Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Need some help Wallsters

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Need some help Wallsters

    ...for a University assignment.

    1. select a current environmental news topic which has been covered by two news media or has been reported by them in the last three months (select 8 news items from the two media selected)

    2. explain to the tutor which concepts from the journalism studies area apply to the selected news items

    I wanted to know if anyone who regularly reads the paper knows of any recent environmental news topics that have been covered by two significant news medias?

    I was thinking about Turnbull and the Emission Trading Scheme, but I'm not too good at that.

    Any help Wallsters?

  • #2
    What about the Hendra virus??

    Comment


    • #3
      Climate change.

      Grain productions down.

      Beer prices are up.

      Weddy weddy bad.

      You asked Mack.



      The FlogPen .

      You know it makes sense.

      Comment


      • #4
        60 minutes did a great piece on climate change tonight.

        http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/B...wcomments=true

        Comment


        • #5
          Turnbull and his indmission of the carbon trading scheme, will show that man once again no only contributes to massive climate change but also continues to put his head in the sand, purely to satisfy those major polluters who now know they will havw to lose significant profit to contribute to the resurrection of our planet, its your classic good vs evil, black vs white, this might be a good topic to attack, especially the majority of liberal senators still refusing to accept that there is indeed a problem of anysort apart from their lack of government thes days? The penny wongs of the world, different though thay are , woman, gay, asian fom the wasp onservative senators are championing the case of restoration of our earth contrary to the long term plunderers of the other side of politics! sounds like the start of good essay?
          Last edited by stephenj; 08-17-2009, 10:57 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by stephenj View Post
            Turnbull and his indmission of the carbon trading scheme, will show that man once again no only contributes to massive climate change but also continues to put his head in the sand, purely to satisfy those major polluters who now know they will havw to lose significant profit to contribute to the resurrection of our planet, its your classic good vs evil, black vs white, this might be a good topic to attack, especially the majority of liberal senators still refusing to accept that there is indeed a problem of anysort apart from their lack of government thes days? The penny wongs of the world, different though thay are , woman, gay, asian fom the wasp onservative senators are championing the case of restoration of our earth contrary to the long term plunderers of the other side of politics! sounds like the start of good essay?
            You have NFI
            Turnbull is a puppet of his former employer Goldman Sachs who have been lobbying hard for cap and trade similar to our ETS in America since the early 90's. And both schemes are aimed at enriching the political class and there bankster friends. Nothing to do with the environment which has changed continuosly since time began and long before carbon emissions were increased by human activity.

            The Great American Bubble Machine

            http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...bble_machine/7

            BUBBLE #6 Global Warming

            Fast-forward to today. It's early June in Washington, D.C. Barack Obama, a popular young politician whose leading private campaign donor was an investment bank called Goldman Sachs — its employees paid some $981,000 to his campaign — sits in the White House. Having seamlessly navigated the political minefield of the bailout era, Goldman is once again back to its old business, scouting out loopholes in a new government-created market with the aid of a new set of alumni occupying key government jobs.

            Gone are Hank Paulson and Neel Kashkari; in their place are Treasury chief of staff Mark Patterson and CFTC chief Gary Gensler, both former Goldmanites. (Gensler was the firm's cohead of finance.) And instead of credit derivatives or oil futures or mortgage-backed CDOs, the new game in town, the next bubble, is in carbon credits — a booming trillion dollar market that barely even exists yet, but will if the Democratic Party that it gave $4,452,585 to in the last election manages to push into existence a groundbreaking new commodities bubble, disguised as an "environmental plan," called cap-and-trade.

            The new carboncredit market is a virtual repeat of the commodities-market casino that's been kind to Goldman, except it has one delicious new wrinkle: If the plan goes forward as expected, the rise in prices will be government-mandated. Goldman won't even have to rig the game. It will be rigged in advance.

