Científicos aseguran que los gases modificaron el clima y provocaron trágicos cambios en la temperatura terrestre.

Los dinosaurios herbívoros de gran tamaño generaron tal cantidad de gas metano (llamados gases de “efecto invernadero”),a través de sus flatulencias, que llegaron a modificar el clima de la Tierra durante el Período Mesozoico, hace más de 65 millones de años, según un estudio británico dado a conocer en las últimas horas.

De acuerdo a la investigación de la Universidad John Moores de Liverpool, en Inglaterra, los enormes saurópodos produjeron grandes cantidades de metano a partir de sus flatulencias, que modificaron la temperatura del planeta. Dichos dinosaurios, que vivieron desde el Triásico Superior hasta el Cretácico Superior (hace aproximadamente 210 y 65 millones de años), poblaron lo que hoy es América, Asia, Europa, África, Oceanía y la Antártida. La investigación fue publicada ahora en la influyente revista científica británica Current Biology.

Los saurópodos eran herbívoros y cuadrúpedos, y estaban caracterizados por largos cuellos y colas. Este género de dinosaurios incluyó a algunos de los animales más grandes que existieron en la Tierra, como el Diplodocus, que medía cerca de 50 metros de largo y pesaba 45 toneladas. Los científicos británicos concluyeron que, así como ocurre en las vacas, la bacteria que produce el metano en los intestinos de los herbívoros ayudaba a los saurópodos a fermentar las enormes cantidades de plantas que consumían a diario.

“Un simple modelo matemático nos ayudó a concluir que los microbios que vivían en los saurópodos habrían producido suficiente metano para modificar de forma importante el clima del Mesozoico”, declaró el científico Dave Wilkinson, jefe de la investigación de la John Moores University. “De hecho, nuestros cálculos sugieren que estos dinosaurios habrían producido más metano que todas las fuentes modernas juntas, incluidas naturales y las creadas por el hombre”, agregó.

El metano es un gas de invernadero más potente que el dióxido de carbono, ya que tiene una mayor capacidad para atrapar calor. Las emisiones globales de metano de estos animales habrían superado los 472 millones de toneladas por año, según los científicos. Dicha cifra es comparable con las emisiones de metano totales actuales tanto naturales como generadas por el hombre.

http://www.hoybolivia.com/Especial.php?IdEspecial=2130&tit=los_dinosaurios_murieron_por_sus_pedos_

The Medieval Warm Period in Southeast Uruguay … and Beyond (8 May 2012)
The results of this paper add to the ever-expanding body of empirical findings testifying to the reality of the millennial-scale cycling of the planet’s climate, which after the passing of the Little Ice Age that followed the Medieval Warm Period is likely what has most recently ushered in the Current Warm Period… Read More

Global Warming, Graminoid Grasses, and the Grazing Geese of Greenland (8 May 2012)
How have rising temperatures impacted the grasses? … and how has the result impacted the geese? According to Madsen et al., it would appear that many of Earth’s higher-latitude terrestrial ecosystems might well be able to sustain considerably greater primary productivity, as well as much larger numbers of higher-trophic-level consumers, in a CO2-enriched and warmer world than what has long been believed possible… Read More

Stormy Periods Over the Northwestern Mediterranean Sea (8 May 2012)
Over the past 7,000 years, seven multi-century periods of increased storm activity were observed, the most recent of which interval the authors associate with the Little Ice Age. “In contrast,” the authors also found that “the Medieval Climate Anomaly (1150-650 cal yr BP) was characterized by low storm activity”… Read More

Mediterranean Pink Roserock: Could It Survive IPCC-Predicted Global Warming? (9 May 2012)
A new study suggests that it may very well do so… Read More

The Plant Community Composition of Canada’s Southwest Yukon (9 May 2012)
How did it respond to the 2°C warming experienced there between 1968 and 2010? According to the authors of this study, “species richness increased on all slopes, diversity increased on three of the four slopes, and community composition changed significantly on each of the four slopes, with the most significant change occurring on the southwest aspect”… Read More

Here’s to Your Health! … Courtesy of Carbon Dioxide (9 May 2012)
Atmospheric CO2 enrichment promotes the production of many cancer-fighting substances. So here’s to our health … and the health of our children’s children … courtesy (in part) of the atmosphere’s steadily rising carbon dioxide concentration; for if the world’s climate alarmists can attribute nearly everything bad that happens nowadays, to the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content, surely a possible benefit or two can be pointed out. And the potential benefit described here is a huge one… Read More

Tropospheric Humidity and CO2-Induced Global Warming (9 May 2012)
Paltridge et al. conclude that negative trends in tropospheric humidity “as found in the NCEP data would imply that long-term water vapor feedback is negative – that it would reduce rather than amplify the response of the climate system to external forcing such as that from increasing atmospheric CO2”… Read More

Changes in Hawaiian Island Precipitation Extremes, 1950-2007 (9 May 2012)
It is of interest to compare the findings of this study with model projections that suggest a warmer climate provides more moisture in the atmosphere and will result in more frequent and intense precipitation events. Yet, as the results of this study show, the availability of more moisture in the atmosphere does not necessarily produce more extreme (heavy) rainfall, which suggests that the models still have a long way to go before they get it right… Read More

Heartland Institute | NIPCC Project, P.O. Box 25697 | Tempe, AZ 85285

by Paul Driessen

Unprecedented! As bills to extend seemingly perpetual wind energy subsidies were again introduced by industry lobbyists late last year, taxpayers finally decided they’d had enough.

Informed and inspired by a loose but growing national coalition of groups opposed to more giveaways with no scientifically proven net benefits, thousands of citizens called their senators and representatives – and rounded up enough Nay votes to run four different bills aground. For once, democracy worked.

