Make a profit, save the world

Even if you don't buy into theories on global warming, alternative-energy industries should prosper in the coming years. Now's the time to invest.
By Jim Jubak

You should own global-warming stocks. Even if you think that global warming is based on bad statistics and unconvincing computer models. Or that it's a plot by the tree huggers and the United Nations to institute some kind of world government.

I'm not one of the skeptics. I find the science compelling. Human activities ranging from burning coal for electricity to driving gasoline-fueled vehicles have increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. These changes are about to shift the world's climate into a new state that will dramatically alter rainfall patterns, ocean currents, sea levels and the acidity of the world's oceans. And we've got only a relatively small window, maybe as few as 50 years, before these changes to global climate take on an irreversible momentum.

I'm not here to argue the science. There are lots of books that do a good job of that. My current favorite is Tim Flannery's "The Weather Makers." I accept your skepticism. Doubters and scoffers welcome.

So let's say you don't buy it. I still think you ought to invest in global-warming stocks. At worst, you'll make a profit. At best, you'll make a profit and help save the world. That sound OK to you? Then let me explain my logic. At the end of this column, I'll give you five kinds of global-warming stocks to consider for your portfolio.

Not just an environmental issue

The deck is stacked at the moment in favor of action on global warming. Even if global warming winds up on the rubbish heap of discredited scientific theories, entities such as the European Union, Japan, China, India and even the United States are going to adopt a program that looks a whole lot like one designed to stop global warming because it fits each nation's need to increase its energy security as well. It's not just coincidence that politicians on both sides of the Atlantic are talking simultaneously about stopping global warming and ending their nations' addiction to oil.

This program of action, whether under the guise of national security or stopping global warming, couldn't come at a better time for what I'll have to call alternative-energy stocks, for lack of a better term. The subsidies and market incentives in this program will be more than enough to push maturing, but still not fully commercialized, technologies into the market on an equal footing with other energy technologies.

Come what may after that, these alternative-energy technologies -- and I'm thinking here primarily, though not exclusively, of wind and solar power -- will have received enough of a boost to be able to compete with the rest of the energy sector.

You can get a good sense of what the coming global-warming combat orders are going to look like from the plan unveiled Jan. 10 by the European Union.

The plan calls for:

• Making a 20% reduction, from 1990 levels, in carbon emissions in the European Union by 2020.
• Getting 20% of electricity supply in the European Union from renewable sources by 2020. That's more than a doubling from current targets.
• Constructing a new generation of safer nuclear reactors to keep nuclear power at a 30% share of supply.
• Keeping coal at 30% of electricity supply but ensuring that all new and existing plants include systems for capturing carbon and storing it out of the atmosphere.
• Having biofuels provide 10% of fuel for transportation by 2020, up from 2% now.

Global warming or no global warming, it's pretty clear that these changes are critical for the future health of the European economy. Europe is desperately worried about its reliance on Russian energy supplies. In the most recent example to Europeans of why they have to do something to reduce their dependence on Russian natural gas and oil, Russia cut off oil supplies to Western Europe through the pipeline that crosses Belarus for three days during a dispute with Belarus.

Even in Washington the ice is thawing because of this conjunction of global-warming science and national energy security. The "Advanced Energy Initiative" in last year's State of the Union address promised a 22% increase in research for "clean" coal, "safe" nuclear power, "revolutionary" wind and solar energy, "cutting-edge" biofuels, hybrids and hydrogen fuels. This year I expect more research money to be thrown at the same sectors, with the possibility that the Bush administration will actually apply more federal cash to the big job: building unit volume in order to drive down costs for wind and solar, the most commercially developed of these technologies.

What does all this amount to from an investor's prospective? I'd break down the opportunities into two groups.

Group 1: Saving the world

These stocks maximize your long-term potential returns since they really can play a role in solving the global-warming problem.

