the connection is primarily greenhouse gasses associated with climate change but also other health and environmental effects ozone particulates but in addition it connects with job anenergy security as we're seeing in europe in relationship between the use of fuel and the events on the ground there well take a step back because we used a lot of language that we assume people understand i started thinking okay so if we want to talk about renewable energy solar wind water geothermal whatever okay look at the other side of the equation what we're trying to reduce okay fossil fuels coal oil and natural gas right you good with me on that so far? absolutely yes is it fair to say that on one end here jeff we're trying to reduce the use of fossil fuels and increase the use of renewable energy simple to start with that argument right? yeah why is that so hard? because there's a lot of vested interests that make money off of the fossil fuel industry and there's a lot of jobs there too what we have to show is not only clean energy good for the environment but it's good for the economy and will cr

there were obviously stresses associated with the greenhouse aftermath. so you could imagine that that would be an environment in which there would be strong, selective pressure, and, therefore, that might be an incentive for evolutionary change. but the arrival of multicellular animals is not just a change. this is a biological innovation. this is a change to a world in which you had organisms which achieved a level of complexity and behavior that had never been seen previously. we don't have any idea at this point why a snowball glaciation and its greenhouse aftermath might have created a circumstance that would have been selectively favorable for this great change in the course of biological evolution, but the coincidence in timing is tantalizing. narrator: while the question of how complex life emerged on our planet persists, the work of scientists like paul hoffman and andy knoll brings us closer to the answer, shedding light not just on how earth became habitable, but on how it remains habitable today. [ birds squawking ] funding for this program is

we know that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are warming the atmosphere.we know they have contributed to more than a rise in global temperatures since the 880's. we know global sea levels have risen eight inches by thermal expansion caused by melting of laciers. we know that ocean acidification s occurring. this is harming our coral reefs and marine ecosystem. we know the communities in our country are dealing today with the effects of changing climate. in a florida, we see increasing salt water intrusion in our drinking water supply along the coast due to sea level rise. we see coastal communities dealing with sea level rise on heir drainage systems. the economic impact is undeniable. the local governments struggle to address today's impacts of climate change while trying to participate the risk in the future israel. on a broader scale, widespread impact is across the country. it will range from the shellfish harvest in the pacific northwest due to ocean acidification or ildfires in the southwest. given this assessment of the impacts and risks posed by gl

greenhouse emissions move offshore. as carbonferred to leakage. it damages the domestic economy and employment. a minimum this would need carbon allowances. we request that the epa perform a carbon leakage analysis. this precedent would require this to reduce greenhouse gas amounts that are above what we manufacturingoof technology, equipment and pratt this is an be required to accept responsibility to achieve higher reductions by reducing emissions outside our fence line. thecustomers are all over world and not just in the u.s.. thank you for considering. >> thank you very much for your testimony. good morning. reverend. is the i am a sierra club member and a concerned citizen from annapolis. i enqueue for the opportunity to eat in favor of the clean power plant in carbon role. city has been around for over 300 years. is in danger from rising sea levels due to climate change. , is it my voice? ok. it is not me. shall i continue? posted theday noah seanical report and tired level rise a new flood frequency around the united states. nuisance floodi

it was coupled with theory notably the greenhouse effect. explains why the earth's atmosphere is hospitable to life. the concern prompted jim baker to signal a policy of no regrets. we will consider those measures, he said, that address current priorities that also help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. in 1987 montrÉal protocol which thomas helped negotiate and that -- negotiate was an example of that thinking and that was 25 years ago. the models are far more reliable and buttressed by thousands of credible scientific studies documenting changes underway. i listened to senator boozman, and there are still many outstanding chest and's -- outstanding questions. the pace of change, tipping point, methane emissions and more. the caught -- the climate is a complex system and we do not have a complete picture. we welcome serious critiques to examine gaps and anomalies and uncertainties. that is how science advances our understanding of complex issues. change is underway. we can expect to see many more disruptions or intense storms and more wildfi