A shocked American Wind Energy Association and its allies began even more aggressive recruiting of well-connected Democrat and Republican political operatives and cosponsors – and introducing more proposals like HR 3307 to extend the Production Tax Credit (PTC). Parallel efforts were launched in state legislatures, to maintain mandates, subsidies, feed-in tariffs, renewable energy credits, and other “temporary” ratepayer and taxpayer obligations.

This “emerging industry” is “vitally important” to our energy future, supporters insisted. It provides “clean energy” and “over 37,000” jobs that “states can’t afford to lose.” It helps prevent global warming.

None of these sales pitches holds up under objective scrutiny, and their growing awareness of this basic reality has finally made many in Congress inclined to eliminate this wasteful spending on wind power.

Entitlement advocates are petrified at that possibility. Crony corporatist lobbyists and politicians have built a small army to take on beleaguered taxpayers, rate payers and business owners who say America can no longer afford to spend more borrowed money, to prop up energy policies that drive up electricity costs, damage the environment, and primarily benefit foreign conglomerates and a privileged few.

To confront the growing onslaught of wind industry pressure and propaganda, citizens should understand the fundamental facts about wind energy. Here are some of the top reasons for opposing further handouts.

Energy 101. It is impossible to have wind turbines without fossil fuels, especially natural gas. Turbines average only 30% of their “rated capacity” – and less than 5% on the hottest and coldest days, when electricity is needed most. They produce excessive electricity when it is least needed, and electricity cannot be stored for later use. Hydrocarbon-fired backup generators must run constantly, to fill the gap and avoid brownouts, blackouts, and grid destabilization due to constant surges and falloffs in electricity to the grid. Wind turbines frequently draw electricity from the grid, to keep blades turning when the wind is not blowing, reduce strain on turbine gears, and prevent icing during periods of winter calm.

Energy 201. Despite tens of billions in subsidies, wind turbines still generate less than 3% of US electricity. Thankfully, conventional sources keep our country running – and America still has centuries of hydrocarbon resources. It’s time our government allowed us to develop and use those resources.

Economics 101. It is likewise impossible to have wind turbines without perpetual subsidies – mostly money borrowed from Chinese banks and future generations. Wind has never been able to compete economically with traditional energy, and there is no credible evidence that it will be able to in the foreseeable future, especially with abundant natural gas costing one-fourth what it did just a few years ago. It thus makes far more sense to rely on the plentiful, reliable, affordable electricity sources that have powered our economy for decades, build more gas-fired generators – and recycle wind turbines into useful products (while preserving a few as museum exhibits).

Economics 201. As Spain, Germany, Britain and other countries have learned, wind energy mandates and subsidies drive up the price of electricity – for families, factories, hospitals, schools, offices and shops. They squeeze budgets and cost jobs. Indeed, studies have found that two to four traditional jobs are lost for every wind or other “green” job created. That means the supposed 37,000 jobs (perpetuated by $5 billion to $10 billion in combined annual subsidies, or $135,000 to $270,000 per wind job) are likely costing the United States 74,000 to 158,000 traditional jobs, while diverting billions from far more productive uses.

Environment 101. Industrial wind turbine projects require enormous quantities of rare earth metals, concrete, steel, copper, fiberglass and other raw materials, for highly inefficient turbines, multiple backup generators and thousands of miles of high-voltage transmission lines. Extracting and processing these materials, turning them into finished components, and shipping and installing the turbines and power lines involve enormous amounts of fossil fuel and extensive environmental damage. Offshore wind turbine projects are even more expensive, resource intensive and indefensible. Calling wind energy “clean” or “eco-friendly” is an extraordinary distortion of the facts.

Environment 201. Wind turbines, transmission lines and backup generators also require vast amounts of crop, scenic and wildlife habitat land. Where a typical 600-megawatt coal or gas-fired power plant requires 250-750 acres, to generate power 90-95% of the year, a 600-MW wind installation needs 40,000 to 50,000 acres (or more), to deliver 30% performance. And while gas, coal and nuclear plants can be built close to cities, wind installations must go where the wind blows, typically hundreds of miles away – adding thousands of additional acres to every project for transmission lines.

Environment 301. Sometimes referred to as “Cuisinarts of the air,” US wind turbines also slaughter nearly half a million eagles, hawks, falcons, vultures, ducks, geese, bats and other rare, threatened, endangered and otherwise protected flying creatures every year. (Those aren’t song birds killed by house cats, and this may be a conservative number, as coyotes and turbine operator cleanup crews remove much of the evidence.) But while oil companies are prosecuted for the deaths of even a dozen common ducks, turbine operators have been granted a blanket exemption from endangered and migratory species laws and penalties. Now the US Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing a formal rule to allow repeated “takings” (killings) of bald and golden eagles by wind turbines – in effect granting operators a 007 license to kill.

Environment 401. Scientific support for CO2-driven catastrophic manmade global warming continues to diminish. Even if carbon dioxide does contribute to climate change, there is no evidence that even thousands of US wind turbines will affect future global temperatures by more than a few hundredths of a degree. Not only do CO2 emissions from backup generators (and wind turbine manufacturing) offset any reductions by the turbines, but rapidly increasing emissions from Brazil, China, India, Indonesia and other rapidly developing countries dwarf any possible US wind-related CO2 reductions.

Human Health and Welfare 101. Skyrocketing electricity prices due to “renewable portfolio standards” raise heating and air conditioning costs; drive families into fuel poverty; increase food, medical, school and other costs; and force companies to lay off workers, further impairing their families’ health and welfare. The strobe-light effect, annoying audible noise, and inaudible low-frequency sound from whirling blades result in nervous fatigue, headaches, dizziness, irritability, sleep problems, and vibro-acoustic effects on people’s hearts and lungs. Land owners receive royalties for having turbines on their property, but neighbors receive no income and face adverse health effects, decreased property values and difficulty selling their homes. Formerly close-knit communities are torn apart.