Wind and solar: These technologies are set to go over the top and into the commercial market. There are several factors putting a breeze at the back of wind technology:

• More cost-efficient turbines have driven down the cost of using the wind to produce electricity by about 50% over the past 15 years.
• The European Union's carbon-trading systems put a price on pollution, making it more costly for utilities to do business the old way.
• Big utilities are able to raise capital at extremely low costs.
• Government funding for global-warming programs will be enough to finance the construction of manufacturing facilities that will remove the current solar-cell bottleneck. It's hard to grow a solar-energy market when no one can get enough raw material to build solar cells.

Stocks to watch: I'd look to add global-warming positions in European market leaders such as Gamesa (GCTAF, news, msgs) and Vestas (which trades on the Copenhagen Exchange under code DK001026806), Indian market leader Suzlon Energy (which trades on the Mumbai stock exchange under code 532667) and U.S. market leader GE Wind, a subsidiary of General Electric (GE, news, msgs). Or you can buy up-and-coming suppliers of key technologies to the wind industry, such as carbon-fiber supplier Zoltek Cos. (ZOLT, news, msgs) and ultracapacitor maker Maxwell Technologies (MXWL, news, msgs). In solar, my list would include First Solar (FSLR, news, msgs), a leader in making thin-film photovoltaic material, and SunPower (SPWR, news, msgs), which is making good progress in driving down the cost per kilowatt for solar cells because of the silicon manufacturing expertise of its parent Cypress Semiconductor (CY, news, msgs).

Transitional technologies: In the long run, burning natural gas to produce electricity (or to produce the electricity that you need to turn natural gas into hydrogen) still produces too much carbon dioxide to prevent massive climate change from global warming, but it sure packs less of a carbon-dioxide wallop than coal or oil. However, getting the natural gas where it needs to go is a huge job requiring immense capital.

• Stocks to watch: ExxonMobil (XOM, news, msgs) has already begun to move its hydrocarbon resource base strongly toward natural gas. It's the most obvious play on this opportunity, even if the company has fought global-warming science tooth and nail.

Unsexy technologies: This stuff doesn't fire folks up the way that talking about the hydrogen economy does, but for the really important decades between now and 2050, figuring out ways to reduce carbon emissions a little bit here and a little bit there will have a much bigger aggregate effect than big ideas that remain stuck in the research labs.

• Stocks to watch: I'm talking about a shift from incandescent bulbs to LEDs (light-emitting diodes) from Color Kinetics (CLRK, news, msgs), about using software and centralized control systems from Johnson Controls (JCI, news, msgs) to cut energy use in offices and factories, and about 3M (MMM, news, msgs) re-engineering everyday materials to cut the energy used in production and to increase recycling potential.

Group 2: Less-than-pure profit

These opportunities will make you a profit, at least over the next few years or so, but they really don't do anything to save the world from global warming.

Technologies likely to get big political bones: I'm talking mainly about so-called clean coal here.

It really isn't part of the solution because coal produces too much carbon dioxide per pound burned for any system of capture-and-storage to work. (Burn a ton of coal to generate electricity, and you get four tons of carbon dioxide.) However, any politician who says this right now is committing suicide: There are too many jobs at stake and too many well-funded lobbyists roaming the halls. It will take years for the technology to prove itself one way or the other, and in the meantime, the effort will be enough to build and support interest in clean coal and carbon dioxide-storage stocks.

• Stocks to watch: Headwaters (HW, news, msgs) and Praxair (PX, news, msgs). The former is the largest provider of technology and chemical reagents to the coal-based synthetic-fuels industry. The latter has announced joint research into improved carbon-dioxide capture technologies with utility AES Corp. (AES, news, msgs). Just so the coal folks don't think I'm picking on them, I'd put corn-based ethanol in the same camp -- lots of rhetoric and not much long-term future. Still, that rhetoric should be enough to make Archer Daniels Midland) (ADM, news, msgs) a profitable holding. (To be completely fair, the company is pushing ahead into other biofuels that hold more long-term potential.)

