Christmas with Family & Friends (Seasonal Cookbook Collection) [Hardcover]

From the Author

Enjoy this recipe from Christmas with Family & Friends.

Cheese Strata

2 T. butter
8 slices bread
8-oz. pkg. shredded Cheddar cheese, divided
8-oz. pkg. shredded Swiss cheese, divided
1/4 c. green onion, chopped
pepper to taste
4 eggs, beaten
2 c. milk
2 T. butter, melted

Arrange 4 slices bread in a greased 13"x9" baking pan. Sprinkle one cup of each cheese over bread. Top with one tablespoon green onion; add pepper as desired. Repeat layering with remaining bread, cheeses, onion and pepper. Whisk eggs, milk and butter together. Pour evenly over layers. Cover tightly with aluminum foil and refrigerate at least 6 hours to overnight. Bake, uncovered, at 325 degrees for 40 minutes. Serve hot. Serves 4 to 6.

From the Inside Flap

I love your E-letters…they make me feel like a kid at Christmastime!
 - Teresa Edwards, Ararat, NC
 
Your cookbooks are terrific! Not only do they contain a wonderful variety, but also each recipe brings a new friend into my home as well…friends who share their precious memories, family traditions and recipe creations from across the country. There’s always room in my home for newfound friends and Gooseberry Patch cookbooks. Thank you for always being at my fingertips!
 - Peggy Market, Elida, OH
 
I wanted to write and let you know that you’re doing something so right! I received all my items and the quality surpassed all my expectations. Thank you so much for making my Christmas season so enjoyable…and easy!
 - Pamela Vidler, San Jose, CA

The Litigators [Hardcover]

Review

PRAISE FOR THE CONFESSION

“Brilliant . . . Superb . . . the kind of grab-a-reader-by-the-shoulders suspense story that demands to be inhaled as quickly as possible.” —Washington Post

“One of Grisham’s best efforts in many seasons . . . a rous­ing return to his dexterous good-guy-faces-corrupt-system storytelling.” —People magazine

“Packed with tension, legal roadblocks, and shocking rev­elations.” —USA Today

About the Author

JOHN GRISHAM is the author of twenty-three novels, one work of nonfiction, a collection of stories, and two novels for young readers. He lives in Virginia and Mississippi.

Catching Fire (The Second Book of the Hunger Games) [Hardcover]

From School Library Journal

Starred Review. Gr 7 Up–Every year in Panem, the dystopic nation that exists where the U.S. used to be, the Capitol holds a televised tournament in which two teen “tributes” from each of the surrounding districts fight a gruesome battle to the death. In The Hunger Games, Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark, the tributes from impoverished District Twelve, thwarted the Gamemakers, forcing them to let both teens survive. In this rabidly anticipated sequel, Katniss, again the narrator, returns home to find herself more the center of attention than ever. The sinister President Snow surprises her with a visit, and Katniss’s fear when Snow meets with her alone is both palpable and justified. Catching Fire is divided into three parts: Katniss and Peeta’s mandatory Victory Tour through the districts, preparations for the 75th Annual Hunger Games, and a truncated version of the Games themselves. Slower paced than its predecessor, this sequel explores the nation of Panem: its power structure, rumors of a secret district, and a spreading rebellion, ignited by Katniss and Peeta’s subversive victory. Katniss also deepens as a character. Though initially bewildered by the attention paid to her, she comes almost to embrace her status as the rebels’ symbolic leader. Though more of the story takes place outside the arena than within, this sequel has enough action to please Hunger Games fans and leaves enough questions tantalizingly unanswered for readers to be desperate for the next installment.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Bookmarks Magazine

Reviewers were happy to report that the Hunger Games trilogy is alive and well, and all looked forward to the third book in the series after this one’s stunning conclusion. But they disagreed over whether Catching Fire was as good as the original book Hunger Games or should be viewed as somewhat of a “sophomore slump.” Several critics who remained unconvinced by Katniss’s romantic dilemma made unfavorable comparisons to the human-vampire-werewolf love triangle in Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight series. But most reviewers felt that Catching Fire was still a thrill because Collins replicated her initial success at balancing action, violence, and heroism in a way that will enthrall young readers without giving them (too many) nightmares.