Real World Civics 101. Politicians take billions from taxpayers, ratepayers and profitable businesses, to provide subsidies to Big Wind companies, who buy mostly Made Somewhere Else turbines – and then contribute millions to the politicians’ reelection campaigns, to keep the incestuous cycle going.

It is truly government gone wild – GSA on steroids. It is unsustainable. It is a classic sWINDle.

Citizens can contact senators, congressmen, congressional committees and state representatives – to demand science-based energy policies. These reasons could be a good way to start the conversation.

Paul Driessen is senior policy adviser for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), which is sponsoring the All Pain No Gain petition against global-warming hype. He also is a senior policy adviser to the Congress of Racial Equality and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green Power – Black Death.

http://www.cfact.org/a/2121/Time-to-terminate-Big-Wind-subsidies?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+cfact+%28CFACT%29

Por primera vez científicos encontraron la forma de proteger al organismo de pacientes con cáncer de los efectos perjudiciales de la quimioterapia. Los medicamentos de quimioterapia pueden matar rápidamente a las células cancerosas pero también tienen efectos en el tejido sano del paciente. Contenido relacionado La quimioterapia en el embarazo no daña al feto La plata, ¿una nueva arma contra el cáncer? Lucha contra el cáncer afectada por prejuicios sobre radioterapia Por ejemplo, el tratamiento puede destruir a la médula ósea, que se encarga de producir nuevas células sanguíneas.

Los científicos del Centro de Investigación de Cáncer Fred Hutchinson, en Estados Unidos, lograron crear un “escudo” de células madre para proteger la médula ósea de los pacientes sometidos a la terapia. Lo hicieron modificando las propias células madre sanguíneas del paciente y trasplantándolas para proteger a este tejido. Los resultados del estudio preliminar llevado a cabo con tres pacientes con cáncer cerebral, dicen los científicos en Science Translational Medicine (Science Medicina Traslacional), mostraron resultados alentadores.

Dos de los pacientes sobrevivieron más tiempo del pronosticado y el tercero continuaba vivo tres años después del tratamiento y sin progresión de la enfermedad. El enfoque, afirman los expertos, es “completamente innovador”. Tejido susceptible “Encontramos que los pacientes que recibieron el trasplante de células madre modificadas con el gen fueron capaces de tolerar mejor la quimioterapia y sin efectos secundarios negativos” Prof. Hans-Peter Kiem El organismo constantemente produce nuevas células sanguíneas en la médula ósea, que se encuentra en el interior de los huesos largos.

Sin embargo, este tejido es uno de los más susceptibles al tratamiento de quimioterapia. Estos fármacos provocan una reducción en la producción de glóbulos blancos, lo cual incrementa el riesgo de infección en el paciente. También se reduce el número de glóbulos rojos, que se encargan de transportar el oxígeno en la sangre, lo cual produce falta de aliento y cansancio en la persona. Estos efectos, afirman los científicos, son uno de los mayores obstáculos en el uso de la quimioterapia y a menudo el tratamiento debe ser detenido, retrasado o reducido hasta que el paciente mejore.

Y hasta ahora no se ha encontrado un tratamiento de cáncer que sea tan efectivo como la quimioterapia. En el nuevo estudio, los científicos se centraron en pacientes con glioblastoma, una forma de cáncer cerebral que casi siempre es mortal. Los investigadores extrajeron médula ósea de los pacientes y aislaron las células madre. Escudo de células madre “La quimioterapia dispara tanto a las células del tumor como a las células de la médula ósea, pero al colocar escudos protectores en las células de la médula ósea estas quedan protegidas mientras que las células del tumor están desprotegidas” Jennifer Adair, investigadora Posteriormente utilizaron un virus para “infectar” a las células con un gen que es capaz de protegerlas de los efectos tóxicos de la quimioterapia.

Y después trasplantaron nuevamente estas células madre modificadas en el paciente. “La quimioterapia dispara tanto a las células del tumor como a las células de la médula ósea, pero al colocar escudos protectores en las células de la médula ósea estas quedan protegidas mientras que las células del tumor están desprotegidas”, explica la doctora Jennifer Adair, una de las investigadoras. Por su parte el profesor Hans-Peter Kiem, quien dirigió el estudio, afirma que “encontramos que los pacientes que recibieron el trasplante de células madre modificadas con el gen fueron capaces de tolerar mejor la quimioterapia y sin efectos secundarios negativos que los pacientes que en estudios previos habían recibido el mismo tipo de quimioterapia sin el trasplante de células madre modificadas”.

Según los científicos, los tres pacientes que participaron en el estudio sobrevivieron en promedio 22 meses después de recibir el trasplante. La media de supervivencia de los pacientes con glioblastoma -sin el nuevo trasplante- es de poco más de 12 meses. Uno de los pacientes continúa vivo 34 meses después de recibir el trasplante, afirman los científicos. “El glioblastoma sigue siendo uno de los tipos de cáncer más devastadores, con una supervivencia promedio de sólo 12 a 15 meses”, dice el doctor Maciej Mrugala, quien también participó en la investigación. Enfoque novedoso Agrega que entre 50 y 60% de los pacientes con esta forma de cáncer desarrollan tumores resistentes a la quimioterapia, por lo cual el nuevo trasplante de células madre modificadas puede ser un tratamiento “aplicable” a un gran número de pacientes. Y también podría beneficiar a pacientes con otras formas de tumores cerebrales, como el neuroblastoma, agrega. Tal como expresa la profesora Susan Short, de la organización Cancer Research Uk, “este es un estudio muy interesante y un enfoque completamente innovador para proteger a las células sanas durante el tratamiento de cáncer”.