The technology of denial: On my Christmas visit to the coast north of San Diego, I got to witness the hugely expensive effort being put in to stabilize ocean cliffs by lining them with bulkheads and then injecting concrete into the dirt. If we're willing to spend millions to protect a few seaside condominium complexes, think how much we'll be ready to spend to protect farms on marginal land that has suddenly become even more marginal. I don't think you have to be a cynic to expect that we'll spend billions on desalinating sea water and on genetically engineering seeds to be more resistant to salty soils, to take just two examples.

• Stocks to watch: To bet on this very deep-grained desire to protect what we have from change, I'd suggest General Electric, a leader in the water business, and Monsanto (MON, news, msgs), a leader in the genetic engineering of seeds.

Update to Jubak's Picks

Sell Garmin (GRMN, news, msgs). I'm selling Garmin into the strength of the current technology rally. Garmin's shares haven't participated in this rally as strongly as I'd like because of worries about how shifts in the personal-navigation-device market might be hurting margins at Garmin.

This year's just-concluded Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas was rife with new low-cost but high-quality devices from new vendors. From preliminary holiday sales, numbers it looks like sales of high-end personal-navigation devices came on strong (good news for Garmin) but that at the low end these new vendors used very aggressive discounting in an attempt to build sales (bad news for Garmin).

Garmin and other higher-priced vendors, such as TomTom (TMOAF, news, msgs), defended their share at lower price points by extending discount periods and cutting prices further.

TomTom, for example, increased its lower-end discounts by an additional $50 a device. This can't help profit margins and increases the possibility that Garmin will announce great unit sales but profit-margin pressure for the past quarter and going forward when the company reports earnings Feb. 14.

As of Jan. 16, I'm selling Garmin out of Jubak's Picks with a 3.24% gain since I added the stock to the portfolio Oct. 12. (Full disclosure: I will sell my personal shares of Garmin three days after this column is posted.)

Buy SiRF Technology Holdings (SIRF, news, msgs). The bad news for high-end personal-navigation-device companies such as Garmin and TomTom is good news for GPS chip maker SiRF Technology. The company was clearly the preferred chip supplier for low-end vendors in the personal-navigation-device market at the Consumer Electronics Show and in the next generation of wireless handsets with GPS capability.

The stock has had tough going in 2006 on worries that the company was losing some of its estimated 80% to 90% market share. The company has indeed lost share, as is almost inevitable these days in any fast-growing and profitable technology sector, but even with a drop to 60% to 70% market share in 2007, as projected by Deutsche Bank, SiRF Technology should see its chip sales climb in 2007 as the personal-navigation-device market goes from 16 million units in 2006 to between 24 million and 30 million in 2007. I'm adding the shares to Jubak's Picks with a target price of $34.50 by September 2007.

New developments on a past column

"The state of coal stocks is strong": The best news out of Headwaters' (HW, news, msgs) recently doesn't involve its so-called clean-coal technology but the company's efforts to improve the upgrading of heavy oil to lighter transportation fuels such as diesel and gasoline. With high-sulfur heavy oil making up most of the world's new supplies of oil in recent years, any process that increases the yields and reduces the cost of turning those grades into products such as gasoline would be a big winner. On Jan. 4, Headwaters announced the successful completion of two additional tests of its catalyst technology to upgrade heavy oil at a North American refinery. The company has formed a new business unit, Headwaters Heavy Oil, to develop and market the technology.

There's just too much coal. U.S. coal production rose 10.3% year-to-year for the week that ended Dec. 9, and in November stockpiles at coal-burning power plants climbed to 28% above the level of a year ago and 9.3% above the 10-year average for November. Consol Energy (CNX, news, msgs) is best positioned for this state of oversupply with coal supplies being tightest and demand highest for the high-sulfur, high-BTU Northern Appalachian coal that Consul Energy mines. In the third quarter the company signed new contracts at better than $50 a ton for 2009, a level higher than current prices. That will keep earnings on an upward track in 2007 and 2008. Nonetheless, coal is in plentiful supply, and that will weigh on the shares. As of Jan. 16, I'm cutting my target price for Consol Energy to $44 from $48 a share by September 2007. (Full disclosure: I own shares of Consol Energy.)

