are unpredictable and somewhat beyond our control."
Senator Richard Colburn, a Republican from the Eastern Shore, was skeptical that people have anything to do with climate change. He quoted from a radio talk show host who suggested that there is global warming on other planets -- obviously not caused by humans.
“If Maryland takes action, and China does nothing, will we be able to avoid this (temperature) increase?” Colburn asked of Boesch.
No, Boesch replied. But on the other hand, Boesch suggested that if Maryland other U.S. states don't push the federal government to act, "the chances that China and India take action are slim to none…. We have to be prepared to take the initiative.”
Colburn said: “There is global arming on Mars… Approximately how many global warmings have occurred over the history of this planet?”
Boesch replied: “There have been numerous warmings and coolings of the Earth over its history, due to wobbling on its axis…. This is the first time that we’ve had a human-induced global warming.”
Michael Powell, a lobbyist for several Maryland industries, said the state's contributions to global warming are so small, a state law would do almost nothing to help. "Maryland's contribution to global greenhouse gases is 3 tenths of one percent," he said. "It’s an esoteric debate when you are talking about what this bill does… If you totally eliminated all greenhouse gases from Maryland, you wouldn’t see any changes in global climate change….It's a leadership issue… We can one-up (California Governor Arnold) Schwarzenegger, we can one-up (former British Prime Minister Tony) Blair…These are draconian measures…If you turned off the lights and took all the cars off the road…you would get a 60 percent reduction. And we are talking about a 90 percent reduction...this is an enormous amount.”
Terry Tamminen, former secretary of the California EPA, said Maryland is not stepping out on a limb by cutting greenhouse gases. Six states have set targets of 80 to 90 percent reductions, and many more are adopting more limited cuts. "While Maryland is a leader on climate solutions, you are not alone," Tamminen told the senate committee, "Maryland joins 26 other states that make up half the US population” that have some kind of greenhouse gas limits, he said. "A tidal wave of climate solutions have taken place across the US."
I report on the environment and Chesapeake Bay. A native of West Virginia, I have focused mainly on Maryland's environment since moving here in 1983. Along the way, I've crewed aboard a skipjack in the bay, canoed under city streets up the Jones Fall from the Inner Harbor, and gone deep underground in a western Maryland coal mine. Recently, I have been covering the growth and development transforming the landscape. I love seafood, rambles in the country and good stories. I hope to share some here.
Comments
Just goes to show you that people are uninformed and egotistical.
Posted by: James Chamberlain | February 20, 2008 2:34 PM
More 'the sky is falling' rhetoric from our wonderful state legislature. Who in their right mind would want to raise a family in this state in the future? Who would want to start a business? Unbelievable!
Posted by: Raisin | February 20, 2008 2:51 PM
Would everyone please take a look at the June 1989 issue of National Geographic. The Earth warms and cools in 1,500 year cycles. Furthermore, it was just 40 or 50 years ago that scientists were concerned about Global Cooling.
Posted by: BAL | February 20, 2008 3:01 PM
O'Malley again is looking to spend money before he thinks. Is his term up yet, my wallet can't take much more of this buffoon.
Posted by: Fells point Craig | February 20, 2008 3:08 PM
The audacity and smug arrogance from little petty politicians who have never worked in the real world is to be expected. Next thing you know Y'omalley will tell us he helped Gore invent the internet. Have democrats done anything except spend tax money and given us failed inner cities?
Posted by: Louie the Liberal | February 20, 2008 4:18 PM
i'm not even a college grad and know that this global warming is a joke...i can govern better than are governer..i hope he's not elected next term..if he is it will be the only state with nobody living in it.......
Posted by: scott | February 20, 2008 4:30 PM
To the voters who cast their ballot for this idiot .... another example of his arrogance. Now, O'Malley is an expert on Global warning. Just think China and India will immediately begin to invest billions and billions of dollars just to keep up with Maryland.
Posted by: Dave | February 20, 2008 4:43 PM
While demonstrating Arrogance, how about all the nay sayers who deny the 99 % of scientists that agree we need to correct our negative impacts? Personally I'm skeptical of people who are so pro-monetary profit they would avoid looking at important issues who's side effects may cost more than the profits. But perhaps those people bet their profits will enable them to protect themselves while the rest of humanity suffers. Is our children's future worth reducing our carbon gluttony? For me it is. If your refusal to change results in mayhem that causes you pain don't look to me for sympathy, but be ready to admit you were wrong.