has to be named and shamed into doing greenhouse gas emissions, what would be the impact on u.s.obs and the economy? >> i think it would cause some jobs in the u.s. to be shipped overseas. emerging market economies will not care about being named. unlike the president of the united states who as steve pointed out, cares about political theatrics. >> it will jack up the prices of energy. guess who it hurts the most? poor families. this is essentially kyoto )qz this is not a fringe issue. this could be pulled up right now. and it won't. the senate at least undersnds that this will hurt their state. >> by the way, in terms of emissions, the united states has the best record in the world of any developed economy. >> what do you mean by that? >> ours has gone down because of the natural gas, which is a clean energy which the administration is doing its best to throttle until there is an election coming up but the policies are anti-frackiing. we are down. other countries are up. >> john, what do you make of it? >> obviously we are the most advanced in terms of environmental advances an

to the meat packing beef producers like coal fired power plants that are responsible for greenhouse gas emissions but just as you know you eat beef when you go and buy a hamburger you consume. fossil fuels when you turn the switch on in your home and in the end it's got to where you have got to pay more for using fossil fuels you know business is there now offices that's just part of life i mean if people are making a lot of money out of it illegitimately then we made the policies to to work on that but in the end we have to pay more for our pollution and that rolling carrot just to use less polluting forms of energy and less polluting forms of. green with you and i also just think that corporate america and also world government should really take the lead and then you know hopefully will influence the people to follow let's talk about the solutions here is geo engineering at the coal. well it's a big question is what you mean by geo engineering of the prominence game the most the one that attracting most attention and most research is called sulfite are sold sprang and the idea is to

that is why greenhouse growers quickly put the exhaust from their gas and wood haters into the greenhouse. so we can look forward to increase in productivity in agriculture from increased co2. this to me is the grass. if you accept this is true, which is probably something like true because it has been warming for the last hundred years or says we have been the dominant cause since the mid-20th century. that is 1950. in other words, they do not ascribe the rise in temperature between 1910 and 1940 to human caused emissions because we want him getting much back then. they only say it is the part between 1970 and the year 2000 that was caused by humans. rise int caused the temperature between 1910 and 1940? it is identical induration and size. .4 degrees over four years. they are both the same. it is not logical to be the secondikely that one is caused by us and the first one in is caused by something else. [laughter] this to me demonstrates the logical fallacy in explaining that we are the dominant cause for global warming. [applause] there has been no increase in global temperature for 10

them tied to our goals and adaptability, and the new and the energy, generation and we looked at greenhouse gas emissions and we looked up financial considerations and we looked up the cost of construction and the over all schedule and the operation and maintenance and the technology and we tested the value of alternatives and the net energy pro-ducks of alternatives and finally in the other side of the triple analysis, we looked up considerations and obviously odor control being a huge factor and the stake holder acceptable of the final design and the greenhouse gas emissions as a result of the project and over all air quality and safety and noise and traffic use and the odor, control and we definitely are looking at a state of the art system and we have not landed on one and here is an example of something that exists in bright water, which have been able to achieve the zero odors behind the fence line which is our goal as well. to walk you through the analysis process, we started with the world of opportunities, and the options and we looked at everything that was out there in the bio so

cut greenhouse gas emissions. you know what else we've done? we've created jobs in the area. and i suspect your point is once the economy gets moving in renewable energies, we can be a leader in the world. is that what you meant to say? >> that's what i meant to say. >> you said at that better. the issue of money and politics has been raised at this hearing. with the suggestion that environmental folks are pouring huge sums of money in, and i would argue that their money is being dwarfed by the industry. do you have any thoughts on that in the amounts of money we're seeing lobbying, i know campaign contributions is not your venue. but. >> let me just hit the issue directly, because i know it had to do with a "new york times" article which has been given surprising credibility. but i think i know how hard the great staff at epa worked to design this rule, basically from whole cloth, listening to states and utilities and energy in lobby be that lobbying that comes from contributions. >> let me just hit the issue directly, because i know it had to do with a "new york times" arti

