Could global warming create another new country?

Camille Seaman

By STEPHAN FARIS from the New York Times

Greenland’s ice sheet represents one of global warming’s most disturbing threats. The vast expanses of glaciers — massed, on average, 1.6 miles deep — contain enough water to raise sea levels worldwide by 23 feet. Should they melt or otherwise slip into the ocean, they would flood coastal capitals, submerge tropical islands and generally redraw the world’s atlases. The infusion of fresh water could slow or shut down the ocean’s currents, plunging Europe into bitter winter ...

...But while most of the world sees only peril in the island’s meltwater, Greenland’s independence movement has explicitly tied its fortunes to the warming of the globe ...

... “But from an overall perspective, it will have a positive effect.” Greenland’s fishermen are applauding the return of warm-water cod. Shops in the island’s capital have suddenly begun to offer locally produced potatoes and broccoli — crops unimaginable a few years earlier ...

...Offshore, where the Arctic Ocean is rapidly thawing, expectations are even higher. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that Greenland’s northeastern waters could contain 31 billion barrels of undiscovered oil and gas. On the other side of the island, the waters separating it from Canada could yield billions of barrels more. And while Greenland is still considered an oil exploration frontier, Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Canada’s Husky Energy and Cairn Energy and Sweden’s PA Resources are aleady ramping up exploration.

In November, Greenlanders will vote on a referendum that would leverage global warming into a path to independence. The island’s 56,000 predominantly Inuit residents have enjoyed limited home rule since 1978. The proposed plan for self-rule, drafted in partnership with Copenhagen, is expected to pass overwhelmingly. It would grant the first $16 million of oil and mineral income to the local government, with further revenues split equally until Denmark’s share reaches roughly the $680 million a year Greenlanders currently receive from the Danes. Then there would be no further obstacles to sovereignty. “When we reach the point where we no longer need the subsidy, we’ll be able to say we’re economically independent,” Hammond says. “There will be nothing that ties us anymore.”

Stephan Faris is author of “Forecast: The Consequences of Climate Change, From the Amazon to the Artic, From Darfur to Napa Valley”, to be published inJanuary.

India, nuclear power, and trade

I learned something from a post today, and I guess I need to rip the whole thing since I'm still digesting it. I read the Foundry site every day, and it seems just about every day I'm learning something that actually matters.

First, we are the world's leaders in nuclear technology, even though we haven't built a reactor in 30 years. This means we can make a lot of money, in trade and export, in this industry.

Second, we have a deal worked out to play a major role in helping India deevelop their nuclear power plants, and Congress is being asked to approve a few of those stages. I'm curious where our political leaders stand, since this was the first I've heard of it.

Third and Lastly, we need to build nuclear power plants. To maintain our lead in the field and to reduce our dependence on oil and coal.

From: The Push for Peaceful Nuclear Deal with India


With the Singh government surviving yesterday’s no-confidence motion in the Indian
Parliament, India is one step closer to gaining access to civilian nuclear reactors and fuel that would allow it to embark on its own nuclear renaissance. The civil nuclear cooperation agreement, for which Washington and New Delhi inked a bilateral “123 Agreement” last summer, still must cross several hurdles, including completion of a safeguards agreement with the IAEA, consensus support from the 45-nation Nuclear Supplier’s Group, and approval from the U.S. Congress. The agreement would end a 35 year trade moratorium on the transfer of
civilian nuclear technology and plants imposed against India.

But it is not just India that will get the boost, so will U.S. manufacturers. India has six plants under construction, ten firmly planned, and extensive plans for the future. This agreement will help give U.S. companies access to this huge market. That is precisely what America’s developing nuclear industry needs. America’s access to the burgeoning international nuclear markets is critical. Although the United States hasn’t built a reactor in over three decades, its extensive national laboratory and university system makes it a global leader in nuclear R
& D. Furthermore, while countries like France, Russia, and Japan may have been growing their nuclear manufacturing capacity, the U.S. was perfecting nuclear operations at its 104 power reactors (of the world’s 439).


The result is that American technology and know-how could be a vital part of the international nuclear renaissance. And agreements like this one with India assure that these technologies will be available to bring about safer reactors, proliferation-resistant fuels, and new methods for managing nuclear waste. This will lead to growth throughout the American nuclear industry, including in the manufacturing sector, which the U.S. once dominated.


Once the IAEA board of governors approves a safeguards agreement with India (they meet to discuss the issue on August 1ST), the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) must come to a
consensus on allowing civilian nuclear trade with India. The U.S. Congress then
must also ratify the U.S-India 123 agreement
Tomorrow the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs
will discuss the Nonproliferation Regime in an Era of Nuclear Renaissance.;
Heritage Research Fellow Jack Spencer will be testifying, which can be seen here

Pilot and Former Home Builder in Iowa

For a guy that flies a multi-million dollar jet plane, and built highly custom homes in NW Indiana during the heyday of home building ... what's he do for vacation? I asked him two weeks ago "Ken what are you doing next week?" His answer "I'm heading to Iowa to help people, loading water and tools in my truck and just going there, not sure where, but I'll email when I get there."

Travel to Iowa, find a community to help people affected by the floods, stop and start working. A post by his brother in law last night.

American Self-Reliance Alive in The Heartland

I know Ken personally, have flown with him, golfed with him, and I can only say this week, he's my hero. Some quotes from his email late two nights ago:

"Greetings from Oakville, Iowa. I can’t begin to portray what is to be seen out here. The attached pictures, as usual, do not do it justice. Though there is non-stop activity, it has an eerie, ghost-town feel to it. The smell is vile. I took most of the photos later in the day so as not to appear too callous. There's a lot to convey and I do not know where to begin ... Anyway, it is late in the day, and there are some exhaustive days ahead, therefore, I will be brief. It's an ugly scene and may remind some of us of other places we'd rather not remember, absent the word "unfriendly".

Present, however, are disaster relief volunteers from all over the country. After talking to some of the few remaining locals, it appears that FEMA has been great! From what the locals say, all you have to do is make initial contact with them [FEMA]. Is this something new?

The Red Cross and various other relief organizations have all been amazing, too. They provide an endless flow of supplies, etc. Everyone pitches in wherever they can. We tear everything out of the flooded-out homes: belongings, cabinets, drywall; down to the studs. I spent the evening pumping out a basement with the homeowner and removing all of its contents; nasty stuff. I can’t fathom rebuilding this town. I have also attached a couple of pix from a few weeks ago. More later."

Thanks Ken, wish I was there. More photos on NWI Connect and Indy Hardball. You'll have to surf to all three sites, the link above and these two here to see all the photos through the ones I got at lunch today.

Obama can't make up his Iraqi mind

Barack Obama's continued ignorance of foreign policy is clear and evident in his editorial posted today at The New York Times. Obama continues to repeat his Far Left talking points that Iraq diverted us from fighting Al-Qaeda. The junior senator from Illinois is still unwilling to acknowledge the thousands of Al-Qaeda fighters that have been lost in Iraq. And, after saying the surge had worked last week- Today he's back to saying it didn't work.

From: Gateway Pundit

Is there an oil conspiracy?

Easy answer no. More complicated is to do the debate with liberals who want to "blame" someone for the high oil and thus gasoline prices. Blame speculators, blame Bush for invading Iraq, blame big businesses for global warming, blame the big business for sending too much industry to China.

Can we stop the blame game? The oil markets are a very efficient market for a commodity.

As Carpe Diem says "If the inventory data are correct, consumers were burning all that $135 oil."

"Why is the price of oil a difficult concept for some on the left? They want to come up with some grand conspiracy theory and rush to command and control legislation claiming that Americans have a “right to lower gas prices.” This is at best silly but at worst dangerous. This mentality hinders future economic growth by giving people a victim mentality and stifles the entrepreneurial spirit by making it seem as though government is the only one who can solve the problem. Congress is now fixated on speculators. If Congress wants to weed out speculators, they should allow more potential supply. Anticipation of increased supply will put downward pressure on future oil prices and hence the prices of these future contracts will decline. If these markets have run amok with speculators, these speculators will immediately see the value of their contract decline. (No one is going to want a speculators contract to buy a barrel of oil at $130 when they expect the price to be $100.) Hence Congress quickly punishes speculators in the most efficient way possible — using the market’s discipline rather than holding committee meetings and investigations and then imposing fines and then collecting fines and then who knows what." From the Foundry

From my perspective, naive as environmentalists may see me, we need more supply of all eneergy sources including oil. We need more speculators, the greater the number the more efficient the market. We need to encourage innovation on alternate fuels, but refrain from manipulating markets while "encouraging"