Webdiary - Independent, Ethical, Accountable and Transparent
header_02 home about login header_06
header_07
search_bar_left
date_box_left
date_box_right.jpg
search_bar_right
sidebar-top content-top

21st century climate blueprints: Perspectives from the recent history of the atmosphere

21st century climate blueprints:

Perspectives from the recent history of the atmosphere

 

Andrew Glikson

Earth and Paleoclimate scientist

Australian National University

The Earth surface temperature reflects the net balance between incoming solar (shortwave) radiation and outgoing terrestrial (long wave) radiation (Kiehl and Trenberth, 1997 [1]). The severe disturbance of the energy balance of the atmosphere ensuing from the emission of over 320 billion tons of carbon since 1750 threatens a shift in the state of the atmosphere/ocean system to ice free greenhouse Earth conditions. Based on the recent Copenhagen Synthesis Report [2], climate change trends at the top range of IPCC 2007 projections [2], and the identification of tipping points in the recent history of the atmosphere/ocean system (i.e. at 14 - 11 and 8.2 thousand years-ago [3]), the scale and pace of 21st Century climate changes [4] require re-consideration of mitigation and adaptation strategies.

  1. The combined CO2 and methane level in the atmosphere is fast tracking toward a level of 500 ppm, which defines the approximate onset of the East Antarctic ice sheet [5], the upper climate range which allowed the development of habitats where large mammals flourished from about 40, and in particular 34 million years ago, and hominids appeared from about 7 million years ago [6] (Figure 1). Feedbacks from the carbon cycle, including release of methane from permafrost, polar sediments and bogs, and feedbacks from ice melt/warm water interaction dynamics, accelerate this process. In view of the cumulative nature of CO2 in the atmosphere, at current growth rates of about 2 ppm per-year, rising above the combined CO2 + methane level of 450 ppm [7], the atmosphere/ocean system is fast tracking toward conditions similar to those of an ice-free Earth.
  2. The scale of such greenhouse event may, or may not, bear an analogy to the PETM (Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum) event about 55 million years ago [8], including release of large volumes of methane. Recent methane release from Siberian permafrost, lakes and shallow sediments [9].
  3. Due to hysteresis (retardation of effect after cause), the effects of temperature rise, superposed ENSO (El Nino Southern Oscillation) cycles (Figure 2), melting of Greenland and the west Antarctic ice sheets [10], sea level rise [11], possible collapse of the North Atlantic Thermohaline Circulation [12], and potential tipping points (Figure 3), lag behind CO2 rise by as yet little-specified periods. A shift of the climate system through a transitional stage is occurring at present and is associated with extreme weather events [13].
  4. With a mean global temperature rise of about 0.8 degrees C since 1750, plus a rise of about 0.5 degrees C masked by sulfur aerosols emitted by industry [14], plus temperature rise due to ice albedo loss and infrared absorption by water [10], in particular the Arctic Sea, global warming is potentially near 1.5 degrees C. At this rate, conditions which existed on Earth about 2.8 million years ago (mid-Pliocene +2 to 3 degrees C; Sea level rise of 25+/-12 meters) [6] could be reached within time frames of a few decades.
  5. The unique nature of the "experiment" Homo sapiens is conducting with the atmosphere through the emission of 319 billion tons of carbon by 2007 [15], and the consequent extreme rise in atmospheric CO2 of about 2 ppm/year, two orders of magnitude faster than during the last glacial termination [16], counsels caution.

John Holdren, Obama's science advisor, compared global warming to “being in a car with bad brakes driving toward a cliff in the fog".

Should humanity choose to undertake all possible mitigation and adaptation efforts in an attempt at slowing global warming down, or even reversing it, steps need to include:

  1. Urgent deep reductions in carbon emissions, on the scale of at least 5 percent of emissions per year, relative to 1990 (Anderson and Bows, 2008 [7]).
  2. Global reforestation efforts in semi-arid and drought-effected regions, among other providing employment to millions of people.
  3. Construction of long-range water conduits from flood-affected to drought-stricken regions (an even more important task than designing Broadband networks…).
  4. Urgent development of atmospheric CO2 draw-down methods, including CO2-sequestering vegetation, soil carbon enrichment, sodium-based CO2 capture (a technology no more complex than space projects technologies and financially not more expensive than military expenditure).
  5. Rapid transition to clean energy (solar-thermal, hot-rock, hydrogen, wind, tide, photovoltaic) and transport systems (electric vehicles).
  6. It is possible that, in order to gain time, some governments may opt for geo-engineering efforts, including stratospheric injection of sulfur aerosols (simulating volcanic eruptions) [17], likely over polar regions, meant to temporarily raise the Earth albedo while other meaures are undertaken.
The alternative to urgent fast tracked mitigation efforts does not bear contemplation.

