Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri

sponsored by
Business


Scientist: Stop carbon emissions or face ruin

Droughts, more wildfires, hotter and longer summers and more violent storms will plague the desert Southwest if carbon-dioxide pollution continues, a leading climate-change scientist believes.

Sea levels will rise several feet, covering the state of Florida, the country of Bangladesh and most beachfront property by the end of the century if people keep pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere at the current rate, said James Hansen, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.


Most Popular Stories
  • Mayor calls Lady Luck casino 'carcass'
  • CASINOS IN COURT: Testimony heard in Wynn case
  • Consolidated Resorts files for Chapter 7 bankruptcy
  • Players turned away at WSOP
  • Fontainebleau files motion to leave offices
  • Area economy hits 'pause' period, economist says
  • NEVADAN AT WORK: Local gaming veteran sees opportunity in small Henderson casino
  • ONLINE GUY: Palm Pre promising but not ready to replace Apple iPhone in pocket
  • Las Vegas investor seeks approval of Riviera ownership stake
  • GAMING BEYOND NEVADA: Sands: Macau back in play




  • Hansen made those predictions Thursday at the Desert Research Institute where he spoke to 75 scientists, students and local citizens and later to several hundred DRI supporters during a dinner at Caesars Palace.

    The Columbia University adjunct professor was in Las Vegas to accept the Nevada Medal for his research and efforts to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions.

    The climate scientist stunned Gov. Jim Gibbons on Monday with a public letter that questioned Gibbons' support of three coal-fired power projects in Nevada, including one planned at Ely by utility company Sierra Pacific Resources.

    Hansen argued that the world needs to stop building new coal-fired power plants and to start phasing out existing coal-burning plants because they spew out huge amounts of carbon dioxide, which leads to global warming.

    In reaction to the letter, the governor's office called the institute at 4:30 a.m. Tuesday, asking about the letter, Hansen said. Nevada first lady Dawn Gibbons was hosting a dinner honoring Hansen in Reno that night.

    Institute spokesman Greg Bortolin said he had a phone message from Dianne Cornwall, chief operating officer for Gibbons, waiting for him when he arrived at the office at 8 a.m. Tuesday.

    "I thought Dianne was very gracious, and she wasn't upset," Bortolin said.

    Cornwall said: "We know that DRI didn't put him up to this."

    The governor, who proclaimed Wednesday as James Hansen Day, shouldn't have been totally surprised by Hansen's stand. Hatice Gecol, his energy adviser served on the DRI committee that selected Hansen for the Nevada Medal. And in 2006, Hansen made headlines when he said that President Bush tried to silence him after a speech on climate change.

    DRI associate research professor David Shafer credited Hansen with pioneering research on global warming.

    "He's probably one of the best-known climate scientists in the world today," Shafer said.

    Hansen outlined a program designed to minimize, if not prevent, global warming.

    He noted that one-fifth of all carbon-dioxide emissions remain in the atmosphere for 1,000 years.

    "When you put CO? in the atmosphere, you can't get it back, and the one resource you can control is the coal," he said.

    Hansen said the world needs to leave carbon in coal deposits. Instead, he called for more renewable energy, such as solar and wind power, and increased energy conservation.

    "We have to find out how to live without fossil fuels pretty soon," Hansen said.

    "It's just silly for Nevada with its potential to be a leader in renewable energy" to pursue coal power projects, Hansen said.

    "You could export renewable energy to California and other places," he also said.

    The desert Southwest, he said, could generate enough solar energy to supply all the electricity used in the country.

    Contact reporter John G. Edwards at jedwards@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0420.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 17 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Kevin M wrote on April 22, 2008 07:25 AM: So Hansen claims that President Bush tried to silence him in 2006? That's like the pot calling the kettle black! How many of his peers and colleagues have been ostracized and ridiculed (or worse) for stating an opinion contrary to the orthodoxy of the "Churck of Global Warming"?


    Richard wrote on April 20, 2008 12:11 PM: LOL at Jeff or? Jeff you see things on a different timescale than I do. Looking over billions of years - yeah you're right what difference does mankind do - probably nothing. But in the short term I beleive that we must pass on what we received in the same or better shape. Right now we polute everywhere like the worst of the worst - like no tomorrow exist. I have lived around the world and in some countires there are production complex'es that makes it hard to breathe in a 50 miles radius and at the same time populating a half million people, crops, animals, nature for a total devastating result apart from the profit taken by owners who live on the other side of the globe. So I guess you are one of the billionaires who have what it takes and can give a d.. about everything and everybody. But for the rest (the 99% of the 6.6 billion) it could be nice to have a future too - and be sure everybody will fight for it (world war). With the direction and speed we see everywhere that should be within the next 5 years as far as I can see. By the way how did your car idle test go?