Meet Jim Jubak at The Money Show

MSN Money senior markets editor Jim Jubak will appear along with many other top investment professionals at The World Money Show in Orlando, Fla., Feb. 7-10.

Admission is free for MSN Money users and includes Jubak's seminars and access to more than 320 workshops, panel discussions and other sessions, as well as a chance to visit more than 350 top financial product and service providers in the exhibit hall. For complete details or to register for free admission, call 800-970-4355 (mention priority code #007420) or visit the Money Show Web site.

Editor's Note: A new Jubak's Journal is posted every Tuesday and Friday. Please note that Jubak's Picks recommendations are for a 12- to 18-month time horizon. For suggestions to help navigate the treacherous interest-rate environment, see Jim's new portfolio, Dividend stocks for income investors. For picks with a truly long-term perspective, see Jubak's 50 best stocks in the world or Future Fantastic 50 Portfolio. E-mail Jim Jubak at jjmail@microsoft.com.

At the time of publication, Jim Jubak owned or controlled shares of the following equities mentioned in this column: Consol Energy, Garmin and Zoltek Cos. He does not own short positions in any stock mentioned in this column.

Source: MSN

How global warming could cost you

While there is considerable debate on what is causing global warming, there is little doubt it is happening. And the impacts are not just environmental but also financial.

By Bankrate.com

Scientists' portraits of continued global warming are not a pretty sight: intensified hurricanes, droughts, floods and dramatic shortages of clean air, water and food supplies.

But if you think that's bad, wait until you get the bill.

"Global warming will cause profound changes, and it will be costly for people," says Chris Miller, the director of U.S. Climate Campaigns for Greenpeace USA. "Things we've been taking for granted for so long in this country will be hard to take for granted -- from driving big cars we can afford to fuel to turning on the tap."

Though no one is predicting water will stop running altogether, many global-warming experts predict it will be scarcer in some areas and more expensive across the board.

Signs of the early damage from warming are appearing, according to a growing number of scientists and environmentalists. "There's likely going to be an increase in droughts and floods," says Stephen Schneider, a climatologist and professor at Stanford University. "We're just beginning to show that emerging," he adds, in the form of more intense, destructive and deadly storms.

"You can never say with any one storm, 'We caused that,'" Schneider says. "But you can also never say with any one storm, 'We did not cause that.'"

Unchecked, continued climate change could mean big lifestyle changes in the next 30 to 50 years. And it could also mean that life for your children and grandchildren will be more difficult and more expensive.

What's up weatherwise?

With global warming, "dry areas are likely to get dryer, and wet areas are likely to get wetter," says Chris Field, the director of the department of global ecology for the Carnegie Institution at Stanford University.
And that can wallop the pocketbook.

Take homeowners insurance, for example. "One of the things that has already started is the difficulty of getting insurance along the coast," says Joe Romm, the author of "Hell and High Water: Global Warming -- the Solution and the Politics -- and What We Should Do" and a senior fellow with the Center for American Progress.

And it's going to get worse, he adds, making it more difficult for people who own coastal or even inland property, even if they are not hit by storms. "Thousands of policies could be canceled as climate models begin to show that part of the world is more impacted by storms in the North Atlantic," says Miller.

• MSN Money: Can spending save the Earth?

And that could have yet another financial impact, Romm says, predicting, "If we don't get serious about global warming in the next 10 years to 15 years, coastal property values will crash."

Those who are studying global warming see two problems emerging that will have sizable economic impact. First, because the water is warmer (which fuels hurricanes), there is the potential for the storms to cause more damage. And second, if sea levels are already higher (due to warmer water, plus the effects of melting ice sheets), a storm surge could be even worse.