Posted by: William Small | February 20, 2008 4:49 PM
O'Malley raising our taxes to commit more money to his environmentalist and regulatory lobbyists. Plain and simple. It doesn't matter for me at least in the long run because I'm on a five year plan to get out of this state. O'Malley will eventually be left with another dwindling tax base like he left Baltimore city. All those that depend on entiltement spending won't have us to mooch off anymore. As businesses run for other states, so will I. Like Reagan said, Vote with your feet. I hope all the donkeys that voted for O'Malley will be the extinct species he prophicized about!!!
Posted by: Ballz Mahoney | February 20, 2008 5:13 PM
It’s amazing to me that these comment boards are dominated by those few remaining dead-enders who are either so thickheaded or so willfully ignorant that they think they are smarter and know better than the scientists of the world. Talk about arrogance! Maybe the climate isn’t changing inside the sphincter where you have your head buried, but here in the real world, it is. For those who want to move out of Maryland: pkease! Don’t let the door hit you in the butt on your way out. Give me a call and I’ll help load the van.
Note to BAL. No, scientists fifty years ago were NOT predicting global cooling. That is a myth. See http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/01/the-global-cooling-myth/ Stop listening to Rush Limbaugh and other rightwing bloviators and try learning the facts.
Posted by: ballmerboy | February 20, 2008 7:15 PM
This thread is nothing but ignorant dittoheads qouting Rush Limbaugh and his local wannabes. The empty cans rattling like a thunderstorm.
Go O'Malley for having the guts to follow scientists and not radio talk show "hosts", paid corporate hacks, or the angry right wing idiots who live on these Sun boards.
Go ahead and take your best shots dittoheads. Or as your hero would say, "Bring it on".
You rightwingers hate Maryland and O'Malley so much, why don't you move to Texass and take that phoney POS Ehrlich with you. You morons would fit right in Texass. Maybe you could even elect Ehrlich as all-knowing radio propaganda minister, or even better supreme ruler for life.
Don't let the door hit you in your butt on the way out dittoheads.
Posted by: Butch D | February 20, 2008 8:25 PM
Please do and would you kindly take all your dittohead bretheren and Boob Ehrlich with you.
Texass or Alabama would fine places for your ilk, you'll fit right in.
Don't let the door hit you in your fat a-s-s on the way out.
Posted by: Butch | February 20, 2008 8:28 PM
I guess politicians don't know how to read or research issues before they insert foot in mouth. I've been researching global warming for the last year and keeping up with the latest scientific research. The tragedy is that the general public is getting scammed big time. To understand what a farce this whole man-made global warming theory is, you need to understand who is behind it and why. First of all, the instrument that the elite are using to ram this carbon tax or cap-and-trade scheme down our throat is a vaunted bureaucratic entity called the IPCC under the United Nations. There is so much evidence to prove that the "scientific findings" of the IPCC are bogus that it's not even funny. Just the other day a study put out by the NCPA showed that "the IPCC's policy recommendations are based on flawed statistical analyses and unscientific expert opinions that violate general forecasting principles. Policymakers should take this into account before attempting to counter global warming by enacting laws that could have severe economic consequences." They found that “127 principles were relevant in assessing the process the IPCC used to project climate change. The IPCC clearly violated 60 of the 127 principles. Twelve additional principles appeared to be violated. Another 38 could not be assessed because there was insufficient information." If the amount of corruption that goes on in the UN truly came to light, the public would be horrified." Dr. Vincent Grey, a member of the UN IPCC Expert Reviewers Panel since its inception, wrote a letter this past December which explained that the IPCC avoids the scientific method and he called for it to be reformed or disbanded. He ended the letter with the following comment: "The IPCC from the beginning was given the licence to use whatever methods would be necessary to provide "evidence" that carbon dioxide increases are harming the climate, even if this involves manipulation of dubious data and using peoples' opinions instead of science to "prove" their case."He states, "the disappearance of the IPCC in disgrace is not only desirable but inevitable. The reason is, that the world will slowly realise that the "predictions" emanating from the IPCC will not happen. The absence of any "global warming" for the past eight years is just the beginning. Sooner or later all of us will come to realise that this organisation, and the thinking behind it, is phony. Unfortunately severe economic damage is likely to be done by its influence before that happens." Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu, founding director of the International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks, is recently quoted as saying, "I am concerned about the inevitable backlash against science and scientists, when the public eventually learns the correct information about climate change. Even if the IPCC is not directly responsible for the present confusion, they should take the necessary responsible action to help rectify the confusion. I request that the IPCC make an appropriate statement in this regard before the next G8 meeting in May 2008." There are too many scientists who have a problem with the IPCC for me to quote here. There are a lot of people in elite positions like Al Gore and Maurice Strong who have a vested financial interest in promoting the "scientific" findings of the IPCC no matter how fraudulent they are. Has anyone heard of Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) or any of its worldwide affiliated exchanges? Anyone heard of GIM? Just follow the money trail and you'll find who the real winners are in this "man-made global warming" scam. Does climate change exist? - YES. Is it caused by man and can we change it by curbing CO2? - NO. Here is an interesting article called "Analyzing Global-warming Science" that was just published: http://www.thenewamerican.com/node/7009#SlideFrame_1
Steve Forbes just wrote an articlel which is right on the mark about this issue: http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2008/0310/019.html
Posted by: Mike | February 20, 2008 9:52 PM
The sad thing is that world wide the people have elected these clowns who possess very little common sense.
