Early bloom of cherry blossoms another marker of climate change
What presumptuous rubbish! How do they know it is an effect of global warming? They don't. It could be an effect of higher rainfall brought on by changing ocean currents. And the article itself suggests urban heat island effects increased by growing urbanization. The heading above is faith, not science
Climate change is causing Japanese cherry blossoms, a famous symbol of spring, to burst into peak bloom early. From Tokyo to Paris and Washington DC, nature’s calendar has been disrupted by unprecedented warm weather that could ultimately prove detrimental to one of the world’s most admired flowers.
A marker of seasonal change, cherry blossoms are profoundly symbolic in Japanese culture – representing both rejuvenation as well as the fleeting beauty of nature.
The centuries-old tradition of hanami – “flower viewing” – has been adopted in many countries, with crowds gathering for yearly scenic picnics beneath the fragrant pink sakura.
Forecasting the annual bloom is important business in Japan. Since 1955 the weather agency has calculated the precise moment of peak flowering for the 84 cherry tree hotspots up and down the country.
A tree is deemed to be blossoming once five or six flowers have opened. When 80 percent of it has flowered, it is in full bloom.
Blooming early
The average blossom start date has moved forward by 1.2 days per decade since Japan began keeping records in 1953, said Daisuke Sasano, a climate risk management officer at the Japan Meteorological Agency.
Between 1961 and 1990, cherry trees in Tokyo on average began blossoming on 29 March – but that date moved up to 24 March between 1991 and 2020.
Last year’s blossom in Tokyo began on 14 March – the earliest on record. Sasano puts this down to “global warming compounded with urbanisation”.
Over the past century Tokyo has warmed by 3C.
The biggest threat to the trees, however, are not springs that are too hot – but winters that are not cold enough.
“This is because the winter frost signals to the cherry trees that it’s time for them to wake up and start preparing their buds for spring,” Sasano said.
“Without this cold trigger, the cherry trees will spend the entire winter sleeping. Then in spring they will not flower because they have no buds.”
Fear of frost
Some 11,000 kilometres away, in Washington DC, cherry trees are also an iconic part of the springtime cityscape. Three-thousand sakura were given to the US capital as a gift of friendship from Japan in 1912.
On 17 March, the trees saw their second-earliest peak bloom on record – flowering almost a week before they were expected to.
Early blooms make cherry trees vulnerable to sudden cold snaps, which still happen despite the overall warmer spring temperatures.
The last major incident was in 2017, when half of DC’s Yoshino blossoms were lost due to a late frost that came in the middle of March.
This year's peak bloom happened so soon that it preceded the official start of DC's National Cherry Blossom Festival on 20 March.
From December to February the entire northern hemisphere notched up its warmest winter on record – reducing the exposure to the sort of cold weather a tree requires during its winter dormancy in order to be able to wake up and flower.
Disconcerted by the milder conditions, some wilful cherry blossoms burst open over Christmas in France’s Maulévrier Oriental Park, home to Europe’s largest Japanese garden.
"That's really not normal,” head gardener Didier Touzé told RFI, adding that those flowers were then damaged by ensuing frost.
Despite the startling discovery, Touzé hasn't observed any major fluctuations in bloom dates over the years in the garden, which has drawn in tens of thousands of visitors every spring since its first hanami festival in 2017.
Errant blossoms aside, the trees' normal bloom still took place in March – albeit about a week early. Touzé said another variety of cherry tree is on track to bloom in April, its normal flowering period “give or take a few days”.
Organisers of the park's annual hanami are toying with the idea of starting the event a little sooner to account for potential early blooms.
"But the risk is that we'll then end up having a colder winter followed by a later bloom – so we won't have gained anything," Touzé said.
https://www.rfi.fr/en/environment/20240406-early-bloom-cherry-blossoms-japan-marker-climate-change
******************************************GOP State AGs Urge SCOTUS to Reject Hawaii Climate Change Lawsuits Targeting Fossil Fuel Companies
A group of 20 Republican state attorneys general filed a legal brief on Monday, urging the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in favor of fossil fuel companies facing civil liability in Hawaii for their alleged role in causing global climate change.
In an amicus curiae “friend of the court” brief organized by Republican Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, 20 state attorneys general argued that efforts by the City and County of Honolulu to sue dozens of fossil fuel companies are “an affront to the equal sovereignty” of the various other states. The effort is supported by the attorneys general of Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming.
Fossil fuel companies have faced several lawsuits in Hawaii’s state court system, alleging they have misled the public for decades about the dangers of climate change. In October, the Hawaii state Supreme Court ruled that the lawsuits could proceed, rejecting arguments from the fossil fuel companies that such litigation is preempted by federal law because it seeks to regulate interstate emissions and commerce.
In recent weeks, Sunoco LP and Shell PLC have petitioned the Supreme Court to review their case.