Steve Jobs [Hardcover]

Amazon Best Books of the Month, November 2011: It is difficult to read the opening pages of Walter Isaacson’s Steve Jobs without feeling melancholic. Jobs retired at the end of August and died about six weeks later. Now, just weeks after his death, you can open the book that bears his name and read about his youth, his promise, and his relentless press to succeed. But the initial sadness in starting the book is soon replaced by something else, which is the intensity of the read–mirroring the intensity of Jobs’s focus and vision for his products. Few in history have transformed their time like Steve Jobs, and one could argue that he stands with the Fords, Edisons, and Gutenbergs of the world. This is a timely and complete portrait that pulls no punches and gives insight into a man whose contradictions were in many ways his greatest strength. –Chris Schluep

Amazon Exclusive: A Q&A with Walter Isaacson

Q: It’s becoming well known that Jobs was able to create his Reality Distortion Field when it served him. Was it difficult for you to cut through the RDF and get beneath the narrative that he created? How did you do it?

Isaacson: Andy Hertzfeld, who worked with Steve on the original Macintosh team, said that even if you were aware of his Reality Distortion Field, you still got caught up in it. But that is why Steve was so successful: He willfully bent reality so that you became convinced you could do the impossible, so you did. I never felt he was intentionally misleading me, but I did try to check every story. I did more than a hundred interviews. And he urged me not just to hear his version, but to interview as many people as possible. It was one of his many odd contradictions: He could distort reality, yet he was also brutally honest most of the time. He impressed upon me the value of honesty, rather than trying to whitewash things.

Q: How were the interviews with Jobs conducted? Did you ask lots of questions, or did he just talk?

Isaacson: I asked very few questions. We would take long walks or drives, or sit in his garden, and I would raise a topic and let him expound on it. Even during the more formal sessions in his living room, I would just sit quietly and listen. He loved to tell stories, and he would get very emotional, especially when talking about people in his life whom he admired or disdained.

Q: He was a powerful man who could hold a grudge. Was it easy to get others to talk about Jobs willingly? Were they afraid to talk?

Isaacson: Everyone was eager to talk about Steve. They all had stories to tell, and they loved to tell them. Even those who told me about his rough manner put it in the context of how inspiring he could be.

Q: Jobs embraced the counterculture and Buddhism. Yet he was a billionaire businessman with his own jet. In what way did Jobs’ contradictions contribute to his success?

Isaacson: Steve was filled with contradictions. He was a counterculture rebel who became a billionaire. He eschewed material objects yet made objects of desire. He talked, at times, about how he wrestled with these contradictions. His counterculture background combined with his love of electronics and business was key to the products he created. They combined artistry and technology.

Q: Jobs could be notoriously difficult. Did you wind up liking him in the end?

Isaacson: Yes, I liked him and was inspired by him. But I knew he could be unkind and rough. These things can go together. When my book first came out, some people skimmed it quickly and cherry-picked the examples of his being rude to people. But that was only half the story. Fortunately, as people read the whole book, they saw the theme of the narrative: He could be petulant and rough, but this was driven by his passion and pursuit of perfection. He liked people to stand up to him, and he said that brutal honesty was required to be part of his team. And the teams he built became extremely loyal and inspired.

Q: Do you believe he was a genius?

Isaacson: He was a genius at connecting art to technology, of making leaps based on intuition and imagination. He knew how to make emotional connections with those around him and with his customers.

Q: Did he have regrets?

Isaacson: He had some regrets, which he expressed in his interviews. For example, he said that he did not handle well the pregnancy of his first girlfriend. But he was deeply satisfied by the creativity he ingrained at Apple and the loyalty of both his close colleagues and his family.

