Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Climate Action Report 2002(NYT's Bush's U-Turn report)
US. EPA Global Warming ^ | May 2002 | Various EPA studies

Posted on 06/02/2002 7:46:20 PM PDT by JerseyHighlander

The United States of America's Third National
Communication Under the United Nations 
Framework Convention on Climate Change


FINAL VERSION
Hard copies of this report will not be published for several months. Ordering information will be available on this page once copies are available.


(Per Federal Register Notice)

(Public Comments Submitted)


Get Acrobat ReaderAll files listed in the Table of Contents are available for viewing or download in Adobe Acrobat 5.0 format. The Acrobat Reader is available at no cost from Adobe Systems.Exit EPA


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Zip file of pdf containing entire document (5.7M)

Upfront (247k pdf)  – Cover page and table of contents.

Chapter 1.  Introduction and Overview (197k pdf) – Summarizes the main elements of the report.

Chapter 2.  National Circumstances (450k pdf) – Presents a snapshot of the national characteristics of the United States that play a role in climate change, including the country's climate, geography, economy, demographic trends, energy production and consumption, and natural resources.

Chapter 3.  Greenhouse Gas Inventory (442k pdf) – Provides a broad overview of all U.S. greenhouse gas emission sources and sinks, introduces key concepts, and discusses the primary drivers for the growth in emissions.  All material in the chapter is drawn from the U.S. Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks:  1990–1999

Chapter 4.  Policies and Measures (320k pdf) – Reviews national policies to limit emissions and enhance sinks of greenhouse gases undertaken since 1990.

Chapter 5.  Projections (322k pdf) – Quantifies the aggregate effects on greenhouse gas emissions of policies and measures implemented or planned from 1990 to 2020.

Chapter 6.  Vulnerability (1.5M pdf) – Addresses U.S. vulnerabilities to the adverse consequences of climate change and identifies the most promising adaptation measures being explored.

Chapter 7.  Financial Resources (426k pdf) – Reviews U.S. efforts with other countries to assist with mitigation and sequestration strategies, build human and institutional capacity to address climate change, and facilitate the commercial transfer of technology.

Chapter 8.  Research and Observation (296k pdf) – Discusses research efforts involving prediction of climate change, impacts and adaptation, and mitigation and new technologies.  This chapter also provides an overview of U.S. work on Global Climate Observing Systems.Exit EPA

Chapter 9.  Education, Training, and Awareness (269k pdf) – Addresses programs to educate and train students and citizens in areas related to climate change and reviews U.S. outreach activities to disseminate information about global climate change.

Appendix A:  Emission Trends. (1.9M pdf)

Appendix B:  Policies and Measures. (1.5M pdf)

Appendix C:  Selected Technology Transfer Activities and U.S. Direct Financial Contributions and Commercial Sales Related to Implementation of the UNFCCC. (4.4M pdf)

Appendix D:  Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions. (264k pdf)

Appendix E:  Bibliography. (197k pdf)


http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/nwinsite.html
http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/actions/national/index.html
http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/publications/index.html



TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: climatechange; drudgegas; globalwarming; greenhousegas; unitednations
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-160 next last
This is the source document that the New York Times is reporting as the reversal by the Bush administration on Global Warming. This report has been in production since before Bush was elected. Matt Drudge is using this to pump ratings tonight, June 2nd 2002. A few months ago, if I recall correctly, the Bush administration, through Christy Whitman, stalled the production of this report.

There is a link to the preliminary reports open comment period, Here which has some further info that should be aired.

1 posted on 06/02/2002 7:46:20 PM PDT by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander
Climate Changing, U.S. Says in Report

But while the report says the United States will be substantially changed in the next few decades — "very likely" seeing the disruption of snow-fed water supplies, more stifling heat waves and the permanent disappearance of Rocky Mountain meadows and coastal marshes, for example — it does not propose any major shift in the administration's policy on greenhouse gases.

It recommends adapting to inevitable changes. It does not recommend making rapid reductions in greenhouse gases to limit warming, the approach favored by many environmental groups and countries that have accepted the Kyoto Protocol, a climate treaty written in the Clinton administration that was rejected by Mr. Bush.


2 posted on 06/02/2002 7:51:13 PM PDT by Pokey78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander
...it does not propose any major shift in the administration's policy on greenhouse gases.

I wonder how many times this will get over looked.

3 posted on 06/02/2002 7:52:49 PM PDT by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
fyi.......
4 posted on 06/02/2002 7:55:15 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rintense
From the Bush-hating chorus:

FACTS....FACTS.....WE DON'T NEED NO STINKING FACTS!

5 posted on 06/02/2002 7:55:36 PM PDT by Pokey78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander, Sabertooth
It is my belief that the NYT's report on June 3rd will focus on language used in chapters 5 and 6.

Now what does this report create in term of precedence, or what would this report mean this election cycle if the media didn't stir it up at this point? Or what will this report and follow up reports do to solidify scientifically shaky climate change projection techniques during the next Democratic administration, 6, 10, or 14 years from now?

If this report had slid under the radar, a few thousand scientists in the climate change community/industry would have known of its existence. With this wide open airing (curteous NYT), it becomes a great foil to sow doubt in Bush's base as the the president's commitments on politically charged issues.

6 posted on 06/02/2002 7:57:29 PM PDT by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78; Lazamataz; semper_libertas
These bogus Bush-bashing reports are getting very very old. I don't remember the last time I clicked on Drudge, but tonight's little episode reminds me why I don't. I need to mark off a few Freepers from my "read this thread" list too.
7 posted on 06/02/2002 7:59:12 PM PDT by Ms. AntiFeminazi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander
Another example of the EPA bureaucracy out of control.