Now, the amicus brief from the 20 Republican state attorneys general urges the Supreme Court to take up the petition by the fossil fuel companies, arguing their states also have a vested interest in the outcome.
The Republican attorneys general note the litigants suing fossil fuel companies through the Hawaii state court system are seeking to stop those fossil fuel companies from promoting the sale and use of their fuel products, even in other states. The attorneys general argue such a ruling from the Hawaiian court system “would imperil access to affordable energy and inculpate every State and every person on the planet.”
“If Hawaiians want to rely on solar power, I have no problem with that,” Mr. Marshall said in a Monday press statement. “But Honolulu cannot force its views onto Alabama—or any other State. Major decisions about our national energy policy must be made at the federal level, not dictated by one lawsuit brought by one city in its own courts.”
The plaintiffs in the Hawaii cases argue their lawsuits narrowly target harmful marketing practices, the amicus brief from the Republican attorneys general argues the lawsuits in Hawaii are necessarily about interstate emissions.
“The case is about more than ’torts committed in Hawaii.‘ If the allegations are true, Honolulu’s injuries stem from ’global warming,‘ global emissions, and the global use of energy and fuel products. As Honolulu admits, ’it is not possible to determine the source of any particular individual molecule of CO2,‘” the amicus brief states. “Thus, the only way for energy companies to avoid potential liability is to cease the production and sale of their products everywhere. And any ’equitable relief, including abatement,' would need to reach conduct everywhere to redress the alleged injuries.”
Several other groups submitted amicus briefs on Monday also supporting the fossil fuel companies and urging the Supreme Court to grant their petition to review the Hawaii state cases. Amicus briefs were filed by the Atlantic Legal Foundation, the American Tort Reform Association, the Washington Legal Foundation, the National Association of Manufacturers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and a group of fossil fuel industry associations.
Retired U.S. Air Force Gen. Richard Myers and U.S. Navy Adml. Michael Mullin, both of whom served stints as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also filed an amicus brief on Monday, arguing the legal case implicates national security.
“As federal courts have recognized, petroleum products have been ‘crucial to the national defense,’ including but by no means limited to ‘fuel and diesel oil used in the Navy’s ships; and lubricating oils used for various military machines,’” reads the brief by the two retired U.S. military officers.
In response to a request for comment from NTD News, a spokesperson for the City and Council of Honolulu said they will respond to the arguments from the petitioners in court and declined to comment further on the matter.
The City and County of Honolulu is expected to file its response by May 1.
********************************************************
Britain's nuclear industry reboot takes a step forward as project to build reactors in Hartlepool receives multimillion pound cash boost
Britain's nuclear industry reboot has taken a massive step forward after a project to build reactors in Hartlepool received a multimillion pound cash boost.
In January, plans to build a major new nuclear power station were launched just weeks after Boris Johnson told Rishi Sunak to 'get on with it'.
The Government said it was committed to 'exploring' the possibility of a reactor as large as the under-construction Hinkley C and Sizewell C powerplants.
The proposal was included in a Civil Nuclear Roadmap which set out ways in which UK nuclear power can be quadrupled by 2050 - the biggest expansion for 70 years.
Now, Hartlepool looks set to host a fleet of mini-nuclear reactors within a decade after the Government's multimillion-pound grant which it awarded to engineering group Babcock to explore the project's feasibility, the Telegraph reports.
X-Energy and Cavendish Nuclear also won funding from the Future Nuclear Enabling Fund, and they will develop advanced nuclear power plants known as small modular reactors (SMRs).
In total, the government has now earmarked more than £1bn for the Sizewell C project, building on its original £700m stake as part of its plan to rapidly expand the UK's nuclear energy sector.
The government is exploring plans to build a new large-scale nuclear plant, despite concerns about delays to existing projects.
Ministers say the project would be the biggest expansion of the sector in 70 years, reducing reliance on overseas supply.
The new plant would quadruple energy supplies by 2050, they say.
In total, the government has now earmarked more than £1bn for the Sizewell C project, building on its original £700m stake as part of its plan to rapidly expand the UK's nuclear energy sector.
Mick Gornall, managing director of Cavendish Nuclear, told the publication: 'A fleet of Xe-100s can complement renewables by providing constant or flexible power and produce steam to decarbonise industry and manufacture hydrogen and synthetic transport fuels.
'Deployment in the UK will create thousands of high-quality, long-term jobs across the country.'
The Government also gave the companies £3.34m to explore the plans, with X-energy investing the same amount.
In April last year, Boris Johnson shelved plans to double the number of wind turbines in the countryside and instead approved plans for up to seven new nuclear reactors.
The former PM rejected ambitious targets presented by Kwasi Kwarteng to double the UK's onshore output to 30GW by 2030.
Instead, Tory opposition in the party's shire England heartlands and within the Cabinet means that new atomic power sites in rural areas were likely to get Government backing.
