<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Nobelist Krugman calls climate science denial by House conservatives &#8220;a form of treason — treason against the planet&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/29/nobelist-krugman-calls-climate-science-denial-by-house-conservatives-a-form-of-treason-%e2%80%94-treason-against-the-planet/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/29/nobelist-krugman-calls-climate-science-denial-by-house-conservatives-a-form-of-treason-%e2%80%94-treason-against-the-planet/</link>
	<description>The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:27:35 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris Winter</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/29/nobelist-krugman-calls-climate-science-denial-by-house-conservatives-a-form-of-treason-%e2%80%94-treason-against-the-planet/#comment-94988</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Winter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:36:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/?p=8495#comment-94988</guid>
		<description>This may be more than you wanted to know about Dr. Krugman&#039;s column, but I&#039;ve just tallied the comments. It comes out like this: 333 in favor, 153 opposed. (The remaining 16 either are duplicates, or I couldn&#039;t divine their position.)

Thus, readers approved his view by better than 2:1. Also, if you check the average recommendation scores, they are 29.1 for approving comments, 18.0 for those opposed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This may be more than you wanted to know about Dr. Krugman&#8217;s column, but I&#8217;ve just tallied the comments. It comes out like this: 333 in favor, 153 opposed. (The remaining 16 either are duplicates, or I couldn&#8217;t divine their position.)</p>
<p>Thus, readers approved his view by better than 2:1. Also, if you check the average recommendation scores, they are 29.1 for approving comments, 18.0 for those opposed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David B. Benson</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/29/nobelist-krugman-calls-climate-science-denial-by-house-conservatives-a-form-of-treason-%e2%80%94-treason-against-the-planet/#comment-89757</link>
		<dc:creator>David B. Benson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:20:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/?p=8495#comment-89757</guid>
		<description>&lt;b&gt;Susan&lt;/b&gt; --- Algae dervied biofuels will have their place, but they are not necessarily better, in all circumstances, than other biomass.  For example, Jatropha does well in India and in Southeast Asia.  Could be grown on Caribbean islands.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>Susan</b> &#8212; Algae dervied biofuels will have their place, but they are not necessarily better, in all circumstances, than other biomass.  For example, Jatropha does well in India and in Southeast Asia.  Could be grown on Caribbean islands.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Max</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/29/nobelist-krugman-calls-climate-science-denial-by-house-conservatives-a-form-of-treason-%e2%80%94-treason-against-the-planet/#comment-89346</link>
		<dc:creator>Max</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:50:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/?p=8495#comment-89346</guid>
		<description>I believe the consensus is that something needs to be done and fast...have any of us ever seen government so anything fast?  Government may be one of the solutions but the world will have already melted by that big red star...before government takes action.  They are influenced by too many pet projects, lobbyists and a desire to keep a cushy job to ever do anything quickly.  
It will take the actions of the human population to solve our environmental problems.  When consumers talk...manufacturers listen. When humanity shouts, government listens.  When we (humans) decide that saving our environment from ourselves is important, we will be the ones who will make a difference...not government intervention.  All we need is someone to lead us all, wake us up, and motivate us to do the right things.  Then we will make a difference.

Max
http://www.ensobottles.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe the consensus is that something needs to be done and fast&#8230;have any of us ever seen government so anything fast?  Government may be one of the solutions but the world will have already melted by that big red star&#8230;before government takes action.  They are influenced by too many pet projects, lobbyists and a desire to keep a cushy job to ever do anything quickly.<br />
It will take the actions of the human population to solve our environmental problems.  When consumers talk&#8230;manufacturers listen. When humanity shouts, government listens.  When we (humans) decide that saving our environment from ourselves is important, we will be the ones who will make a difference&#8230;not government intervention.  All we need is someone to lead us all, wake us up, and motivate us to do the right things.  Then we will make a difference.</p>
<p>Max<br />
<a href="http://www.ensobottles.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.ensobottles.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Susan</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/29/nobelist-krugman-calls-climate-science-denial-by-house-conservatives-a-form-of-treason-%e2%80%94-treason-against-the-planet/#comment-89189</link>
		<dc:creator>Susan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 08:03:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/?p=8495#comment-89189</guid>
		<description>re DotEarth, though I remember hooting and hollering about the oozy &quot;fair and balanced&quot; Copenhagen article, there have been a lot of good posts there.  This on MIT:
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/20/high-odds-of-hot-times/