for instance, things like greenhouse gases. acid rain was much better than it was 20 years ago.ere are good things out there but so much work to be done. really it's up to the united states to set a good examples. other countries are setting protocols, that they're not living up to. i think the way to counteract this is a green solution. now, michelle, you went to alabama to look at another solution. >> i was in greensboro, alabama, and people were down on their luck but trying to turn it around by using a weed growing in their backyard. real understanding... >> where you scared when you hear the bombs? >> al jazeera america real... news... ♪ ♪ >> hi guys, welcome back to techknow. i'm phil torrez. i'm here with marita and rachelle. you went to alabama. >> i did go to alabama, i got to see how the town is using bamboo to revitalize and pull itself up by its boot straps. >> let's check it out. >> deep in the heart of rural alabama. the once thriving town of greensboro is struggling for survival. a quarter of the population lives below the poverty line. work is scarce. the catfish

possible precedent for the future regulations of greenhouse gases are the manufacturing sector. the rules president would require them to produce greenhouse gas amounts that are above what we could reduce through manufacturing technology, equipment and practices and be required to accept responsibility to achieve higher greenhouse gas reductions by reducing emissions outside of our line. our customers are all over the world and not just in the u.s. and this regulation imposes the cost that the global competitors would not have. thank you for considering. >> thank you very much for your testimony. >> the next speaker is -- next is reverend codes ann also sarah. >> this morning. my name is anna bravcho from an apple is maryland. i thank you for t opportunity to speak speak in favor of the carbon plants and rules. my city of an obelisk has been around for over 300 years. like most coastal cities, it is in danger from the rising sea levels due to climate change. just yesterday, july 28 -- are we okay? -- should i continue? just on july 28 be posted on the website a report entitled s

for instance, things like greenhouse gases. acid rain was much better than it was 20 years ago.ere are good things out there but so much work to be done. really it's up to the united states to set a good examples. other countries are setting protocols, that they're not living up to. i think the way to counteract this is a green solution. now, michelle, you went to alabama to look at another solution. >> i was in greensboro, alabama, and people were down on their luck but trying to turn it around by using a weed growing in their backyard. >> al jazeera america >> this is the very tail section it was burning when we got here >> unbiased reporting... >> the violence has continued >> the violence has continued just a couple of miles from here >> in depth coverage... >> we've got a military escort allowing us to feel a further than everyone else... >> real global perspective >> this was clearly an attack against them... >> from around the world, to the issues right here at home >> ...shouldn't been brought here in the first place... >> we're not here to take over >> real stories... r

scientists at the stockholm environment institute a keystone xl would increase world greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 121 million tons of carbon die objection aid a year, four times as much as the state department said earlier this year. know what's really interesting is because a pipe lynn doesn't give off any emissions whatsoever. what's really interesting is how the scientists came to that conclusion, they say the pipeline will potentially boost production from the canadian oilsands, which is probably true, and all the extra oil will

>> we understood the basic science of the greenhouse effect nearly two centuries ago. joseph fourier, the same guy who discovered the law of heat conduction, understood that there was this greenhouse effect. so we've known for some time that the greenhouse effect exists and that we're increasing it through fossil fuel burning. by the mid 1990s, we had reached a level of formal certainly about that that we had not before reached. we could actually attach a number to it. in the second assessment report of the ipcc published in 1995, the ipcc concluded that there was now a discernible human influence on the climate. now, there's an interesting story there. the language would have been stronger than just discernible, but the delegates of certain participating nations like saudi arabia demanded that the language be watered down and discernible ended up being sort of a lowest common denominator. it was the one thing that everybody could agree on, the governments and the scientists. but we were able to say that we've seen the fingerprint now of human influence in a formal way

left, there's another issue up there, cap and trade, the state's landmark legislation to reduce greenhouse emissions is already being implemented, but there's some concern it's being implemented too soon or they want to put the brakes on it a bit. tell us what's going on there. >> cap and trade goes into a new phase next year, and beginning next year, you're going to have to account for the fact the carbon and other greenhouse gases, gasoline in your car burns off, that means gasoline prices are going to go up, according to a lot of studies that are done. there's a big pushback from the oil industry and a growing number of democrats who represent poorer communities saying let's slow this down, wait until the economy improved a bit more and delay that implementation a little bit. >> i can't imagine environmentalists are happy about that. >> they are not happy. they are upset about that. this is a top priority for governor brown and a lot of democrats and environmentalists make the point, if you delay gasoline and other transportation fuels, it's pointless, because they make up about 40% of