Q: What do you think is his legacy?

Isaacson: His legacy is transforming seven industries: personal computers, animated movies, music, phones, tablet computing, digital publishing, and retail stores. His legacy is creating what became the most valuable company on earth, one that stood at the intersection of the humanities and technology, and is the company most likely still to be doing that a generation from now. His legacy, as he said in his “Think Different” ad, was reminding us that the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do.

About the Author

Walter Isaacson, the CEO of the Aspen Institute, has been chairman of CNN and the managing editor of Time magazine. He is the author of Einstein: His Life and Universe; Benjamin Franklin: An American Life; and Kissinger: A Biography, and the coauthor of The Wise Men: Six Friends and the World They Made. He lives in Washington, D.C., with his wife and daughter.

Warming gases saw biggest jump on record

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
WASHINGTON?— The global output of heat-trapping carbon dioxide jumped by the biggest amount on record, the U.S. Department of Energy calculated, a sign of how feeble the world’s efforts are at slowing man-made global warming.

The new figures for 2010 mean that levels of greenhouse gases are higher than the worst case scenario outlined by climate experts just four years ago.

“The more we talk about the need to control emissions, the more they are growing,” said John Reilly, co-director of MIT’s Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change.

The world pumped about 564 million more tons of carbon into the air in 2010 than it did in 2009. That’s an increase of 6 percent. That amount of extra pollution eclipses the individual emissions of all but three countries — China, the United States and India, the world’s top producers of greenhouse gases.

It is a “monster” increase that is unheard of, said Gregg Marland, a professor of geology at Appalachian State University, who has helped calculate Department of Energy figures in the past.

Extra pollution in China and the U.S. account for more than half the increase in emissions last year, Marland said.

“It’s a big jump,” said Tom Boden, director of the Energy Department’s Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center at Oak Ridge National Lab. “From an emissions standpoint, the global financial crisis seems to be over.”

Story: NYC-sized iceberg being born on Antarctica

Boden said that in 2010 people were traveling, and manufacturing was back up worldwide, spurring the use of fossil fuels, the chief contributor of man-made climate change.

India and China are huge users of coal. Burning coal is the biggest carbon source worldwide and emissions from that jumped nearly 8 percent in 2010.

“The good news is that these economies are growing rapidly so everyone ought to be for that, right?” Reilly said Thursday. “Broader economic improvements in poor countries has been bringing living improvements to people. Doing it with increasing reliance on coal is imperiling the world.”

In 2007, when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued its last large report on global warming, it used different scenarios for carbon dioxide pollution and said the rate of warming would be based on the rate of pollution.

The Waldorf Way: Silicon Valley school eschews technology U.S.-Pakistan relations, a new ‘all-time low’? Case of the drowned million-dollar car to go to trial Meet Nashville’s square-dancing Occupiers Muslim Brotherhood bends rules to win big in Egypt How to make an honest profit in politics Police question wife of Chinese activist

Boden said the latest figures put global emissions higher than the worst case projections from the climate panel. Those forecast global temperatures rising between 4 and 11 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century with the best estimate at 7.5 degrees.

Even though global warming skeptics have attacked the climate change panel as being too alarmist, scientists have generally found their predictions too conservative, Reilly said. He said his university worked on emissions scenarios, their likelihood, and what would happen. The IPCC’s worst case scenario was only about in the middle of what MIT calculated are likely scenarios.

Story: More weather disasters ahead, climate experts report

Chris Field of Stanford University, head of one of the IPCC’s working groups, said the panel’s emissions scenarios are intended to be more accurate in the long term and are less so in earlier years. He said the question now among scientists is whether the future is the panel’s worst case scenario “or something more extreme.”

But Reilly and University of Victoria climate scientist Andrew Weaver found something good in recent emissions figures. The developed countries that ratified the 1997 Kyoto Protocol greenhouse gas limiting treaty have reduced their emissions overall since then and have achieved their goals of cutting emissions to about 8 percent below 1990 levels. The U.S. did not ratify the agreement.