References

left
right
spacer

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The war hasn't even started

Falk Larsen: "When a lieutenant colonel working at the Pentagon reports she is still looking for the attack site 9/11, then you really don’t need a great imagination to understand that the Religious Right, or whoever you might equate the Republicans might be, have not a single scruple that would stand the slightest scrutiny in any court of the land."

Be that has it may, it takes a person with "not a single scruple" to recognise the equivalent in another. Something about shit finding its own level.

It won't be Republicans who torpedo this scam, it'll be Blue Dog Democrats (thank God for the Blue Dogs), and it'll be for the most basic of reasons. One cannot support a center left party and be for a staples consumption tax. To do so is to be a class traitor (and if southern a social traitor). The religious right is about smiting outsiders and such; however, the green religion is about smiting the poor, a contradiction for a the center left no?

I'm not political (avoid it to the best of my ability), I do though support two anti-global warming religious groups directly and one indirectly (an association I'm involved with does). Perhaps they have links with Republican groups, I don't know, and I don't ask. My enemies enemy is my friend in this particular case.

If defeating this evil scam means going as far as breaking Obama and friends like the proverbial guitar, so be it. It's a price well worth paying.

Carbon wars

The very large gap in carbon logic by equating a political solution is that the author forgets that Republicans start wars.

Any so-called gripe about carbon reduction expense is totally dwarfed by the waste that such illegal ventures create.

When a lieutenant colonel working at the Pentagon reports she is still looking for the attack site 9/11, then you really don’t need a great imagination to understand that the Religious Right, or whoever you might equate the Republicans might be, have not a single scruple that would stand the slightest scrutiny in any court of the land..

Regarding our climatology--we invest in aircraft shares don’t we....

Fiona: Welcome to Webdiary, Falk.

Old model politics

It is abundantly clear that old model politics, built along old fracture lines of class, having nothing meaningful to say about ecological issues except ... well, please just leave the protagonists alone for another decade of so in order that they might enjoy the benefits of earth plunder a bit more before trying to offload the cost of ecological collapse elsewhere.  Be a good chap there, Andrew, and stop rockin' the boat in the name of reality.

Winning the battle isn't the same as winning the war

Urgent deep reductions in carbon emissions, on the scale of at least 5 percent of emissions per year, relative to 1990 (Anderson and Bows, 2008 [7]).

Of course making reductions on something as basic as carbon is the tough part.

Take a tax like a carbon tax or if you like the "too big to fail tax" (the Wall Street bailout was also "peer reviewed"). And somebody has been selected to pay. 

A carbon tax is a tax on consumption and production at this point in time. The only thing I know is that this point in time won't remain the same - the beauty of democratically elected government.

Production taxes hurt employment, and nobody is ever re-elected doing that, so political survival can always be counted on. Additionally tax cuts on either capital gains, income or company taxes will result. And great way for Republicans to nullify any changes, whilst finding a narrative. Anything Obama promises, they'll promise more. What remains is a consumption tax on the basics of living. The tough part.

Consumption taxes on living are regressive. A person on a low or non-indexed fixed income spends a higher proportion of their income on such products. Guess what? we are left with the perfect flat tax. And with rising income in other segments of society the consumption lost is reallocated.

The whole point is that in four (looking very likely) or eight years a Republican will be President and there will be a Republican lead Congress. Republicans will control the purse strings and decide where this pot of cash ends up. The UN, third world, anyone....? anyone...?  And all this neatly packaged and placed in their lap.

Republicans are a lot of things, they however do know their "true base". Something Democrats and Obama don't.

When Obama took upward of six hundred million in donations (from many of Americas wealthiest), I couldn't help but think he and his silly middle-class white bred friends, were being played like a piano (isn't it always the case).

The party is now over, and the hangover is becoming a bitch.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
© 2005-2011, Webdiary Pty Ltd
Disclaimer: This site is home to many debates, and the views expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the site editors.
Contributors submit comments on their own responsibility: if you believe that a comment is incorrect or offensive in any way,
please submit a comment to that effect and we will make corrections or deletions as necessary.
Margo Kingston Photo © Elaine Campaner

Recent Comments

David Roffey: {whimper} in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 5 days ago
Jenny Hume: So long mate in Not with a bang ... 13 weeks 6 days ago
Fiona Reynolds: Reds (under beds?) in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 1 day ago
Justin Obodie: Why not, with a bang? in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 1 day ago
Fiona Reynolds: Dear Albatross in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 1 day ago
Michael Talbot-Wilson: Good luck in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 1 day ago
Fiona Reynolds: Goodnight and good luck in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 2 days ago
Margo Kingston: bye, babe in Not with a bang ... 14 weeks 6 days ago