    D. Johnson wrote on April 20, 2008 11:38 AM: Forget about whether you believe any particular scientist is correct or not. Forget about whether the Earth is changing on it's own or with help from human activities.

    As humans we would prefer to stick around.

    Climate change will/is cause/ing change that makes it more difficult for us to maintain our life style. Many more living things have gone extinct than currently live on Earth. Do we want to be among them? Humans are the only species with the ability to do something about their fate. Let's error on the side of caution.

    Does it make sense to continue adding CO2? We have alternatives. Why take the chance?
    Does it make sense to go on adding pollutants to our air and water?
    Why don't more people recycle?

    We have the ability to meet our energy needs without as much environmental damage. Why not think longer term?

    If you would not allow your house and property to fill with wastes, refuse, and dangerous material why let the Earth?

    If global warming should turn out to be a myth we loose nothing and gain energy independence, more secure long term jobs, a healthier environment, and a higher quality of life.






    Jeff wrote on April 20, 2008 07:27 AM: LOL at Richard, You talk about 6.6 billion people causing harm to the Earth. Such arrogance. How can we hurt the Earth? It has survived for 4 and half billion years and you think we are harming it? The Earth doesn't care about what we do. It has gone through much worse things than mankind. Life has adapted thru many challenges. I guess you just want things to stay the same forever. Wow, what a boring world that would be. I just thank God for the asteroid that hit 65 million years ago, if not for it we would not exist.


    David Johann wrote on April 19, 2008 09:30 PM: When some people talk that there is no new and emerging threat to the upper atmosphere, and that there is no new threat to long-term weather patterns, one thing to keep in mind is that there are as many people alive today as have died in the last 5,000 years. Yep. Read that again: as many people alive today as the total number who have died in the last 5,000 years.

    http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/dead.asp

    And we've only been burning petroleum products, coal and natural gas for a very, very, comparatively short time. No new threat, huh?


    Richard wrote on April 19, 2008 05:07 PM: I think Jeff is correct. There is no danger. And letting his car running idle for a couple of hours might be the test that confirms this. Jeff would you put your nose into the pipe while your car is running idle and then confirm after this little test that there is no danger? If you do so then I'm sure you can stop all this scientists bragging. Anf Jeff again you are right the Earth has gone through cycles for millions of years. The 6.6 billion people has not caused any harm over the last many thousand years so 2008 is no different - right???


    J wrote on April 19, 2008 01:22 PM: The idea that human beings can (a) decide what climate change is "natural" or "unnatural," and (b) do things that affect climate change is the result of the hubris of humanity. We aren't having an affect one way or the other, folks.


    jimshoes wrote on April 19, 2008 12:00 PM: Where do they get this information???
    In the 60s i was taught how Mother Nature must change the earths growing in many ways to produce life on this planet. The earths temp. has been changing since the 1890s. It seems that when ever a scientist or scientists makes a remark they become instant celebrity and millionares


    Don Evans wrote on April 19, 2008 11:58 AM: "Vegas Vic"

    I'm glad you brought up China and India. What do you propose we do about their burgeoning addition to global finite (fossil) fuel consumption? This represents the nexus of what in economics is called a perfectly inelastic supply (aka finite supplies), with rapidly growing consumption (rapidly increasing demand).

    In short, if we're unwilling to embrace non-finite energy generation, I hope we're all willing to pay 10.00 a gallon for gas, and 1000.00 power bills..in the near future. Although, someone may get rich from our finite fuel dependence, it most certainly be our country, or our children; save for the few willing to allow us to be at the mercy of these "emerging" economies for their own financial gain.


    Jeff wrote on April 19, 2008 11:31 AM: LOL, Im so sick of this non-sense... The Earth has been cooling since 1998. Florida is gonna be underwater? LMAO When? If we've seen such warming, why have sea levels not risen yet? Is all that water waiting somewhere? And how arrogant are these scientists to believe that humans are actually the cause of any climate change? The Earth has gone through these cycles for millions of years... Im gonna go turn on my car and let it idle for a couple hours.


    Read All Comments