In 1990, developed countries produced about 60 percent of the world’s greenhouse gases, now it’s probably less than 50 percent, Reilly said.

“We really need to get the developing world because if we don’t, the problem is going to be running away from us,” Weaver said. “And the problem is pretty close from running away from us.”

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Australie passe carbone landmark lois prix

CANBERRA – Australian Parliament adopted landmark legislation to impose a price on carbon emissions Tuesday in one of the major economic reforms in a decade, giving new impetus to the discussions on the global climate of December in South Africa.

Impact of the plan will be felt right across the economy, of minors in LNG producers, airlines and steelmakers and aims to make more efficient companies in energy and power of pushing gas and renewable energy generation.

Australia represents just 1.5% of global emissions, but transmitter is highest in the world developed per capita because of a reliance on coal to produce electricity.

“It is a very positive step for the global effort on climate change.” “It shows that the world economy of advanced emissions-intensive most is ready to use a market mechanism to reduce emissions of carbon in an affordable manner,” said analyst of the Deutsche Bank Tim Jordan carbon.

The vote is a great victory for embattled Prime Minister Julia Gillard, who staked the future of his Government about what will be the system of prices outside the carbon Europe more comprehensive despite the deep hostility of voters and the political opposition.

The regime is a central element in the fight against climate change and is designed to slow the growth of increasing greenhouse gas emissions in the country from a boom based on resources and the age-old dependence of coal-fired power plants.

It defines a fixed carbon tax of a $23 ($23,78) a tone on the top 500 of July 2012 polluters, then moves to a July 2015 of emissions trading scheme. Companies involved will need a permit for each ton of carbon they emit.

“Today marks the beginning of clean energy for the future Australia.” It’s a historic moment, it’s a historic reform, a reform which is long, “Finance Minister Penny Wong told the upper House of the Senate as she wrapped the marathon debate.”

TEN YEARS OF DEBATE

The Australia has been debating a system of prices of carbon for a decade and 37 parliamentary investigations, with legislation in 2007 instrumental, fall of conservative former Prime Minister John Howard and Kevin Rudd labor in 2010.

The laws will be Australia to join the European Union and the New Zealand with Exchange of national plans. California begins in 2013, while China and the Korea of the South work on carbon exchange programs. The India has a coal tax, while South Africa plans to put caps of carbon on its major polluters.

The way Waldorf: Silicon Valley School avoids relations technology U.S. – Pakistan, a new “low”? Case of the million car drowned to go to the occupants of the Muslim brothers square-dance of Nashville folds the trial meet rules win big in Egypt how to make a honest profit in Police question wife political activist Chinese

The Government hopes to obtain the laws of the carbon price will help push for a global agreement to resume reduce emissions and the fight against global warming before international talks at Durban in December.

The price of carbon will impose a cost on each ton of carbon emitted, giving companies an incentive financial to combat pollution and contribute to the Australia in its objective of reducing emissions by 5 per cent of the year 2000 levels by 2020.

Farmers will be exempted from the economy, but it will be able to money by selling offsets carbon under separate laws for agriculture carbon initiative.

Package of 18 new laws establishes the price of carbon and billions in compensation industries exposed to export and local steelmakers, and 90 percent of workers personal tax cuts, an average value a $300 per year.

Trade of intensive industries emissions presentation such as aluminum, refining of zinc and steel makers will receive 94.5% of carbon permits free of charge for the first three years of the regime.

ENERGY OWN GOLD RUSH

The adoption of the Bill was welcomed by the applause of the public galleries, with Green leader Bob Brown – a major proponent of the scheme – shaking hands with Government senators.

A Melbourne carbon expo Conference participants were delighted with the result.

“The atmosphere is electric.” “It’s fantastic,” said Nick Armstrong the COzero of emissions trading firm.