“Necesita ser probado en más pacientes pero podría significar que en el futuro podremos usar temozolomide (un fármaco de quimioterapia) en más pacientes con tumores cerebrales de los que pensamos”.

Los científicos creen que esta estrategia también podría eventualmente beneficiar a pacientes cuya médula ósea resulta afectada debido a otros trastornos, o para pacientes con VIH o SIDA en los cuales el trasplante podría incrementar el número de células resistentes al virus. Los científicos están ahora reclutando a más pacientes para un ensayo clínico más amplio.

http://eju.tv/2012/05/hallan-cmo-proteger-al-organismo-de-los-daos-de-la-quimioterapia/

After two weeks of closed door negotiations, a U.N. preparatory committee has failed to reach consensus on a global plan of action, titled “The Future We Want,” to be adopted by a summit meeting of world leaders mid-June in Brazil. In an effort to break the deadlock, the PrepCom will give another shot at the zero draft when it holds an unscheduled five-day session beginning May 29. This will be a last ditch attempt to finalise the draft action plan. –Thalif Deen, IPS News, 7 May 2012

Representatives from governments negotiating the outcome document for the United Nations Sustainable Development Conference (Rio+20) today agreed to add five more days of deliberations to bridge differences that have kept them from making further progress in negotiations. Countries have voiced concern over the theme of the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty, with some developing countries asserting that a green economy approach should not lead to green protectionism or limit growth and poverty eradication. –UN News Centre, 5 May 2012

A statement released Friday by a coalition of international non-governmental organisations (NGOs) warned that Rio+20 “looks set to add almost nothing to global efforts to deliver sustainable development”. Antonio Hill of Oxfam said, “After four months of talks on the so-called zero draft outcome document, the Rio+20 talks are stuck at zero.” He said little or nothing has emerged that will deliver on what governments agreed was needed 20 years ago at the Earth Summit. –Thalif Deen, IPS News, 7 May 2012

Miffed with the way some UN and other international organizations have played a partisan role in climate change negotiations, India has demanded that their reports and studies should not be accepted as part of these deliberations. So far, these external reports were used more for rhetorical discourses and building public pressure outside the negotiation forums. –Nitin Sethi, Times of India, 6 May 2012

EU nations are dithering over how to fill a multi-billion-euro fund to help tackle climate change, just as the region’s executive body hosts talks with countries likely to bear the brunt of extreme weather. Non-governmental organisation Oxfam said “intransigence” from some EU member states was putting the coalition at risk as they are arguing against firm commitments to finance after 2012. –Reuters, 7 May 2012

Are biofuels about to become irrelevant in Europe? It is not just austerity on the decline throughout Europe with France’s Nicolas Sarkozy another leader down as of yesterday. While Europeans are rethinking their countries’ austere budgets, European Union officials in Brussels are also doubting the efficacy of biofuels. –Leon Kaye, Triple Pundit, 7 May 2012

I voted against the Climate Change Act, not on the basis that the science is still so uncertain, but on the evidence provided to Parliament by the government about the costs and benefits of the Act. I got a copy of the impact assessment. I was the only person to do so – I know that because when I went to the vote office, they said “Oh, we can’t find that, no-one’s asked for it.” But they did eventually find it. And I read it. And this is the government’s assessment of the costs and benefits of the Climate Change Act, the most expensive piece of legislation probably introduced in this country since the Welfare State. –-Peter Lilley, MP, 1 May 2012

1) UN Fails to Finalise Rio+20 Plan On Sustainable Future – IPS News, 7 May 2012

2) Rio+20 Talks Deadlocked Over Green Protectionism Fears – UN News Centre, 5 May 2012

3) Cash-Strapped EU Nations Get Cold Feet Over $100bn Climate Fund – Reuters, 7 May 2012

4) India Demands Exclusion Of Partisan NGO Reports From Climate Talks – Times of India, 6 May 2012

5) Biofuels On The Brink In Europe – Triple Pundit, 7 May 2012

6) Peter Lilley, MP: Communicating Climate Realism – Policy Exchange, 1 May 2012

1) UN Fails to Finalise Rio+20 Plan On Sustainable Future
IPS News, 7 May 2012

Thalif Deen

After two weeks of closed door negotiations, a U.N. preparatory committee (PrepCom) has failed to reach consensus on a global plan of action, titled “The Future We Want,” to be adopted by a summit meeting of world leaders mid-June in Brazil. The negotiators, comprising representatives of all 193 member states, proclaimed limited success, including reducing the size of the action plan – formally called the “outcome document” – from nearly 200 to less than 100 pages.

The document, called the “zero draft”, originally ran to more than 6,000 pages of submissions by member states, international organisations and civil society groups.

Still, after protracted negotiations ending last Friday, Ambassador Kim Sook of South Korea, one of the co-chairs of the PrepCom, said delegates had expressed “disappointment and frustration at the lack of progress” on reaching agreement on a plan aimed at a greener economy and a sustainable future.

In an effort to break the deadlock, the PrepCom will give another shot at the zero draft when it holds an unscheduled five-day session beginning May 29.

This will be a last ditch attempt to finalise the draft action plan, which has to be ready for approval by world leaders arriving in Rio de Janeiro for the three-day summit, beginning Jun. 20.

The summit will be the culmination of the U.N. Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD, also called Rio+20), a follow-up to the landmark 1992 Earth Summit in Brazil which adopted Agenda 21 and the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development.

“Let us be frank,” UNCSD Secretary-General Sha Zukang said Friday, “currently, the negotiating text is a far cry from the ‘focused political document’ called for by the General Assembly.”

He said the objective should be to arrive in Rio “with at least 90 percent of the text ready, and only the most difficult 10 percent left to be negotiated there at the highest political levels”.