            Here's how it works: If the bill passes, there will be limits for coal plants, utilities, natural-gas distributors and numerous other industries on the amount of carbon emissions (a.k.a. greenhouse gases) they can produce per year. If the companies go over their allotment, they will be able to buy "allocations" or credits from other companies that have managed to produce fewer emissions. President Obama conservatively estimates that about $646 billion worth of carbon credits will be auctioned in the first seven years; one of his top economic aides speculates that the real number might be twice or even three times that amount.

            The feature of this plan that has special appeal to speculators is that the "cap" on carbon will be continually lowered by the government, which means that carbon credits will become more and more scarce with each passing year. Which means that this is a brand new commodities market where the main commodity to be traded is guaranteed to rise in price over time. The volume of this new market will be upwards of a trillion dollars annually; for comparison's sake, the annual combined revenues of all electricity suppliers in the U.S. total $320 billion.

            Goldman wants this bill. The plan is (1) to get in on the ground floor of paradigmshifting legislation, (2) make sure that they're the profitmaking slice of that paradigm and (3) make sure the slice is a big slice. Goldman started pushing hard for capandtrade long ago, but things really ramped up last year when the firm spent $3.5 million to lobby climate issues. (One of their lobbyists at the time was none other than Patterson, now Treasury chief of staff.) Back in 2005, when Hank Paulson was chief of Goldman, he personally helped author the bank's environmental policy, a document that contains some surprising elements for a firm that in all other areas has been consistently opposed to any sort of government regulation. Paulson's report argued that "voluntary action alone cannot solve the climatechange problem." A few years later, the bank's carbon chief, Ken Newcombe, insisted that capandtrade alone won't be enough to fix the climate problem and called for further public investments in research and development. Which is convenient, considering that Goldman made early investments in wind power (it bought a subsidiary called Horizon Wind Energy), renewable diesel (it is an investor in a firm called Changing World Technologies) and solar power (it partnered with BP Solar), exactly the kind of deals that will prosper if the government forces energy producers to use cleaner energy. As Paulson said at the time, "We're not making those investments to lose money."

            The bank owns a 10 percent stake in the Chicago Climate Exchange, where the carbon credits will be traded. Moreover, Goldman owns a minority stake in Blue Source LLC, a Utahbased firm that sells carbon credits of the type that will be in great demand if the bill passes. Nobel Prize winner Al Gore, who is intimately involved with the planning of cap-and-trade, started up a company called Generation Investment Management with three former bigwigs from Goldman Sachs Asset Management, David Blood, Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris. Their business? Investing in carbon offsets. There's also a $500 million Green Growth Fund set up by a Goldmanite to invest in greentech … the list goes on and on. Goldman is ahead of the headlines again, just waiting for someone to make it rain in the right spot. Will this market be bigger than the energyfutures market?

            "Oh, it'll dwarf it," says a former staffer on the House energy committee.

            Well, you might say, who cares? If cap-and-trade succeeds, won't we all be saved from the catastrophe of global warming? Maybe — but capandtrade, as envisioned by Goldman, is really just a carbon tax structured so that private interests collect the revenues. Instead of simply imposing a fixed government levy on carbon pollution and forcing unclean energy producers to pay for the mess they make, cap-and-trade will allow a small tribe of greedy-as-hell Wall Street swine to turn yet another commodities market into a private taxcollection scheme. This is worse than the bailout: It allows the bank to seize taxpayer money before it's even collected.

            "If it's going to be a tax, I would prefer that Washington set the tax and collect it," says Michael Masters, the hedgefund director who spoke out against oilfutures speculation. "But we're saying that Wall Street can set the tax, and Wall Street can collect the tax. That's the last thing in the world I want. It's just asinine."

            Cap-and-trade is going to happen. Or, if it doesn't, something like it will. The moral is the same as for all the other bubbles that Goldman helped create, from 1929 to 2009. In almost every case, the very same bank that behaved recklessly for years, weighing down the system with toxic loans and predatory debt, and accomplishing nothing but massive bonuses for a few bosses, has been rewarded with mountains of virtually free money and government guarantees — while the actual victims in this mess, ordinary taxpayers, are the ones paying for it.