How can someone with so little nouse rise to a prominent position? Locals shouldn't be totally embarrased because buffoons are running governments all over the world.
This insanity called global warming will be with us for a long time unfortunately despite the fact we are heading for a cooling period.
Posted by: Keith F | February 21, 2008 5:52 AM
1. We need steel
2. If we don't make the steel it will be made in other countries where they just dump the waste in the rivers
3. Aren't the Democrats supposed to be the party of the working man?
Posted by: bryanintimonium | February 21, 2008 10:13 AM
If this bill becomes law, it will greatly increase the cost of living and doing business in the state. However, it will be save only a tiny amount of CO2 on a worldwide scale. CO2 will leak in from our neighboring states, who will pick up the slack. National CO2 legislation is imminent - certainly within the next year or two. Why not have the courage to wait for a national program which will eliminate the leakage problem? Why this "bold move" to create another huge bureaucracy? Smells like 2010 re-election politics already!
Posted by: An Engineer | February 21, 2008 5:30 PM
Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley states: “We need to move into a much more sustainable future or else we cease to exist as a species.” Anyone doubt the governor's words should read the below article concerning the acidification of the world's oceans ----
Sour times: The sea is becoming more acidic. That is not good news if you live in it.
From The Economist print edition
Feb 21st 2008 | BOSTON
EVERY silver lining has its cloud. At the moment, the world's oceans absorb a million tonnes of carbon dioxide an hour. Admittedly that is only a third of the rate at which humanity dumps the stuff into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels, but it certainly helps to slow down global warming. However, what is a blessing for the atmosphere turns out to be a curse for the oceans. When carbon dioxide dissolves in water it forms carbonic acid. At the moment, seawater is naturally alkaline—but it is becoming less so all the time.
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10717954
Posted by: John Seebeth | February 21, 2008 9:26 PM
It is very unlikely that a rapidly growing world population and economy will cut their emissions so fast and drastically that either abrupt climate change or runaway global warming will be avoided.
Instead, according to Dr James Hansen of NASA, any feasible planetary rescue plan must include a method of removing CO2 from the air.
I suggest the low cost, highly scalable, and technically feasible method of biosequestration. The last severe global warming episode 55 million years ago ended when ocean life kicked into high gear and removed the excess CO2 from the air over tens of thousands of years. We can use genetic engineering to improve nature's ability to remove CO2 from the air.
Either we remove that excess CO2 from the air soon, or our climate will rapidly change to the hothouse state of 55 million years ago whem most life died. In a warming world carbon sinks become carbon emitters, not only reducing nature's ability to remove CO2 (estimated 30% reduction by 2030!), but also will dramatically increase natural greenhouse gas emissions, completely overwhelming any cuts we make.
Posted by: Brad Arnold | February 22, 2008 8:35 AM
Regarding:
"Bill Pitcher, a lobbyist for the NewPage paper mill in Western Maryland (formerly known as the Westvaco plant). suggested that the limits could imperil the jobs of all of the factory's 950 employees"
How much carbon dioxide does that
paper mill emit?
How much carbon dioxide do all the pulp and paper mills in the US emit?
nobody seems to know......
do you?
Posted by: Judy Ezell | February 22, 2008 10:03 AM
The scientific case for significant human influence via the amplified greenhouse effect is strong, despite being one of the most scrutinized in history. Averting significant change at this point may be quite a challenge, considering the lags and feedbacks in the climate system. But that doesn't mean we should continue worsening the situation. Rapid global climate change may not mean the survival of the entire human race is in danger, but I think prosperity is valued almost as much as survival. Some interesting points and links here:
http://understandit.org
Posted by: Ryan T | February 28, 2008 4:10 PM
My bank account's survival is at risk from Governor Martin O'Malley! Martin O'Malley passed the largest tax hike in Maryland history. O'Malley is a taxaholic. How can we ever look at reducing energy consumption when O'Malley is pushing our energy rates through the roof and stealing our family's hard earned wages?
Posted by: Brad | March 8, 2008 9:41 PM