However, a statement released Friday by a coalition of international non-governmental organisations (NGOs) warned that Rio+20 “looks set to add almost nothing to global efforts to deliver sustainable development”.

“Too many governments are using or allowing the talks to undermine established human rights and agreed principles such as equity, precaution, and polluter pays,” it said.

Antonio Hill of Oxfam said, “After four months of talks on the so-called zero draft outcome document, the Rio+20 talks are stuck at zero.”

He said little or nothing has emerged that will deliver on what governments agreed was needed 20 years ago at the Earth Summit.

Full story

2) Rio+20 Talks Deadlocked Over Green Protectionism Fears
UN News Centre, 5 May 2012

Representatives from governments negotiating the outcome document for the United Nations Sustainable Development Conference (Rio+20) today agreed to add five more days of deliberations to bridge differences that have kept them from making further progress in negotiations. Countries have voiced concern over the theme of the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty, with some developing countries asserting that a green economy approach should not lead to green protectionism or limit growth and poverty eradication.

“The present negotiation approach has run its course,” said Rio+20 Secretary-General Sha Zukang, adding that there is a need to proceed with a sense of urgency.

The negotiated document, along with voluntary commitments by governments, businesses and civil society, is meant to set the stage for the global community to recommit to sustainable development and agree to concrete actions when they gather at the Rio+20 Conference in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, from 20 to 22 June.

Mr. Sha called for greater political will and agreement on all sides and underlined that the main objective is to get to Rio de Janeiro with at least 90 per cent of the text ready and only the most difficult 10 per cent left to be negotiated there.

“We can have an outcome document which builds upon earlier agreements – an outcome document which is action-oriented in spelling out the future we want,” he said.

Mr. Sha stressed that the present document, despite having been reduced by about 100 pages, still has too many paragraphs and contains too much repetition. “Currently, the negotiating text is a far cry from the ‘focused political document’ called for by the General Assembly,” he said.

Countries have voiced concern over accountability and implementation of the commitments made, as well as over the theme of the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty, with some developing countries asserting that a green economy approach should not lead to green protectionism or limit growth and poverty eradication.

“Delegates have expressed disappointment and frustration at the lack of progress,” Rio+20 Preparatory Committee co-chair Kim Sook told participants at the concluding meeting of the latest round of talks yesterday.

Mr. Kim emphasized that there will be a change in working methods when negotiations resume that will include working from a new text prepared by the co-chairs, as well as other changes in the negotiating procedures.

The five added negotiating days have been set for 19 May to 2 June and will take place in New York.

More than 120 Heads of State have registered to attend Rio+20, and some 50,000 people, including business executives, mayors, representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), youth and indigenous people, among others, are expected to participate in both official and informal events during the Conference.

3) Cash-Strapped EU Nations Get Cold Feet Over $100bn Climate Fund
Reuters, 7 May 2012

EU nations are dithering over how to fill a multi-billion-euro fund to help tackle climate change, just as the region’s executive body hosts talks with countries likely to bear the brunt of extreme weather.

The EU recommitted to providing €7.2bn ($9.4bn) for the fund over 2010-12, according to draft conclusions seen by Reuters ahead of a meeting of EU finance ministers next week.

But after that, how much cash will flow is unclear as the text – drafted against the backdrop of acute economic crisis in the eurozone – only states the need to “scale up climate finance from 2013 to 2020″ without specifying how.

The Green Climate Fund aims to channel up to $100bn globally per year by 2020 to help developing countries deal with the impact of climate change.

Its design was agreed at international climate talks in Durban last year.

Europe’s climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard is fighting to build on Durban’s fragile agreement to keep alive the United Nations process on tackling climate change.

On Monday and Tuesday, she will hold informal discussions in Brussels with members of what some call the “coalition of ambition”, ahead of UN talks in Bonn later this month.

The coalition is a union of the EU, the Alliance of Small Island States and the Least Developed Countries, which at the UN talks in Durban played a lead role in forging agreement on keeping alive the Kyoto process to address global warming.

“I have invited to Brussels today and tomorrow a group of 30 ambitious countries, represented by their ministers, to discuss how we can keep up this momentum and continue to achieve results together,” Hedegaard said in a statement.

‘Stubborn’

Non-governmental organisation Oxfam said “intransigence” from some EU member states was putting the coalition at risk as they are arguing against firm commitments to finance after 2012.

“At a critical moment in the fight against climate change, Europe looks to be sitting back rather than stepping up,” Lies Craeynest, Oxfam’s EU climate change expert, said.

Debate has also focused on how much of the EU’s $30bn share of the $100bn should come from the private sector, which would reduce the need for public funds.

The draft conclusions ahead of the May 15 EU ministerial meeting noted “further efforts are required to clarify the concept of private financing and its contribution to the $100bn””.
Full story

4) India Demands Exclusion Of Partisan NGO Reports From Climate Talks
Times of India, 6 May 2012

Nitin Sethi

Miffed with the way some UN and other international organizations have played a partisan role in climate change negotiations, India has demanded that their reports and studies should not be accepted as part of these deliberations.

Domestically, it has refused the Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) request to become an official partner to its study on the cost-benefit analysis of taking different actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The decision against ADB’s proposal on ‘mitigation studies’ is not the first time that the government has taken such a step on offers from international organizations and funding agencies. “The method that ADB was using was such that it would seem all emission reduction actions are purely beneficial in terms of economics,” an official told TOI.

Earlier, India had fought a silent battle at international climate negotiations to point out that the Bridging the Emissions Gap report, presented by United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), was a clever presentation of data showing the gap between what the world had committed to reduce emissions and how much more needed to be done to remain within relatively safer levels of global warming. Scholars from the Stockholm Institute of Environment, using the data that UNEP had collected but not highlighted, showed that the developing countries had committed to greater emission reductions than the rich nations.