The New Yorker article on Hansen is pretty good, though I agree it would be nice to avoid the flames the title might cause.  It shows him as likable, humble, and driven by necessity, directly contracting the nasty factoids being circulated by the hoax toadies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>re DotEarth, though I remember hooting and hollering about the oozy &#8220;fair and balanced&#8221; Copenhagen article, there have been a lot of good posts there.  This on MIT:<br />
<a href="http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/20/high-odds-of-hot-times/" rel="nofollow">http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>2009/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>05/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>20/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>high-odds-of-hot-times/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span></a></p>
<p>The New Yorker article on Hansen is pretty good, though I agree it would be nice to avoid the flames the title might cause.  It shows him as likable, humble, and driven by necessity, directly contracting the nasty factoids being circulated by the hoax toadies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Susan</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/29/nobelist-krugman-calls-climate-science-denial-by-house-conservatives-a-form-of-treason-%e2%80%94-treason-against-the-planet/#comment-89178</link>
		<dc:creator>Susan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 07:37:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/?p=8495#comment-89178</guid>
		<description>oh dear, ecostew, you seem to have gone right into it.  I&#039;m not sure if what I was talking about was identical but if so it doesn&#039;t sound so good, does it?  It is so annoying not to have enough scientific training.

Nonetheless, IMHO it looks better than other biofuels.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oh dear, ecostew, you seem to have gone right into it.  I&#8217;m not sure if what I was talking about was identical but if so it doesn&#8217;t sound so good, does it?  It is so annoying not to have enough scientific training.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, IMHO it looks better than other biofuels.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Susan</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/29/nobelist-krugman-calls-climate-science-denial-by-house-conservatives-a-form-of-treason-%e2%80%94-treason-against-the-planet/#comment-89173</link>
		<dc:creator>Susan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 07:33:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/?p=8495#comment-89173</guid>
		<description>Here&#039;s another article about algae; perhaps it is more specific:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jun/28/china-algae-carbon-capture-plan

I think (though I too am insufficiently informed) it might have some potential.  It gets confused by some with a couple of other items involving algae which are not so positive.  I got the impression it gets points because (a) it consumes more CO2 than it emits and (b) it&#039;s cheap and easy to produce.

People tend to be dismissive about it, but I&#039;m not sure it is as flawed as indicated.  I first heard about it second hand from someone associated with MIT; perhaps someone with connections there can find out what they&#039;re up to, and I&#039;ll try to track down who it was.

I don&#039;t think it should automatically be lumped in with efforts likely to fail.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s another article about algae; perhaps it is more specific:<br />
<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jun/28/china-algae-carbon-capture-plan" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>environment/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>2009/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>jun/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>28/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>china-algae-carbon-capture-plan</a></p>
<p>I think (though I too am insufficiently informed) it might have some potential.  It gets confused by some with a couple of other items involving algae which are not so positive.  I got the impression it gets points because (a) it consumes more CO2 than it emits and (b) it&#8217;s cheap and easy to produce.</p>
<p>People tend to be dismissive about it, but I&#8217;m not sure it is as flawed as indicated.  I first heard about it second hand from someone associated with MIT; perhaps someone with connections there can find out what they&#8217;re up to, and I&#8217;ll try to track down who it was.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think it should automatically be lumped in with efforts likely to fail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: quakergardener</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/29/nobelist-krugman-calls-climate-science-denial-by-house-conservatives-a-form-of-treason-%e2%80%94-treason-against-the-planet/#comment-89050</link>
		<dc:creator>quakergardener</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 04:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/?p=8495#comment-89050</guid>
		<description>re &quot;skeptics&quot; decrying Waxman-Markey:

Here is a link to an article in Investors Business Daily claiming the EPA suppressed a report that disproves global warming so ACES could pass. Real denier stuff full of half-truths and outright lies. 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ibd/20090626/bs_ibd_ibd/20090626issues;_ylt=AkSKf2xNlL8acpuE_rm_DIppl88F</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>re &#8220;skeptics&#8221; decrying Waxman-Markey:</p>
<p>Here is a link to an article in Investors Business Daily claiming the EPA suppressed a report that disproves global warming so ACES could pass. Real denier stuff full of half-truths and outright lies. </p>
<p><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ibd/20090626/bs_ibd_ibd/20090626issues;_ylt=AkSKf2xNlL8acpuE_rm_DIppl88F" rel="nofollow">http://news.yahoo.com/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>s/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>ibd/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>20090626/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>bs_ibd_ibd/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>20090626issues;_ylt=AkSKf2xNlL8acpuE_rm_DIppl88F</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ecostew</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/29/nobelist-krugman-calls-climate-science-denial-by-house-conservatives-a-form-of-treason-%e2%80%94-treason-against-the-planet/#comment-88957</link>
		<dc:creator>ecostew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 01:41:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/?p=8495#comment-88957</guid>
		<description>Yes, and the &quot;Rs&quot; hope to achieve the same outcome next election, unfortunately it&#039;s our kids and their kids that go to jail.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, and the &#8220;Rs&#8221; hope to achieve the same outcome next election, unfortunately it&#8217;s our kids and their kids that go to jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris McGrath</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/29/nobelist-krugman-calls-climate-science-denial-by-house-conservatives-a-form-of-treason-%e2%80%94-treason-against-the-planet/#comment-88953</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris McGrath</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 01:37:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/?p=8495#comment-88953</guid>
		<description>It is ironic that Bernie Madoff was sentenced today to 150 years in prison for his Ponzi scheme while Representative Paul Broun received applause for his statements about global warming being a hoax. Madoff was praised as a financial wizard right up to his fall too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is ironic that Bernie Madoff was sentenced today to 150 years in prison for his Ponzi scheme while Representative Paul Broun received applause for his statements about global warming being a hoax. Madoff was praised as a financial wizard right up to his fall too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ecostew</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/29/nobelist-krugman-calls-climate-science-denial-by-house-conservatives-a-form-of-treason-%e2%80%94-treason-against-the-planet/#comment-88904</link>
		<dc:creator>ecostew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:34:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/?p=8495#comment-88904</guid>
		<description>Well biofuels, including algae:

Compete with food security, energy security,  and water security; a World Bank 2008 report estimates that biofuels have increased food prices by 75%; increasing AGW-related temperatures expected to decrease crop yields (recent US national assessment) and increase irrigation requirements; algal biodiesel potential, but current small-scale production costs of $33/gal are too high and based on first principles of solar insolation falling on a square meter of land, the maximum algal biodiesel yield you could expect to get is around 1 gallon/square meter/yr with photobioreactors cost over $100/square meter; a recent Proceedings of NAS study reported  that jatropha requires five times as much water per unit of energy as sugarcane and corn, and nearly ten times as much as sugar beet--the most water-efficient biofuel crop and jatropha requires an average of 20,000 liters of water for every liter of biodiesel with soybeans and rapeseed, the two other biodiesel crops considered in the study, being next highest, each requiring roughly 14,000 liters of water per liter of fuel</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well biofuels, including algae:</p>
<p>Compete with food security, energy security,  and water security; a World Bank 2008 report estimates that biofuels have increased food prices by 75%; increasing AGW-related temperatures expected to decrease crop yields (recent US national assessment) and increase irrigation requirements; algal biodiesel potential, but current small-scale production costs of $33/gal are too high and based on first principles of solar insolation falling on a square meter of land, the maximum algal biodiesel yield you could expect to get is around 1 gallon/square meter/yr with photobioreactors cost over $100/square meter; a recent Proceedings of NAS study reported  that jatropha requires five times as much water per unit of energy as sugarcane and corn, and nearly ten times as much as sugar beet&#8211;the most water-efficient biofuel crop and jatropha requires an average of 20,000 liters of water for every liter of biodiesel with soybeans and rapeseed, the two other biodiesel crops considered in the study, being next highest, each requiring roughly 14,000 liters of water per liter of fuel</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