The Government expects the plan to stimulate a rush of several billion dollars investment in new cleaner energy sources including natural gas and renewable power plants to replace the aging of the Australia coal-fired plants.

Canberra has committed a 13 billion for renewable projects and low emissions, including an A $ 10 billion independent Clean Energy Finance Corporation, with autour $ 100 billion in renewable energy sector investment should by 2050.

However, a comprehensive introduction of the Australian regime remains uncertain, with the conservative opposition leader Tony Abbott, promising to scrap the carbon price if it wins power and with the minority Government of Gillard hold on to power by a single seat.

The next election is not due until the end of 2013, but opinion polls show Gillard Government could be easily swept the Office, and Abbott can potentially take power at any time in the case of a by-election in a seat held by the Government.

Abbott, who has campaigned tirelessly against the new laws, was overseas for vote Tuesday, but he issued a statement reaffirming his promise to repeal the laws if he takes power.

“More this tax is in place, the worst of the consequences for the economy, jobs and families.” It will increase the cost of living, threaten jobs and do nothing for the environment, “Said Abbott.”

A poll Tuesday showed the Conservatives leading to the power of the work by 53 to 47 percent, although the popularity of the Government improved slightly as voters rewarmed Gillard handling of the economy and industrial relations problems.

The price of carbon is one of the three key policies that Gillard promised to finalize when it becomes Prime Minister, alongside a tax of 30 per cent planned on iron ore and coal mines and the new measures to deter asylum seekers.

But dead-heat elections last August forced Gillard to negotiate the details of the price for the carbon with the Greens and three independent legislators.

Climate Minister Greg Combet, said the Government would stick to its$ 23 a tone of prices, despite the fact that it is almost double the European cost of $8.70 and $12.60 tone, which is four-year-lows on the back of the global economic uncertainty.

“I certainly hope and anticipate that over next years three-and-half, to overcome the crisis in Europe, is, markets will stabilize and recover and our price of carbon will be well mesh,” Combet told Australian radio.

(Additional reporting by Rob Taylor in CANBERRA;) (Editing by Lincoln feast)

Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click on for restrictions.

(Incandescent) lights to go out in China

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
BEIJING?— China announced Friday it will phase out incandescent light bulbs within five years in an attempt to make the world’s most polluting nation more energy efficient.

The Waldorf Way: Silicon Valley school eschews technology U.S.-Pakistan relations, a new ‘all-time low’? Case of the drowned million-dollar car to go to trial Meet Nashville’s square-dancing Occupiers Muslim Brotherhood bends rules to win big in Egypt How to make an honest profit in politics Police question wife of Chinese activist

China will ban imports and sales of 100-watt and higher incandescent bulbs from Oct. 1, 2012, the country’s main planning agency said.

It will extend the ban to 60-watt and higher bulbs on Oct. 1, 2014, and to 15-watt and higher bulbs on Oct. 1, 2016. The time frame for the last step may be adjusted according to an evaluation in September 2016, the National Development and Reform Commission said.

State-run Xinhua News Agency quoted Xie Ji, deputy director of the commission’s environmental protection department, as saying China is the world’s largest producer of both energy-saving and incandescent bulbs.

Last year, China produced 3.85 billion incandescent light bulbs, and 1.07 billion were sold domestically, the agency said. Lighting is estimated to account for about 12 percent of China’s total electricity use, it said. Xie said the potential for energy savings and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions is huge.

The planning agency said China will save 48 billion kilowatt hours of power per year and reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 48 million tons annually once the bulbs are phased out.

Several countries plan to phase out traditional light bulbs. The United States is set to put standards in effect that require a higher level of efficiency than classic incandescent light bulbs can produce, essentially nudging them off store shelves over the next few years. The 27-nation European Union agreed in 2008 to phase out the bulbs by 2012. The most common replacements are fluorescent and LED lights.