“It’s not that the data is wrong in these reports, but what answers one is looking at. If the reports are part of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change like the IPCC report, they are informed by the needs of all countries and not guided by politics and interests of the few,” an official said.

In one of the most prominent such cases, the government had taken the UNDP to task in 2007 for presenting a report that had discarded the notion of fair-burden sharing while apportioning responsibility to reduce global emissions.

If the report is based on the premise of fair burden-sharing formula, the solutions it would throw up like which country should do what are bound to be at odds with dumping the responsibility for historical emissions and only looking at the remaining atmospheric space.

“Now, equity has been accepted by even groupings like US-led Major Economies Forum that had refused to entertain it so far. An equitable decision on how countries share emission reductions to remain within safe limits is back on the table after Durban talks, and studies or institutions that do not make this as a basis of their research are playing a partial role at these meetings,” another official noted.

So far, these external reports were used more for rhetorical discourses and building public pressure outside the negotiation forums. With the EU and Association of Small Island States, which ally closely with the Europeans, demanding that reports from outside the negotiation process too be taken into consideration while firming up greater commitments for all, India has formally objected to such a move.

5) Biofuels On The Brink In Europe
Triple Pundit, 7 May 2012

Leon Kaye

Are biofuels about to become irrelevant in Europe? It is not just austerity on the decline throughout Europe with France’s Nicolas Sarkozy another leader down as of yesterday. While Europeans are rethinking their countries’ austere budgets, European Union officials in Brussels are also doubting the efficacy of biofuels.

Biofuels have become a lynchpin in the European Union’s long-term energy strategy. As Europe lurches towards a goal of 20 percent of its total energy requirements by 2020, biofuels are an important part of that goal. Another EU directive mandates that 10 percent of transport fuel comes from renewable energy sources. But “renewable” has become a loaded word when it comes to biofuels because of the effects they have on land where they are grown as well as their resulting emissions.

At issue is the concept of indirect land use change (ILUC). ILUC theory dictates that by converting farms for food into land grown for biofuel crops, such production increases an overall demand for additional land for farming. If farmers therefore cut down trees or drain wetlands, the results would be the release of millions of tons of carbon emissions that would otherwise be sequestered in peat bogs and forests. Studies the EU commissioned suggest that the risk of ILUC is higher for biodiesel, often made from oilseeds, than for bioethanol, manufactured out of sugar or grain. Meanwhile there is talk in Brussels over whether biodiesel is really better for the environment than conventional diesel, though some experts argue that plants grown for biodiesel’s production offsets any carbon emissions from biofuels.

The result has been reported infighting between the EU’s Climate Commission, which supports the move to include ILUC emissions in the overall emissions count of crops used to produce biofuels. The Energy Department, however, opposes such a rule. Naturally the biofuels industry, worth approximately $17 billion in Europe, is against such a change because such a shift could drastically affect its business. Farmers, generally a powerful lobby throughout Europe, could see their bottom line take a hit as well.

Full story

6) Peter Lilley, MP: Communicating Climate Realism
Policy Exchange, 1 May 2012

Peter Lilley’s speech at the Policy Exchange debate A Greener Shade of Blue? Communicating Climate Change on the Right

It’s a privilege to be part of this panel. The document that was sent out says the presumption today is that there’s a problem communicating climate change on the right, because some on the political right are suspicious of taking action to reduce greenhouse emissions, some are hostile to climate science, others worry that it’s just a cover for anti-capitalist political aims, or they challenge some of the economics behind the policy measures. Well, I take it I am here set up as an example of this problem, a token denialist, one of the infamous five who voted against the Climate Change Act. In short, a suitable case for treatment.

Indeed I was worried and relieved when Dr Corner spoke, because I’d seen that Cardiff University houses his school on communicating climate change in the School of Psychology, and I wondered whether this was a sort of Stalinist approach, where one who was thought to deviate from the established line was in need of treatment, and in fact that wasn’t the line taken. But I would suggest another line to take, for your studies of the psychology, is to study the groupthink in the climate change business. And I will happily give you an article on the subject, that I wrote in the Wall Street Journal some while ago.

Before I go on to what I say, can I – because I am somewhat of the grit in the oyster – explain my own position? I studied physics at Cambridge, before I went on to become an economist, and I fully accept the existence of the greenhouse effect. Without the warm blanket provided by greenhouse gases, notably CO2 and water vapour, the Earth would probably be a frozen, uninhabitable rock. If the amount of CO2 is doubled, it’s well established that the direct effect, other things being equal, would be to raise the Earth’s temperature by about one degree Centigrade. Since warmer air holds more water vapour, that could double the impact, or reduce it if the resulting clouds reflect back more sunshine.

All that’s certain and settled. But a degree or two rise in temperature is, of itself, not a huge concern. To predict temperature increases large enough to generate catastrophic consequences requires invoking feedbacks, which are at best uncertain, or even unknown, and in order to amplify the initial greenhouse effect. So the debate is not about whether CO2 will warm the climate, but how much, how certain, how soon, how much harm it will cause, and how well we could adapt to it. And all those areas have great doubts and concerns, but also great opportunities for those of an alarmist disposition.

However, I voted against the Climate Change Act, not on the basis that the science is still so uncertain, but on the evidence provided to Parliament by the government about the costs and benefits of the Act. The government published an impact assessment of the Climate Change Act – it’s always obliged to publish an assessment of the costs and benefits of any piece of legislation – in order that Parliament should know that the benefits substantially exceed the costs and it’s worthwhile doing.

I got a copy of the impact assessment. I was the only person to do so – I know that because when I went to the vote office, they said “Oh, we can’t find that, no-one’s asked for it.” But they did eventually find it. And I read it. And this is the government’s assessment of the costs and benefits of the Climate Change Act, the most expensive piece of legislation probably introduced in this country since the Welfare State.

