If local forecasts about tomorrow’s weather are often wrong, then how likely are predictions about the planet’s future climate to be correct?

So begins an audio broadcast from CBC regarding climate change. My own personal position on climate change and the impact that man is making on global warming is uncertain. My scientific background does not qualify me to decide.

There is a body of evidence on both sides and sadly those that dare to say that maybe climate change and global warming might NOT be caused by man’s impact are outcast and derided by the popular movement. That’s not constructive debate.

Opinion always requires debate.

I was recently sent this link to a CBC podcast on climate change, outlining how it is possible that man may not be the reason for the increase in global temperatures. We really ought to consider both sides of the equation rather than heading down a path of strongest media opinion.

Have a listen, see what you think. Just because one opinion is different to the accepted wisdom, doesn’t make that position insane or wrong.

Let’s face it, the steps proposed to solve the assumed problem of CO2, are pretty damaging to the environment, whether it is replacing rainforest by palm oil for bio fuel, eucalyptus for carbon sequestration,  or dammed valleys for power generation, not to mention despoiled landscapes and migrant bird and bat kill by windmills, as well as habitat loss from blocked off estuaries.

What if the theory of global warming caused by CO2 is not true, as so many reputable scientists are saying now?

Let’s face it, CO2 is necessary for life on earth, it is plant food. It makes forests grow faster.

It is in our interests to do all that we can to protect the environment, particularly the rain forests.

Policies designed to reduce CO2 may well be counter productive, apart from , of course, those that preserve and increase the world’s rain forests.

It’s important to look at both sides of the coin. No?

This article from the Economist was brought to my attention by a chap I met at a trustee meeting for a new Charity called Leapfrog.

Leapfrog is a unique business-led not-for-profit organisation that channels pro bono (free) services from top businesses into activities that deliver carbon reductions and they look set to make a huge difference by leveraging the desire of professionals in the corporate world to utilise their acquired skills for the not for profit sector, specifically in the climate change arena.

The article talks about how the Amazon ‘could’ develop into the future, focusing on both the needs of the  population within the forests of Brazil and the need for lond term sustainability and forest conservation.

Given the fact that the forest is one and a half times the size of India (8 times the size of Texas according to the article) and is home to over 10 million people, it’s an issue that needs a plan.

The article has some great case studies about villages and towns that have grown and thrive in the forest like Manaus,

About 900 miles (1,500km) downriver to the east, in Amazonas state, stands Manaus. Rubber barons built the city from the 1860s onwards. Its early residents made up for their distance from the European centres of fashion by trying to outdo Paris during the BELLE ePOQUE in drinking and debauchery. Now Manaus’s Zona Franca is the workshop for most of the televisions, washing machines and other white goods sold in Brazil. Special arrangements allow firms such as Sony and LG to import parts tax-free from elsewhere in the world and assemble them there. Despite being surrounded on all sides by thick forest, Manaus hums with manufacturing.

Have a read of it, I think it sounds like a good plan for the future development.

We all know that the creation of electricity has an impact on the environment in what ever form it takes, so it is hardly surprising to read analysis that large, data centre loving companies like Google are having a significant impact on carbon emmissions.

Here at CTF our website is carbon neutral, that is to say that the hosting company we use has an environmental carbon offsetting programme. It’s not ideal, but it is better than nothing!

Are Google doing enough to manage their consumption of electricity? This report from leading technology news site, Techcrunch, makes for an interesting read.

Here at Children’s Tropical Forest we’ve taken a step to making our website operation carbon neutral by teaming up with NS Design for the supply of our web hosting.

NS Design use data centres owned by Coreix the first UK data centre to become carbon neutral.

On March 26th, 2007 Coreix became the first UK based managed hosting services company to take the crucial step to make their operations more environmentally friendly. On behalf of all their clients Coreix is voluntarily offsetting all the CO2 emissions caused by its data centre and are the first UK data centre to do so. Coreix contributions have been used to help purchase the Rodas property, a 45 hectare extension to the Buenaventura Reserve managed by Fundación Jocotoco in the foothills of the Andes in south-western Ecuador.

But it isn’t just through the use of Coreix data centres that NSDesign are making their products greener, they also do work in the UK with Tree Appeal, a tree planting scheme. As NS Design explain…

As an ethical business we care about the environment, and recently became one of the few web service companies to become carbon neutral, by completely offsetting our carbon footprint.

Our partnership with Tree Appeal allows us to do even more – by pledging to plant a native broad leaf tree for every customer who purchases our new “Green Web Hosting Plan”. They’ll also get an official certificate (digital of course!) thanking them for their contribution, as well as links to specific environmental websites and carbon calculators.

Data centres have a huge environmental impact due to the massive amount of electricity they consume to power the servers and the climate control needed to keep everything cool.

As this article from Tech Republic illustrates..

Here’s one of the interesting things about all of these new data centers that are going up in rural areas — their energy consumption. For example, Microsoft’s new data center will consume 48 megawatts of power, or enough to power about 40,000 homes. According the US Census Bureau, for 2005 all of Grant County, Washington (which includes Quincy) contained only 30,605 housing units. That means that Microsoft’s new data center will consume about 30% more energy than all of the people in the entire county combined.

We can all do our bit and choosing our suppliers based on their environmental credentials is a good place to start.

For more information on carbon reduction, check out Zero Carbonista as well.