If there is a rise of 5 to 6 feet in the sea level "over the next century or two, one-third of Florida is gone," Miller says.

The Carnegie Institution's Field agrees: "With every meter (39.37 inches) of sea level, you lose a substantial amount of South Florida."

In an area such as New York City, which sits close to the ocean, if you combine rising levels and a strong storm such as a nor'easter, "you'll have things like the subway filling with water," Field says.

Another problem with warming is the heat. By the end of the century, heat waves in Los Angeles or San Francisco could stretch from 12 days to 100 days, Field says. That heat also magnifies smog problems, meaning there are "more kids with asthma, more people who can't go outside," he says. "There will be a greater number of people who have air-pollution-related health conditions."

What's more, warming fosters some types of ragweed, as well as bug-borne diseases like malaria and dengue fever, he says. So America could expect to see "more serious impacts from hay fever," as well as more malaria and dengue fever cases.

Short supplies?

Drought, climate changes and storm damage could also lead to shortages or disruptions in food, water and energy supplies.

"We've already seen impacts of warming on the yields of corn, wheat and barley," Field says. "Worldwide, for every degree the temperature goes up, the yield goes down 8%."

An aging water and sewer infrastructure, melting snowpacks in the Western mountains and increasing heat and drought in the West have several experts predicting struggles over the water supply -- and an end to cheap water.

By 2020 -- just about the time today's toddlers are in high school -- "I think it's untenable for water to be free or as cheap as it is in many places," says Romm, of the Center for American Progress.

There would likely be "increased water prices and shortages in some areas, first affecting agriculture in the West," says Greenpeace USA's Miller. "It would have a profound effect on the economy in the West."

But Mother Nature is also throwing some curveballs.

"In a lot of cases, the effects from climate changes interact in unexpected ways," Field says. For example, as water levels in San Francisco Bay rise, seawater is flowing upriver, which is a big problem because that water is used to irrigate fertile California farmland.

"After a big storm, you already have salt levels that are unacceptable," he says. "The concern is that instead of getting it once every five years, you get it once every month, and eventually the water will be too salty to use."

What that could affect: the supply and cost of water and food.

And expect energy prices to continue climbing, says Romm.

"The days of cheap oil are gone," he says. "I do think the days of the gas guzzler are going to be reduced."

And, as the country learned during the gas-price increases after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, "a third or more of the oil and gas comes from the Gulf of Mexico area," Miller says. "That puts a lot of eggs in one basket, and it's a basket that is more likely to be disrupted."

• MSN Money: 28 ways to make your fun eco-friendly

A solution many environmental groups have proposed: meeting more energy needs locally through renewable, fixed-rate solutions such as wind- and solar-power stations.

A wind farm that Greenpeace is working to have permitted now off the coast of Massachusetts could provide 75% of the power to Martha's Vineyard, Nantucket and Cape Cod, Miller says.

Because the costs are fixed ahead of time, residents would have power at a fixed rate for the next 20 years, he says.

Where's the fun?

Outdoor recreation, such as baseball and golf, could look markedly different, too, Romm says. What's at stake: anything that depends on lush, green spaces and outdoors access.

Tourism could take a hit, especially in places such as Florida and Arizona, where warm-weather outdoor activities are big and global warming changes are predicted to be especially profound, Field says.

In the West, skiing and other cold-weather activities could also suffer, as scientists predict that warming will affect the snow accumulation and, consequently, the water supply in the region.

Even for folks who just sit at home in the easy chair, life could get more problematic. "By the end of the century, a city like Washington, D.C., or Houston might see 60-plus days at 98-plus-degree temperatures," Romm says. "That's pretty grim stuff."

In addition to the expense of rocketing electric bills to cover the cost of air conditioning, hotter temperatures combined with dirtier air could pack a one-two punch for a lot of people with asthma, allergies, emphysema and other medical problems who will be forced to spend more time indoors.