            It's not always easy to accept the reality of what we now routinely allow these people to get away with; there's a kind of collective denial that kicks in when a country goes through what America has gone through lately, when a people lose as much prestige and status as we have in the past few years. You can't really register the fact that you're no longer a citizen of a thriving first-world democracy, that you're no longer above getting robbed in broad daylight, because like an amputee, you can still sort of feel things that are no longer there.

            But this is it. This is the world we live in now. And in this world, some of us have to play by the rules, while others get a note from the principal excusing them from homework till the end of time, plus 10 billion free dollars in a paper bag to buy lunch. It's a gangster state, running on gangster economics, and even prices can't be trusted anymore; there are hidden taxes in every buck you pay. And maybe we can't stop it, but we should at least know where it's all going.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Lauren View Post
              60 minutes did a great piece on climate change tonight.

              http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/B...wcomments=true
              In contrast Ice Caps are growing

              http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...-11949,00.html

              Revealed: Antarctic ice growing, not shrinkingFont Size: Decrease Increase Print Page: Print Greg Roberts | April 18, 2009
              Article from: The Australian
              ICE is expanding in much of Antarctica, contrary to the widespread public belief that global warming is melting the continental ice cap.

              The results of ice-core drilling and sea ice monitoring indicate there is no large-scale melting of ice over most of Antarctica, although experts are concerned at ice losses on the continent's western coast.

              Antarctica has 90 per cent of the Earth's ice and 80 per cent of its fresh water. Extensive melting of Antarctic ice sheets would be required to raise sea levels substantially, and ice is melting in parts of west Antarctica. The destabilisation of the Wilkins ice shelf generated international headlines this month.

              However, the picture is very different in east Antarctica, which includes the territory claimed by Australia.

              East Antarctica is four times the size of west Antarctica and parts of it are cooling. The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research report prepared for last week's meeting of Antarctic Treaty nations in Washington noted the South Pole had shown "significant cooling in recent decades".

              Australian Antarctic Division glaciology program head Ian Allison said sea ice losses in west Antarctica over the past 30 years had been more than offset by increases in the Ross Sea region, just one sector of east Antarctica.

              "Sea ice conditions have remained stable in Antarctica generally," Dr Allison said.

              The melting of sea ice -- fast ice and pack ice -- does not cause sea levels to rise because the ice is in the water. Sea levels may rise with losses from freshwater ice sheets on the polar caps. In Antarctica, these losses are in the form of icebergs calved from ice shelves formed by glacial movements on the mainland.

              Last week, federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett said experts predicted sea level rises of up to 6m from Antarctic melting by 2100, but the worst case scenario foreshadowed by the SCAR report was a 1.25m rise.

              Mr Garrett insisted global warming was causing ice losses throughout Antarctica. "I don't think there's any doubt it is contributing to what we've seen both on the Wilkins shelf and more generally in Antarctica," he said.

              Dr Allison said there was not any evidence of significant change in the mass of ice shelves in east Antarctica nor any indication that its ice cap was melting. "The only significant calvings in Antarctica have been in the west," he said. And he cautioned that calvings of the magnitude seen recently in west Antarctica might not be unusual.

              "Ice shelves in general have episodic carvings and there can be large icebergs breaking off -- I'm talking 100km or 200km long -- every 10 or 20 or 50 years."

              Ice core drilling in the fast ice off Australia's Davis Station in East Antarctica by the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Co-Operative Research Centre shows that last year, the ice had a maximum thickness of 1.89m, its densest in 10 years. The average thickness of the ice at Davis since the 1950s is 1.67m.

              A paper to be published soon by the British Antarctic Survey in the journal Geophysical Research Letters is expected to confirm that over the past 30 years, the area of sea ice around the continent has expanded.

              Comment


              • #8
                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp-is6S_b_g



                The FlogPen .

                You know it makes sense.

                Comment


                • #9
                  A fake just like GW

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X