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Insuring against extreme weather

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
Dave Martin / AP

A farmer drives his tractor past a flooded field of corn near Yazoo City, Miss. on Saturday, May 21, 2011.

A high-tech crop insurance company aims to make farming profitable — and itself — by writing policies that offer protection against floods, frosts, droughts and other bouts of crop-damaging weather that are on the rise.

Whether the increase in these weather events are due to human-caused climate change, the company said, is not their business, but the events are trending upwards and they have the technology to analyze the risk they pose to individual farmers and price polices accordingly.

“We are not trying to predict exactly what will happen, we are trying to create a distribution of outcomes of what might happen,” David Friedberg, the CEO of The Climate Corporation, which is issuing the insurance, told me Thursday.

“It is the probabilistic distribution of things that might happen that allows us to figure out what price to charge for the insurance that we are selling.”

High-tech risk analysis
This ability hinges on a system that crunches a deluge of data from state-of-the-art climate models, millions of weather measurements, and billions of soil observations. At any given time, more than 50 terabytes of live data are in its systems.

Farmers purchase policies for specific plantings (such as a field of corn or wheat) and are paid automatically when an identified type of weather hits that is known to cause production shortfalls, such as crop-wilting heat or drought.?

The Climate Corporation was founded by ex-Googlers who believe that these types of weather events are becoming increasingly common. Whether this increase in weather volatility is due to human cause climate change, however, the company doesn’t have an opinion, Friedberg said.

“All that we can do is identify trends in climate data and use them to help us predict what is going to happen in the future,” he said.?

For example, he said they can look at any city in the United States and see that temperatures have increased slightly over the last 30 years and seem to be continuing to increase, but that’s not what they’re interested in.

Rather, the impacts they are looking for are droughts, such as the one currently crippling Texas and the floods that hit Midwest farms in the spring.

“Those are the sorts of events that farmers and other businesses care about … and those are the sorts of events that we also see big trends in,” Friedberg said.

Changing industry
While climate scientists caution people not to confuse the weather with climate change, the types of extreme weather events experienced this year are consistent with the predictions of climate change models.

Polls show a growing percentage of Americans now believe the planet is warming, but the issue remains a political hot potato. Most Republican presidential candidates — John Huntsman aside — eschew the idea that fossil fuel burning is causing the climate to change, for example.

Meanwhile, legislation to combat climate change has failed to make its way through Congress and climate scientists are routinely accused of manipulating data, though those claims have been proven mostly false.

But for the insurance industry, where money does most of the talking, whether anyone says it directly or not, climate change is decidedly real and will wreak havoc on life, property, and crops. As a result, the industry is becoming proactive in incorporating changing climate into its risk analyses.

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners now, on a state-by-state opt-in basis, surveys companies about the risk climate changes poses to insurers and the actions insurers are taking in response to their understanding of those risks, for example.

Munich Re, a multinational company that insures insurance companies, issued a report in July showing 2011 was already the costliest year on record in terms of property damage.

While natural disasters unrelated to climate change such as the earthquake and tsunami in Japan make up for a big chunk of the losses, flooding in Australia has the fingerprint of climate change, Peter Hoppe, who runs the company’s Geo Risk/Corporate Climate Center, told reporters as the report was released.

Natural events such as La Nina and El Nino, ocean cycles that alter weather systems, are certainly factors as well, but warming temperatures appear to be adding a layer “on top” of that natural variability, Hoppe said.

He also cited a climate connection between Australia’s severe floods and rising ocean temperatures off the coast there. That means “more evaporation and higher potential for these extreme downpours,” he said.

“It can only be explained by global warming,” he added.?

Now that this acknowledgement exists, insurers such as The Climate Corporation are creating innovative tools to offer protection from the risk posed by the increased chance that bad weather can wipe out a year’s income.

“If you are a farmer, you really can’t afford to have another heat wave or another early freeze event or delayed plant period,” said Friedberg. “We can really reach in and help.”