The folks hardest hit? Children, senior citizens and anyone with existing health problems, Schneider says.

Then there are the social effects that scientists really can't measure. How will the stresses and strains of supply shortages, hotter summers and more-expensive goods affect tempers? How will the aftermaths of more-frequent violent hurricanes, floods and fires impact American businesses struggling to stay competitive on the world stage or small companies operating on already tight margins?

Scientists and environmentalists agree there is time to prevent all this from happening. But it's a small window of opportunity.

"The kind of changes you see in 30 years to 50 years depends on the path we move down," Miller says. "If we get our stuff together soon and make the kind of changes scientists tell us are necessary, we're insuring our ability to live in the quality of life we have."

What about offsets?

Global warming is like slow-acting poison, several scientists warn. Inaction will set the planet on an unchangeable course. But the antidote, administered quickly, would affect a cure.

Though opponents complain about the cost of solutions, there will be an economic cost exacted from individuals either way, he says. "The cost of doing nothing is greater than the cost of doing something," Miller says.

One idea that's gotten a lot of ink, carbon offsets, is also controversial.

Here's how it works: Individuals, companies or even countries pay some other person or entity that pollutes less or practices behavior that would remove carbon from the atmosphere (like planting trees). Some scientists and environmentalists believe it's cheating or that, because it's largely unchecked, there's no way to know if people are really getting what they are buying.

"The best thing they do is reduce our emissions," says Field. But, he adds, they are not great as a first line of defense. "It allows the person with the SUV to spend an extra $150 that may or may not be worthwhile and make them feel a little less guilty."

Others see it as a good stopgap or a way to at least get everyone engaged in solving the global warming problem.

"What offsets do is get you into the game," says Schneider. "That alone makes offsets useful to me."

That said, "you have to make sure an offset is real and not a pig in a poke," he says.

This article was reported and written by Dana Dratch for Bankrate.com.

Global Warming in the Antarctic

By Michael Warr

After 40 years of being away I returned to the Antarctic in 2005. Even with over 98 percent of Antarctica being ice, global warming has started to change the fifth largest contient. In the 1960s I had worked on the Antarctic Peninsula as a meteorologist, and I drove huskies.

(Environmental concerns that the Antarctic-born huskies were an alien species meant that by 1994 all the huskies were removed from the Antarctic). A major change has been the increase from a few hundred tourists in the 1960s to the present number of over 30,000 Anatractic visitors annually. But the greatest change has been the effects of global warming. Comparing my meteorological records from forty years ago to those of the present has added to the evidence that changes have occurred in Antarctica.

The effects are not immediately obvious to Antarctic visitors even though the temperature has increased by 2.5 degrees C over the last few decades. There are still masses of ice, glaciers, and frigid waters along the Antarctic Peninsula. I had spent a year at Adelaide Island in Marguerite Bay forty years ago with no fur seals, now they lazed around on the rocks of the closed down base. In the 1960s the seals lived 700 kilometers to the north. Now they are spread all along the Antarctic Peninsula. In some breeding areas there is concern that the huge numbers, now in the millions, will destroy other Antarctic flora and fauna habitats.

The increase in temperature means less sea ice. Less sea ice has meant less krill larvae, (krill are the shrimp-like creatures that most Antarctic marine life depend on for food). This affects the more southerly Adelie penguins' feeding habits. The more northerly gentoo penguins are surviving the increased temperatures, though some recent warm summers with temperatures over 8 degrees C has resulted in penguin heat exhaustion.

The only two flowering Antarctic plants, the hair grass and the pearlwort, have increased their range and area. There are more plants growing, and they are now found as far south as 68 degrees latitude.

