May 12, 2009 - Between the mid-1940s and the end of the 1970s lead was added to gasoline to improve the way it burned. Lead reduced or eliminated the "knocking" sound caused by premature ignition and also provided lubrication, which prevented the close-fitting parts of the engine from chafing against one another. The lead made its way into the water and air and caused many types of health problems. For that reason leaded gas was banned. The air has less lead today. But in a fine example of good deeds being punished, it seems that airborne lead particles in high altitude cirrus clouds also helped stall global warming. Lead particles are great seeds for the formation of ice crystals in the clouds and help to radiate heat efficiently into space. Here's the full story at Science Daily.

May 3, 2009- Only ostriches now deny the indisputable and overwhelming evidence that the earth is warming. But there are intelligent people who question whether or not emissions from human activities are the cause and whether CO2 is the primary villain. For the past decade the "Petition Project" has been circulating a petition at universities that questions the basis for linking man made CO2 emissions to climate change. Since 1998 the petition has gathered 31,000+ signatures. According to its website the reason for the petition is as follows:

The purpose of the Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climatological damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

Publicists at the United Nations, Mr. Al Gore, and their supporters frequently claim that only a few “skeptics” remain – skeptics who are still unconvinced about the existence of a catastrophic human-caused global warming emergency.

It is evident that 31,478 Americans with university degrees in science – including 9,029 PhDs, are not "a few." Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,478 American scientists are not “skeptics.”

These scientists are instead convinced that the human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity and that government action on the basis of this hypothesis would unnecessarily and counterproductively damage both human prosperity and the natural environment of the Earth.

Here's the website for the Petition Project. For what it's worth, a signature from atomic bomb developer and advocate Edward Teller, the man who inspired the character Dr. Strangelove, is shown on the website's home page. Teller died in 2003.

The Petition Project is being used by people who want the government to move slowly (or not at all) in taking action against climate change. This letter at Boston.com is an example. Undoubtedly there are many more. How much weight should we give to this? We know a lot more about climate change today than we did a decade ago. In light of current evidence I wonder if some of the people who signed have changed their minds.

April 16 2009 - During her run as candidate for vice president Sarah Palin took the position that scientific evidence of global warming was both inconclusive and flawed. Now she says that global warming is harming her state of Alaska. Palin sees undeniable evidence: "The dramatic decreases in the extent of summer sea ice, increased coastal erosion, melting of permafrost, decrease in alpine glaciers and overall ecosystem changes are very real to us." She continues to support increased domestic energy production. But now her focus is on cleaner natural gas rather than crude oil. Here's the full story from the Chicago Tribune.

April 11, 2009 - When Cape Wind announced its intent to build windmills in Nantucket Sound the project became a lightning rod for local environmentalists both for and against it. Last week, the 5,700 member Association to Preserve Cape Cod (APCC) issued a letter from President Susan Shepherd and Executive Director Maggie Geist in favor of the project. The APCC has been participating in the regulatory review of Cape Wind since 2001 when it was first proposed. Here's a snip from the letter:

"We do not conclude that there will be no environmental impacts from this project. But it is our judgment that the benefits of increasing the local production of renewable energy will outweigh any environmental harm and the perceived threat to our region’s character. This conclusion is supported by a steady stream of new scientific evidence that indicates climate change is occurring even more rapidly than previously predicted. Cape Cod will be among those areas first affected by rising sea levels. The seabirds that winter in Nantucket Sound will be among the creatures most threatened by a rapidly warming Arctic."

Here's the full letter. (pdf)