More on climate change, insurance and farming:

John Roach is a contributing writer for msnbc.com.

Study tallies health costs of climate disasters

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
WASHINGTON?— Natural disasters tied to climate change not only cause physical damage but create significant health costs in terms of hospitalizations and lives lost prematurely, according to a study published Monday that looked at six recent disasters in the United States.

The Waldorf Way: Silicon Valley school eschews technology U.S.-Pakistan relations, a new ‘all-time low’? Case of the drowned million-dollar car to go to trial Meet Nashville’s square-dancing Occupiers Muslim Brotherhood bends rules to win big in Egypt How to make an honest profit in politics Police question wife of Chinese activist

The study in the peer-reviewed journal Health Affairs used the case studies as examples of events that are projected to worsen as the planet warms, the authors said.

These six events resulted in an estimated 1,689 premature deaths, 8,992 hospitalizations, 21,113 emergency room visits and 734,398 outpatient visits, according to the study.

In dollars, the largest cost by far was for premature deaths at $13.3 billion. This number was based on the Environmental Protection Agency’s value of a statistical life, $7.6 million, co-author Wendy Max said.

This was not meant to put a value on any one life but to calculate how much people in aggregate would be willing to spend to lessen the risk of death from certain causes, including the events cited in the study.

Scientists and economists from the Natural Resources Defense Council, the University of California-Berkeley and the University of California-San Francisco estimated the health costs for the following events from 2000 to 2009:

U.S. ozone air pollution, 2000-2002, $6.5 billion;West Nile virus outbreak in Louisiana, 2002, $207 million;Southern California wildfires, 2003, $578 million;Florida hurricane season, 2004, $1.4 billion;California heat wave, 2006, $5.3 billion;Red River flooding in North Dakota, 2009, $20 million.

“When extreme weather hits, we hear about the property damage and insurance costs,” said Kim Knowlton, a senior NRDC scientist and a co-author of the study. “The health-care costs never end up on the tab.”

“This in no way is going to capture all of the climate-related events that happened in the U.S. over that time period,” Knowlton said. “At $14 billion, these numbers are big already.”

To put this in context, 14 weather disasters in the United States so far this year have cost at least $14 billion, according to Jeff Masters of the Weather Underground website.

Masters said by email that health costs and deaths are considered in some of the data used to reach this figure.

The study’s authors stressed they chose events in the middle of the severity spectrum and left out some notably costly disasters, such as the 2005 hurricane season that included the devastating Hurricane Katrina. In the case of Katrina, the health-care costs were hard to pinpoint.

For Mark Conley of Raymond, Maine, whose 11-year-old son Jake suffers from asthma that gets worse with the rise in ozone air pollution, the calculation is more than dollars and cents.

“On those days that are really bad out there, he doesn’t have the lung capacity,” Conley said of the son who plays soccer, basketball and baseball. “A lot of times we have to pull him out of the game.”

Conley, who runs a heating and air conditioning business, said his monthly health insurance premiums are $1,100 with a $5,000 deductible.

“When does it get to the point where I can’t afford it?” Conley said by phone. “What happens when Jake gets worse?”

Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for restrictions.

Crop scientists fret about heat, not just water

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
CHICAGO?— Crop scientists in the United States, the world’s largest food exporter, are pondering an odd question: could the danger of global warming really be the heat?

The Waldorf Way: Silicon Valley school eschews technology U.S.-Pakistan relations, a new ‘all-time low’? Case of the drowned million-dollar car to go to trial Meet Nashville’s square-dancing Occupiers Muslim Brotherhood bends rules to win big in Egypt How to make an honest profit in politics Police question wife of Chinese activist

For years, as scientists have assembled data on climate change and pointed with concern at melting glaciers and other visible changes in the life-giving water cycle, the impact on seasonal rains and irrigation has worried crop watchers most.

What would breadbaskets like the U.S. Midwest, the Central Asian steppes, the north China Plain or Argentine and Brazilian crop lands be like without normal rains or water tables?