87% of the glaciers in the Antarctic Peninsula region have retreated in the last fifty years. This rapid change has not been evident for thousands of years. Ice shelves have lost much of their ice; some have now disappeared. Antarctic ice drill cores have shown the fastest and highest jumps in temperature over the last 900,000 years has been in the last 200 years. Human activity has affected not only the temperate and tropical parts of the world, but also the polar areas. The edges of the north and south polar-regions are more vulnerable to change that the zones in between. Global warming is changing our world.

Michael Warr worked as a meteorologist and dog handler in the Antarctic in the 1960s. He returned as an Antarctic tourist in on an icebreaker in 2005, and was an Antarctic historian on a cruise ship in 2006.

He taught in British Columbia and is now retired. His activities are running, reading and gardening. He wrote a book on the Antarctic: South of Sixty .His website is http://www.antarcticmemoriespublishing.com

Global Warming - How are Animals Affected by Global Warming

By Kelvin Ho Wee Min

It is not a secret that we humans have been destroying the environment for years. It is now that some of us are trying to make all people aware of the affects that our lack of care has had on the environment and what will happen if we do not make changes now and try to stop the progress of global warming.

Our focus, or drive, is the thought of what type of world are we leaving our children. We also need to be looking at how global warming is affecting our animals now and in the future if we do not stop and make the needed environmentally safe changes.

There are numerous studies that are being conducted and have been conducted where watching animal behavior and traits to measure the status of the environment. These studies are showing that our Earth is changing in unnatural ways and it is disturbing. Think about the fact that right now as things stand, reindeer will no longer wander the places they currently do, they will disappear.

Marmots no longer hibernate the same amount of time that they used to. Actually compared to thirty years ago, they are ending hibernation three weeks earlier. The Canadian red squirrel is breeding 18 days earlier. Studies are showing that the red fox is moving north and invading the territory of its Arctic cousin. Polar bears are not as healthy as they were 20 years ago and they are thinner.

If we look at the sea and our creatures there we also see changes that should cause alarm. Coral reefs are expected to increase by up to a third in size. Elephant seal pups are thinner because their prey is migrating to cooler waters. Our turtles are changing behavior as well, the loggerhead is laying eggs 10 days earlier and the Hawkbill turtle hatchlings are having more females then males due to temperature changes.

Birds are changing their diets to insects that do not consume leaves that have been treated with high amounts of pesticides. What does all of this mean? It means that global warming is going to cause many of our animal species to become endangered if not extinct.

The melting ice, the warm seas, the spreading dessert are all threats to our animals. These changes, no matter how subtle have a dramatic influence on the lives of our wildlife. In the sea the disappearance of the tiny organisms that the larger creatures feed off of is causing the sea life to migrate northward.

Keeping in mind that global warming plays a huge part in our weather and climate, the increased storminess destroys the breeding colonies of the albatross that already battle the possibility of being captured and killed by fishing boats. The rise in sea levels wipe out the nesting sites of the sea turtles, seals and wading birds are also on the list of species to be affected by their habitats being destroyed.

Thought the very source of nature is change, and adaptation, the changes that are taking place in our environment due to global warming are just happening to fast. The speed is what makes it difficult for the animals to adapt effectively and this will cause us to loose a lot of our wildlife. Can you imagine a world with no reindeer? What about the day that the Sahara dessert covers all of Africa and makes migration impossible for birds?

These are changes that we can see everyday and we need to start paying attention to them. The predicted elevation of sea level by an amazing three feet coupled with the disruptions to the Earth life support systems should be our wake up call.

While you can look out your back window and see these changes taking place, the full effect will be seen by the year 2100 if the predictions of scientist come through and we do not change our ways. Think about is, 2100 is less then one hundred years away. You and I would probably not be here, but our grandchildren will and what will we have left for them? Help stop global warming, do your part to save the Earth, our children and our wildlife. They need us.

Are you ready to learn how we can stop global warming? Learn how you can do so by checking out our free report at http://www.factsaboutglobalwarming.info Find out more about our impact on the environment at http://www.factsaboutglobalwarming.info/videos