Full speech

]]> http://www.nat-n-bio.santotomas.edu.bo/2012/05/un-fails-to-finalise-rio20-plan/feed/ 0 http://www.nat-n-bio.santotomas.edu.bo/2012/05/la-superluna-llamo-la-atencion-del-mundo/ http://www.nat-n-bio.santotomas.edu.bo/2012/05/la-superluna-llamo-la-atencion-del-mundo/#comments Tue, 08 May 2012 13:45:21 +0000 Sylvia Chafuen http://www.nat-n-bio.santotomas.edu.bo/?p=4051

CNN.- Un espectáculo de luz lunar dio la vuelta al mundo el sábado, recompensando a muchos observadores de la luna con detalles brillantes y nítidos de los cráteres y cuencas de la luna llena.

Llamada como luna “perigea” por los científicos, el fenómeno ocurre una vez al año.

La NASA dijo que la luna aparece aproximadamente un 14% más grande y un 30% más grande que otras lunas llenas.

Eso es porque será lo más cerca que esté a la Tierra por un tiempo; sólo a 355665.02 kilómetros de distancia.

El mejor momento para ver el acontecimiento es justo cuando la luna cruza el horizonte de la Tierra. La luna siempre en ese momento se ve lo más grande posible, aunque la razón por la que ocurre esto sigue siendo un misterio. Observar la luna detrás de los edificios y árboles crea una ilusión óptica por lo que parece aún más grande, por lo que es un momento perfecto para tratar de tomar algunas fotografías hermosas.

Así que, ¿por qué esta luna llena es tan súper?

A media que la luna recorre su órbita elíptica alrededor de la Tierra, hay momentos específicos cuando está lo más cerca y lo más distante de nuestro planeta. El apogeo ocurre cuando la luna está lo más alejada de nosotros, y el perigeo ocurre cuando está lo más cerca.

Los expertos dicen que los observadores puede que no noten una diferencia de tamaño notable, dado que no hay puntos de referencia cuando la luna está en lo alto.

Shari Neluka Atukorala, un iReporter en Kandi, Sri Lanka, dijo que la luna “estaba tan brillante que realmente podía ver las marcas en ella de cerca… y sin embargo tan lejos”.

No todos estuvieron impresionados.

Ben Tason Jesiorna, de 41 años, en Ciudad Davao, Filipinas, tomó una fotografía de la luna asomándose en las nubes.

“En realidad estaba esperando una luna más grande, considerando que los científicos la llamaban una superluna”, dijo.

http://www.hoybolivia.com/Noticia.php?IdNoticia=60556&tit=la_superluna_llamo_la_atencion_del_mundo

CNN.- El gobierno del Distrito Federal recomendó a la población de dos delegaciones utilizar cubrebocas y no realizar actividades físicas tras la caída de ceniza del volcán Popocatépetl en el sur de la ciudad.

Según la Secretaría de Salud del Distrito Federal, la caída de ceniza se registra en las delegaciones de Milpa Alta y Tláhuac, cercanas al volcán, por lo que se recomienda revisar y limpiar coladeras,  juntar la ceniza en bolsas, y no depositarla en el drenaje, al cual puede provocarle serias afectaciones.

El gobierno local recomendó también a la población mantener puertas, ventanas y depósitos de agua cerrados.

La Secretaría de Salud recordó que el nivel de alerta volcánica permanece en color amarillo fase 3 y se prevé que en las próximas horas las cenizas alcancen otras zonas del Distrito Federal y del área metropolitana.

(14:43) En las próximas horas puede registrarse una leve caída de ceniza en el Distrito Federal y en el área metropolitana como resultado del aumento en la actividad del volcán Popocatépetl, reportó el jueves la Secretaría de Gobernación (Segob), al citar información del Centro de Ciencias de la Atmósfera del Instituto de Geofísica de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM).

La Segob señaló que el Volcanic Ash Advisory Center (VAAC) de Washington, Estados Unidos, también prevé posible caída de ceniza en la porción oriental de la Ciudad de México, en las próximas horas.

El miércoles autoridades locales del Estado de México y el Distrito Federal reportaron caída leve de ceniza en al menos cuatro municipios y cuatro delegaciones, respectivamente.

El Centro Nacional de Prevención de Desastres (Cenapred) indicó en un reporte de las 11:00 horas del jueves que en un lapso de 24 horas el volcán Popocatépetl “incrementó significativamente” su actividad.

El evento de emisión más importante de gases, cenizas y fragmentos incandescentes ocurrió a las 5:24 horas del jueves, señaló el Cenapred. “Adicionalmente se registraron 16 exhalaciones de gran amplitud”, refirió en un comunicado.

El Centro informó que se mantiene el nivel de alerta volcánica en Amarillo Fase 3.

http://www.hoybolivia.com/Noticia.php?IdNoticia=60469&tit=ceniza_del_popocatepetl_cae_en_dos_delegaciones_de_ciudad_de_mexico

Nuestro vecino celestial tiene planes de hacernos una visita peculiar este sábado por la noche.

Los científicos la llaman “superluna”. La Luna pasará a 357.000 km de la Tierra. Eso es alrededor de 24.600 km más cerca que el promedio.

Esa proximidad hará que la Luna se vea un 14% más grande de lo que se ve si está a la distancia más lejana, dijo Geoff Chester, del Observatorio Naval de EE.UU.

La diferencia, sin embargo, es tan pequeña que no es fácil detectarla.

La distancia entre la Luna y la Tierra varía porque la primera recorre una órbita elíptica en lugar de una circular.

Al igual que cualquier luna llena, la superluna se verá más grande cuando esté en el horizonte y no en lo alto del cielo; esto gracias a una ilusión óptica, Chester dijo.

La superluna traerá mareas inusualmente altas, debido a su cercanía y alineación con el Sol y la Tierra, pero Chester estima que su efecto será modesto.

¿Se cometerán más crímenes?

Se suele decir que las lunas llenas inspiran a los delincuentes, que los malos hábitos del hombre se alborotan gracias a ellas.

Pero eso no es más que un mito urbano, según le dijo Scott Lilienfeld: no importa qué tan cerca o lejos pase, la Luna no incita crímenes, como sugiere la creencia popular.

Estudios que han tratado de documentar este tipo de conexiones encontraron “una gran cantidad de nada”, dijo el psicólogo de la Universidad de Emory y autor del libro 50 grandes mitos de la psicología popular.

La noción de que la lunas llenas provocan extraños comportamientos está entre los 10 primeros mitos de su estudio, porque “está ampliamente difundida”.

¿Por qué? Lilienfeld dijo que una razón clave podría ser la forma de prestar atención a las cosas: “La gente le busca explicaciones a las cosas cuando no las hay. Cuando hay luna llena y se cometen crímenes, hacen la relación. Pero cuando no pasa nada y hay luna llena, no hacen la relación”, dijo.

http://eju.tv/2012/05/regresa-la-luna-ms-brillante-y-grande-del-ao/

by Dennis Avery

Lo que actualmente llamamos cáncer de mama debería ser considerado como diez enfermedades completamente separadas, según un estudio internacional que ha sido llamado “un hito”.

Las categorías podrían mejorar el tratamiento mediante la adaptación de medicamentos al tipo exacto de cáncer de mama que padece el paciente y ayudar a predecir la supervivencia con mayor precisión.

El estudio publicado en la revista Nature analizó el cáncer de mama de 2.000 mujeres. Y tomará por lo menos tres años para que las conclusiones puedan ser utilizadas en los hospitales.

La cartografía del cáncer

Los investigadores compararon el cáncer de mama a un mapa del mundo. Aseguraron que las pruebas que actualmente se utilizan en los hospitales son muy amplias y lo divide en el equivalente a continentes.

Los últimos hallazgos le dan el mapa al cáncer de mama mucho más detalle, lo que permite encontrar distintos “países”.

“El cáncer de mama no es una enfermedad, si no diez enfermedades distintas”, dijo el investigador que dirigió el estudio, Carlos Caldas. Y agregó: “Nuestros resultados allanarán el camino para que los médicos en el futuro puedan diagnosticar el tipo de cáncer de mama que tiene una mujer, los tipos de medicamentos que funcionan y los que no de una manera mucho más precisa que en la actualidad”.

Por el momento, los cánceres de mama se clasifican por su apariencia bajo el microscopio y con pruebas de marcadores tumorales. Aquellos con “receptores de estrógeno” deberían responder a las terapias hormonales tales como el tamoxifeno; aquellos con un “receptor Her2″ pueden ser tratados con Herceptin.

La gran mayoría de los cánceres de mama, más del 70%, deben responder a las terapias hormonales. Sin embargo, su reacción al tratamiento varía enormemente. Caldas asegura que “algunos lo hacen bien, algunos lo hacen horriblemente. Es evidente que necesitamos una mejor clasificación”.

Escala sin precedentes

Su equipo analizó muestras congeladas de cáncer de mama de 2.000 mujeres en hospitales en Reino Unido y Canadá. Se analizó muy a detalle la genética de las células tumorales -qué genes habían mutado, qué genes estaban trabajando a toda marcha y cuáles habían sido eliminados.

El estudio, realizado por investigadores en Reino Unido y Canadá, mostró que todas las diferentes formas en las que las células cambiaron cuando se volvieron cancerosas podían ser agrupadas en diez categorías diferentes, llamadas IntClust de 1 a 10.

El profesor Caldas dijo que era un “modo completamente nuevo de ver el cáncer de mama”. El estudio fue financiado por el Instituto de Investigación del Cáncer de Reino Unido. Su director ejecutivo, Harpal Kumar, dijo: “Este es el estudio más grande que jamás se haya realizado para analizar en detalle la genética de los tumores de mama”.

“Esto va a cambiar la manera en que vemos el cáncer de mama, en los próximos años tendrá un enorme impacto en el diagnóstico y el tratamiento de la enfermedad. Creemos que este es un estudio histórico”.

Además, agregó que el organismo empezaría a utilizar los nuevos criterios en las pruebas clínicas que financia. Más allá de las pruebas para nuevos fármacos contra el cáncer, la nueva “guía” del cáncer de mama podría tomarse un buen tiempo antes de beneficiar directamente a los pacientes.

Los investigadores tienen que probar que las diez clasificaciones de hecho aportan un beneficio a las personas con cáncer de mama, antes de que puedan ser utilizadas por los médicos. Ese proceso se espera que tome de tres a cinco años.

Revolucionario

La presidenta ejecutiva de la Campaña contra el Cáncer de Mama en el Reino Unido, Delyth Morgan, dijo que el estudio podría “revolucionar la forma en la que el cáncer de mama es diagnosticado y tratado”.

“Ser capaces de adaptar los tratamientos a las necesidades de cada paciente es considerado el Santo Grial para los médicos y este amplio estudio nos lleva un paso más cerca de ese objetivo”.

Un portavoz del Departamento de Salud británico dijo: “Siempre estamos buscando nuevas formas de mejorar los resultados para los pacientes con cáncer y por eso estamos invirtiendo más de US$1.200 millones para asegurar que las personas sean diagnosticadas con cáncer temprano y tengan un mejor acceso a los últimos tratamientos.

http://eju.tv/2012/04/el-cncer-de-mama-es-diez-enfermedades-distintas/