What's the use of an election, if we can't force these agencies to reflect the policy changes made by our elected leadership? They always seem to have the ability to pull an end run around any elected officials or appointees by going to the press and/or a cabal of unelected NGO's and lawyers.

8 posted on 06/02/2002 7:59:13 PM PDT by pierrem15
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander
A newspaper reporting only a portion of the facts? Noooo... never. And yet, look at how quickly many here on fr have reacted. Still, I think I'll be looking at SUVs this week just to piss off some folks.
9 posted on 06/02/2002 8:00:17 PM PDT by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander
In citing the document, the intro pages say we should cite the STATE DEPARTMENT. It appears the EPA and the State Dept...i.e...Powell's Bowels....are responsible for this. Not really Bush. If this is true, my anger is really directed at Bowell and the EPA. But, if it is found Bush signed off on this report....like Drudge was trying to make it sound, I will be very angry....directly at the WH and thus, Bush himself.
10 posted on 06/02/2002 8:05:06 PM PDT by rwfromkansas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
A bump your way as I think you have some interest in this from another thread.......

But while the report says the United States will be substantially changed in the next few decades — "very likely" seeing the disruption of snow-fed water supplies, more stifling heat waves and the permanent disappearance of Rocky Mountain meadows and coastal marshes, for example — it does not propose any major shift in the administration's policy on greenhouse gases.

It recommends adapting to inevitable changes. It does not recommend making rapid reductions in greenhouse gases to limit warming, the approach favored by many environmental groups and countries that have accepted the Kyoto Protocol, a climate treaty written in the Clinton administration that was rejected by Mr. Bush.

The new document, "U.S. Climate Action Report 2002," strongly concludes that no matter what is done to cut emissions in the future, nothing can be done about the environmental consequences of several decades' worth of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases already in the atmosphere.

Its emphasis on adapting to the inevitable fits in neatly with the climate plan Mr. Bush announced in February. He called for voluntary measures that would allow gas emissions to continue to rise, with the goal of slowing the rate of growth.


11 posted on 06/02/2002 8:05:21 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander
Good work.
12 posted on 06/02/2002 8:06:56 PM PDT by Senator Pardek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rintense
Of course, teh media (and Democrats) will say: "You are expressing dire predictions and won't do anything about it?" The EPA better have explanations already for this one.
13 posted on 06/02/2002 8:08:29 PM PDT by rwfromkansas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander
Thanks!

From the intro:
"While current analyses are unable to predict with confidence the timing, magnitude, or regional distribution of climate change, the best scientific information indicates that if greenhouse gas concentrations continue to increase, changes are likely to occur.
The U.S. National Research Council has cautioned, however, that “because there is considerable uncertainty in current understanding of how the climate system varies naturally and reacts to emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols, current estimates of the magnitude of future warmings should be regarded as tentative and subject to future adjustments (either upward or downward).”
Moreover, there is perhaps even greater uncertainty regarding the social, environmental, and economic consequences of changes in climate. "

Sure, but they'd have to increase an impossibly large amount in an impossibly short time.

14 posted on 06/02/2002 8:09:07 PM PDT by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
Yes, but I *could* also win the lottery... just as the Dems have said tax cuts would hurt us, etc... it's all spin.

Remember, a lie becomes truth only if you choose to believe it.

15 posted on 06/02/2002 8:11:49 PM PDT by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: lazamataz
Laz! It's you!!"
16 posted on 06/02/2002 8:12:19 PM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: deport
From http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/publications/car/ford.pdf which is a comment letter from FORD Motor Co....

Chapter 6: Impacts and Adaptation The discussion of impacts of climate change in this chapter is based on the U.S. National Assessment in the 2000 NAST Report. This report remains highly controversial, and was, at that time, the subject of considerable debate with regard to it scientific and policy discussions. The most contentious aspects of the report were (1) the use of the most pessimistic projects of potential climate impacts, with little or no discussion of the uncertainties involved in such projections; and (2) the use of global climate models to predict impacts on regional climates within the U.S. Global climate models cannot be used to project changes in regional climate, primarily because of insufficient spatial resolution and their inability to represent regional phenomena such as clouds. As was pointed out when the National Assessment was in review, the regional projections from the two climate models used often provide diametrically opposed projects for regional climate, making it impossible to determine which (or either) is (are) correct. Further, attempts to average the results from the two models are also without scientific basis. Thank you for your attention to these comments. Please contact Peg Gutmann at 313-594-0400 if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

W. M. Kreucher

17 posted on 06/02/2002 8:12:23 PM PDT by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi
*SMAK* I love you!
18 posted on 06/02/2002 8:13:15 PM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
Now that was unexpected! LOL!
19 posted on 06/02/2002 8:15:41 PM PDT by Ms. AntiFeminazi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander
Hmm, I am still waiting for us to act on the global cooling reports the nature cults where spouting 20 years ago. Of course, if the nations start a big time thermo-nuclear, all global warming bets are off.

Of course, knowing what is really coming, none of this causes me serious concern. When the water canopy is restored around the earth, and the curse is removed from the ground, this entire planet will be a paradise beyond description. And you thought Jesus died just for your sins. He died to completely restore EVERYTHING we lost in the fall. Yes!!!

20 posted on 06/02/2002 8:16:01 PM PDT by Russell Scott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-160 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson