Filski

CB, fair points. Maybe I understand the concept and am not sufficiently removed enough but I don't see how the article actually says that, implicitly or otherwise. I think people have jumped to conclusions. All I can say is that many people seem to have the wrong and overly negative opion of this policy. It is a positive thing. It'll be physically impossible to drive faster than 15mph safely for the most part because the speed limit will be designed in with obstacles that favour pedestrians so your arguments are mostly moot anyway (see homezones). There will be examples where a limit will be need to be enforced but again I cannot see why this is a negative as long as the alternative is easier. Besides, those bad eggs that resent driving slowly are least likely to live there anyway

Regardless of what impression you have, the policy is not aimed directly at reducing CO2 emissions by cutting speed. It's to make the use of cars a less attactive option compared to other options that don't consume CO2, or much less per person such as public transport. It's not a perfect solution but neither is running a car on fossil fuels in the first place.

Hmmm... I don't want to say too much but I'm involved with delivering one of these villages. Yes, you have valid concerns about the fuel efficiency of travelling at that speed but then the policy has nothing to do with that. It's about creating a safe environment for pedestrians and cyclists and making people think twice about using their cars. Let's face it, most can ride a bike at 15mph. It's a lot quicker to jump on your bike and nip a short distance up to the shop on an efficient network that favours bikes and than it is to jump in your car, park, etc. I can't speak for other schemes but ours has services and delivery requirments kept to the edge to minimise their requirment to enter the scheme. There's a whole lot of negativity coming from the skeptics without a great deal of thought. Why?

Don't worry Blackie, you're a bit of a regular finalist in the photo comps. Nice capture of the skyline by the way. Thanks for the votes everyone. It's another panorama (6 shots) - made all the more difficult to get a level horizon from atop a spinning wheel!

Weather SQ1 1 BG 1 BK 1 FR52 1 FR52 2 Non BK N2 GB N1 KF N1 DS N3 BK N1

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/...71210112002.htm

Late entry from me. 3 on the same day I became a citizen of the UK. Weather (Fingers from Heaven) Non-weather (Eye & Thames) I'm tempted to put Reflections in weather since it shows the variability in an abstract way. I leave that to others to judge.

Weather mac 1 mac 3 Blackie 1 WS 3 RL 1 Non-weather (going to vote for myself for once - my fave shot of the year) Filski N2 Slinky N3 SD4 N2 Wibs N3 Blackie N1 BTW, one of mine is not shown.

One of mine seems to have dropped off...

I'm back from Madagascar. No weather there apart from endless sunshine (good for me!). The usual panaorama from me A couple of others

Oops http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007...8/climatechange

Weather MAM 1 WS 1 HF882 3 Essan 3 Non SD4 N3 (nice composition) OS N1 Slinky N2 Blackie N2 (fireworks are hard to do well and you have)

i was wondering if you'd spotted that article Here's another I just came across, a little old. I hadn't thought about the possibility of earthquakes fracturing the ice sheet before.

Chris, I agree for the most part. Changes in the arctic will lead to a decrease overall in biodiversity in the oceans. I beleive the natural order tends towards to increased diversity with an ultimate balance acheived that shifts only marginally over long time scales. If we are the instrument of change that forces massive change over short time scales then we throw things out of whack, detrimental not only to other plants and animals but also ourselves.

Toxic algae blooms are one of the risk factors of a warming arctic. Gaining an earlier start they outstrip the ability of zooplankton to control them. They can then form mats that prevent phytoplankton from photosynthesising and decrease the dissolved organic carbon in the oceans. Of course they are toxic to marine life too.

Well GW, the news I spoke of earlier seems to have arrived. http://www.smh.com.au/news/whale-watch/mys...813.html?page=2 This is entirely in line with what I expected to be the first major tipping point. If the ocean loses the bottom rungs of the food chain it also loses the ability to absorb CO2. The fat lady just sang.

Natural, very little colour editing too. Stunning place for a swim.

Maybe, I don't beleive in 'Day after Tomorrow' scenarios. We've had several bad years in a row so I expect a little bit of balance - even if there is a general downward trend. Take the drought across the UK last year for example. I'm not saying it will happen, just that it'd be odd not to.

What Iceberg says is correct, the polar jet has had an unusually positive phase for the last 20-30yrs which correspond with record amounts of ozone thinning. It must be noted that this winter (SH) there was a negative phase leading to record cold snaps and 1day rainfall totals in some areas, while in itself does not mean that 'normal' conditions are returning. What it could mean though is that we may see some ice sheet breakup since its lost it's protection. I'm betting on a hot summer there this year which should exacerbate the problem. Let's see what the NH winter brings to the arctic this year.

Last non-weather from me.

G-W, It's not a case of waiting to say 'I told you so'. I'm as pessimistic as you at the end of it all. I beleive the oceans contain far greater inertia to buffer provide the required changes in the arctic for complete freeing of multi-year ice than you give credit for. Once set in motion however... and they are in mortion, I don't argue that. They are just not up to speed yet. On and off for the last 6yrs I've done a fair whack of reading into the indian ocean dipole with various effects of monsoon patterns, droughts in africa and also the southern ocean and the various climate and biological projected changes. It started with trying to find a long paddock indicator for winter seasons but I realised that there were more important implications. I've been watching for reports on changes in salinity, fish stocks, etc. These will signal the all important cracks to me and I've been waiting 6yrs already with little change yet. 5yrs from now I expect some change but certainly not to the extent you express. Here is a couple of the factors that I think will link to provide a buffer for at least 20yrs. 1. Solar cycle 24 will offset any albedo changes from increased melting, leading to a plateau (for a time) in rate of change of annual sea ice cover. Within a couple of years we should stop seeing records being broken. 2. Ocean temperature transport at depths have lag effects ranging from a couple of years to several decades to feedback changes at the surface.

Ok, despite that I accept AGW, I'm skeptical that we'll see multi year ice gone in 5 yrs. 20yrs min. A number of reasons including solar cycles are behind this. I see a leveling of warming occuring for the next 2 decades before accelerating again. This will not do our arguments any favours and much needed changes will not occur to offset what will come afterwards.

Still on the holiday theme - Malta. Non-weather of course. Who ever heard of weather in Malta? There's hot and then there's hotter!

I don't know P3, the AAO is now trending positive. This is a sign of the change of season and a tightening of the polar vortex with highs now sitting further south. Perhaps a few more weeks yet but the change has certainly started.

First entry for me will be a non-weather one.