This led to Johnson visiting Hartlepool nuclear power station, which began producing electricity in 1983.
It was one of eight sites the government set its sights on for future nuclear energy plants.
Current PM Sunak said: 'Nuclear is the perfect antidote to the energy challenges facing Britain - it's green, cheaper in the long-term and will ensure the UK's energy security for the long-term.
'This is the right long-term decision and is the next step in our commitment to nuclear power, which puts us on course to achieve net zero by 2050 in a measured and sustainable way.
'This will ensure our future energy security and create the jobs and skills we need to level up the country and grow our economy.'
Energy Security Secretary Claire Coutinho added: 'Strengthening our energy security means that Britain will never again be held to ransom over energy by tyrants like Vladimir Putin.
'British nuclear, as one of the most reliable, low-carbon sources of energy around, will provide that security.
'We're making the biggest investment in domestic nuclear energy in 70 years.'
***********************************************
There has never been a worse time to invest in solar panel production. But we’re wasting $1b on it
Australian Leftist site "Crikey" gets some things right
As we’ve been writing for a while now, the last thing Australia needs is to invent new industries to employ workers, who are becoming an increasingly scarce commodity. Both sides of politics want us to get into building and crewing nuclear submarines. Peter Dutton wants a whole new nuclear power industry. And Labor is now throwing $1 billion at manufacturing solar panels — all part of our effort to be a “renewable superpower”, and also because, apparently, Australia invented the solar panels before losing control of the technology, so we’re really just bringing solar panels “home”.
The $1 billion price tag is small compared to the tens of billions Dutton’s nuclear fantasy will cost and insignificant compared to the waste of money involved in AUKUS, but Albanese’s solar panel investment might be the dumbest of the lot.
Why? Because other, much bigger governments, especially China, are also subsidising solar panel production — resulting in a huge production glut right at the time when Australia, belatedly, is joining in the stupidity.
A fortnight ago there was a rush of reports about massive job cuts at the world’s biggest solar panel maker, LONGi Green Energy Technology of China — perhaps up to one-third of its workforce. LONGi rejected the reports and said it was only planning to cut 5% of its total headcount of 80,000. The reason is the surge in global supplies of solar energy cells.
As the Financial Times noted, LONGi was part of Xi Jinping’s quest for self-sufficiency and even mastery of crucial renewable technology sectors. As protectionism always does, that has prompted China’s competitors, the European Union and the United States, to hit back both with their own subsidies and with blocks on Chinese exports, although these appear to be doing little to curb China’s growing dominance of the solar panel sector. But there is now a massive global oversupply of solar panels.
As a result, there’s never been a better time to buy solar panels — and never been a worse time to get into the production of them.
If, as Albanese says, the expenditure in solar panel manufacturing is about securing supply chains, that could easily be accomplished by redirecting that $1 billion to buying up Chinese solar panels so cheap they’re now being used as garden features, and storing them for use on Australian rooftops. But that lacks the political appeal of last week’s announcement in the Hunter Valley.
So what will we do with all the Australian-manufactured solar panels? Force the local industry to use them, pushing up the costs of renewables at a time when they should be falling?
Labor’s obsession with manufacturing — one that the Coalition for the most part shares, despite Tony Abbott chasing the car industry out of Australia — continues to reflect both the power of the (climate denialist) Australian Workers Union on the right of the party, and the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union on the left. It also reflects the mindset of many not just within the union movement or Labor, but more broadly, that manufacturing is somehow a more real economic activity than services industries or extractive industries.
The story of the Australian economy over the past 30 years has been the rise and rise of extractive industries and service industries. Our mining industry is very, very efficient, and the iron ore industry is cutting edge technologically: it is far advanced in areas like remote-controlled trains and autonomous vehicles compared to other countries — though that doesn’t stop it from being derided as merely “ripping dirt out of the ground”. Our agricultural industry, while not producing anywhere near as much in terms of export values, has enjoyed massive productivity growth and now exports and produces far more, with far fewer workers and less water per unit of production, than it ever used to.
And our services industries in areas like education and tourism are also massive export earners, reflecting Australia’s natural advantages in education and lifestyle.
Meanwhile, like every other western country, the proportion of the economy and workforce devoted to services has grown massively, with the new frontier of employment being caring services, from early childhood to old age and everywhere in between — all heavily feminised workforces.
But ignore all that, Labor is saying let’s invest more in traditional male-dominated manufacturing, despite Australia being hopelessly uncompetitive in production costs and scale, and not having enough workers for the rest of the economy let alone new industries.
And all of this, despite this being literally the worst time in history to invest in solar panel production. Dumb, dumb, dumb.
https://www.crikey.com.au/2024/04/04/solar-panel-investment-albanese-waste-money/
***************************************My other blogs. Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM )
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
Jim Hansen and his twin
No comments:
Post a Comment