Those were seen as longer-term issues of climate change.

But scientists now wonder if a more immediate issue is an unusual rise in day-time and, especially, night-time summer temperatures being seen in crop belts around the world.

Interviews with crop researchers at American universities paint the same picture: high temperatures have already shrunken output of many crops and vegetables.

“We don’t grow tomatoes in the deep South in the summer. Pollination fails,” said Ken Boote, a crop scientist with the University of Florida.

The same goes for snap beans which can no longer be grown in Florida during the summer, he added.

“As temperatures rise we are going to have trouble maintaining the yields of crops that we already have,” said Gerald Nelson, an economist with the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) who is leading a global project initially funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to identify new crop varieties adapted to climate change.

“When I go around the world, people are much less skeptical, much more concerned about climate change,” said David Lobell, a Stanford University agricultural scientist.

Lobell was one of three authors of a much-discussed 2011 climate study of world corn, wheat, soybean and rice yields over the last three decades (1980-2008). It concluded that heat, not rainfall, was affecting yields the most.

“The magnitude of recent temperature trends is larger than those for precipitation in most situations,” the study said.

“We took a pretty conservative approach and still found sizable impacts. They certainly are happening already and not just something that will or might happen in the future,” Lobell told Reuters in an interview.

Scientists at an annual meeting of U.S. agronomists last week in San Antonio said the focus was climate change.

“Its impact on agriculture systems, impacts on crops, mitigation strategies with soil management — a whole range of questions was being asked about climate change,” said Jerry Hatfield, Laboratory Director at the National Soil Tilth Laboratory in Ames, Iowa.

“The biggest thing is high night-time temperatures have a negative impact on yield,” Hatfield added, noting that the heat affects evaporation and the life process of the crops.

“One of the consequences of rising temperatures … is to compress the life cycle of that plant. The other key consequence is that when the atmosphere gets warmer the atmospheric demand for water increases,” Hatfield said.

“These are simple things that can occur and have tremendous consequences on our ability to produce a stable supply of food or feed or fiber,” he said.

Boote at the University of Florida found that rice and sorghum plants failed to produce grain, something he calls “pollen viability,” when the average 24-hour temperature is 95 degrees Fahrenheit (35 Celsius). That equates to highs of 104 F during the day and 86 F at night, he said.

The global seed industry has set a high bar to boost crop yields by 2050 to feed a hungry world. Scientists said that the impact of heat on plant growth needs more focus and study.

“If you look at a lot of crop insurance claims, farmers say it is the lack of water that caused the plant to die,” said Wolfram Schlenker, assistant professor at Columbia University.

“But I think it’s basically different sides of the same coin because the water requirement of the plant increases tremendously if it’s hot,” he said.

“The private sector understands the threats coming from climate change and have significant research programs in regards to drought tolerance. They focus less on higher temperatures, but that’s a tougher challenge,” Nelson said.

“We are responding with a number of initatives…the primary one is focusing on drought tolerance,” said John Soper, vice president in charge of global seed development for DuPont’s Pioneer Hi-Bred, a top U.S. seed producer.

Pioneer launched a conventionally bred drought-tolerant corn hybrid seed in the western U.S. Corn Belt this spring, selected for its yield advantage over other varieties.

“We have some early results in from Texas that show that is exactly how they are behaving. They currently have a 6 percent advantage over normal products in those drought zones,” Soper said.

Roy Steiner, deputy director for agricultural development for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, said the foundation is focused on current agricultural effects of climate change.

“It’s amazing that there are still people who think that it’s not changing. Everywhere we go we’re seeing greater variability, the rains are changing and the timing of the rains is creating a lot more vulnerability,” Steiner said.

“Agriculture is one of those things that needs long-term planning, and we are very short-cycled thinking,” he said. “There are going to be some real shocks to the system. Climate is the biggest challenge. Demand is not going away.”

Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for restrictions.