that is why greenhouse growers quickly put the exhaust from their gas and wood haters into the greenhouse. so we can look forward to increase in productivity in agriculture from increased co2. this to me is the grass. if you accept this is true, which is probably something like true because it has been warming for the last hundred years or says we have been the dominant cause since the mid-20th century. that is 1950. in other words, they do not ascribe the rise in temperature between 1910 and 1940 to human caused emissions because we want him getting much back then. they only say it is the part between 1970 and the year 2000 that was caused by humans. rise int caused the temperature between 1910 and 1940? it is identical induration and size. .4 degrees over four years. they are both the same. it is not logical to be the secondikely that one is caused by us and the first one in is caused by something else. [laughter] this to me demonstrates the logical fallacy in explaining that we are the dominant cause for global warming. [applause] there has been no increase in global temperature for 10

say --ds commercial commercial scale greenhouses on rooftops in new york city and delivers the locallythe -- the local produce all year long. >> it's really good. it is the best you have ever eaten. basil, lettuce, and tomatoes. he also knows new york city has plenty of space to grow them. not on the ground but on the roof. --one vastly unutilized underutilized resource -- there certainly was some trepidation on part of the building owners. many thought it was a pretty compelling idea. >> the idea is building commercial sale has decide greenhouses on roofs. this 20,000 square-foot farm grows hydroponically. thanks to proprietary technology. >> we have a weather station outside that has temperature humidity, co2, wind direction, solar radiation. >> heaters, shades come and events keep conditions and an ideal 65 to 75 degrees. >> how quickly does it get on the shelf? >> product you find in the supermarket will be harvested the same day. >> the company built its second greenhouse on the roof of brooklyn's whole food markets. >> we are growing arugula. to$50 million from investors get busi

>> oftentimes they are harvested that same day. >> the company build a second greenhouse on the roofmpany passes first whole foods market. >> we are growing green leaf and red leaf lettuce, arugula. it is reaping impressive returns. >> you are profitable today? >> since day one, we have been profitable. he will have 100% growth in revenue and next year, 300% forecasted. this farm will probably yield almost 20 times the yield per unit area compared to a conventional farm. lot morebably costs a than conventional farming. >> we are not trying to save this is the best way to do it with the future or does it have a role to play? absolutely. we are growing extremely high quality products in close proximity to large urban marketplaces. at the same time, at the heart of it, we are farmers. >> bloomberg's chief national correspondent carol massar reporting. an exclusive look into how karl rove is preparing the republican party for the elections. we continue in a moment. ♪ x first, bloomberg. >> we wanted you to know that bloomberg is the only is this news service offered on amazon fire tv. re

we will not get there with cutting greenhouse gas emissions. we are not going to get there by trying to impede the oil and gas industry, which will fuel the world for a long time in the future we'll have to find a balance. the more we can do on the efficiency side, the less we have to depend on - the industry that today is not the industry that will be there next year or 10 years or 20 years from now. like any other industry, the oil and gas industry is refining its method, improving its efficiency, and what we are seeing now in the united states with the new extractive technologies for natural gas, a lot of states, cities, have the opportunity to shift to a clean are burning fossil fuel, and the united states is now has the participation of becoming and exporting nation. >> we'll take a break. when we come back. the obama administration is getting ideas from local communities. what are the local communities needing the federal government to do. stay with us, this is "inside story". >>> welcome back to "inside story". i'm libby casey. you may n

linda greenhouse covered the supreme court for "the new york times" for 30 years and still writes a biweekly column for that paper. she's a lecturer at the yale law school. dalia litwick is a senior editor where she writes supreme court dispatches columns. currently she's working on a book about the four women who have served as supreme court justices. welcome to you both. >> thank you. >> you have covered the court since 1978. in that context, what do you make of the roberts court? >> so i try to think generously about the court, but i think it's hard for anybody looking at this court objectively to come away not thinking that it's a court in pursuit of an agenda. and i'm sorry to say i think that agenda maps on pretty closely to a republican party platform in things that in the hot button issues that many of us care the most about. >> is that eunique in the years you have covered the court? >> i have to say so, yes, in terms of a five-member coalition having coalesced for those results. not that there haven't been conservative versus liberal splits on the court always and i covered the tra