Hansen : Climate Change Is Here — And Worse Than We Thought

[DaveinOlyWA]

I am not optimistic about Mueller's results and public appearances. He was interviewed by democracy now and it was obvious Mueller shills for natural gas and “clean fracking” by using a fallacy of the middle. He even says that EVs are regular cars if powered by coal. A myth debunked by the union of concerned scientists.

EVs powered by coal are slightly better in CO2 release to the best hybrids when powered by oil. Few places have 100% coal power. EVs are about twice as good if the hybrid is powered by synfuel produced from coal.

I'd far rather run on Wyoming coal than Ali Hosseini Khamenei's oil, even if it wasn't cleaner.


http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/smart-transportation-solutions/advanced-vehicle-technologies/electric-cars/model-e-faq.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

only because that is what we choose to do...or rather; that is what Big Coal has chosen FOR US. your statement ignores the fact that we do have the technology to clean up coal. all we need is the money but the problem with that is Big Oil aint willing to give up any of its massive share.

and first part of your statement does not apply all over the country (and that part of the country is shrinking daily) but the 2nd part of the statement does.

 

[WetEV]

Three numbers:
The First Number: 2° Celsius
The Second Number: 565 Gigatons
The Third Number: 2,795 Gigatons

The first number is a guess. Not necessarily a bad guess, but still a guess. Might be too pessimistic. More likely too optimistic. No one really knows. Probably not achievable.

http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/369/1934/20.abstract" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


The second number is probably optimistic. Catherates in the Arctic are likely to be pushing up CO2 and methane levels over the next century, even at levels below 2 C.

http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/368/1919/2369.abstract" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


The third number is really optimistic. Reserves are usually understatements, especially for natural gas and for coal. Might not be for oil, due to the politics of OPEC.

 

[AndyH]

Three numbers:
The First Number: 2° Celsius
The Second Number: 565 Gigatons
The Third Number: 2,795 Gigatons

The first number is a guess. Not necessarily a bad guess, but still a guess. Might be too pessimistic. More likely too optimistic. No one really knows. Probably not achievable.

It's a target though maybe not the best. I think it's very possible to achieve but not probable considering that there are humans between the problem and the solutions.

The second number is probably optimistic. Catherates in the Arctic are likely to be pushing up CO2 and methane levels over the next century, even at levels below 2 C.

Maybe they will. But the methane releases from melting permafrost are happening now - no need to wait for the catherates to release their payloads.

The third number is really optimistic. Reserves are usually understatements, especially for natural gas and for coal. Might not be for oil, due to the politics of OPEC.

Considering the nearly five-fold overkill, does it really matter if the reserve estimates are off by 10 or 20 or 65%?

What numbers would you suggest better define the problem?

 

[WetEV]

Three numbers:
The First Number: 2° Celsius
The Second Number: 565 Gigatons
The Third Number: 2,795 Gigatons

The first number is a guess. Not necessarily a bad guess, but still a guess. Might be too pessimistic. More likely too optimistic. No one really knows. Probably not achievable.

It's a target though maybe not the best. I think it's very possible to achieve but not probable considering that there are humans between the problem and the solutions.

http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/369/1934/20.full" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There is now little to no chance of maintaining the rise in global mean surface temperature at below 2°C, despite repeated high-level statements to the contrary. Moreover, the impacts associated with 2°C have been revised upwards (e.g. [20,21]), sufficiently so that 2°C now more appropriately represents the threshold between dangerous and extremely dangerous climate change.

In 1973 my high school physics teacher showed me the "Keeling curve". In 1973 it looked a little alarming. Twenty years later it started to look scary. Now it looks terrifying.

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/webdata/ccgg/trends/co2_data_mlo.png" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[edatoakrun]

Another month, another twelve month record for the lower 48.

The August 2011-July 2012 period was the warmest 12-month period of any 12-months on record for the contiguous U.S., narrowly surpassing the record broken last month for the July 2011-June 2012 period by 0.07°F. The nationally averaged temperature of 56.1°F was 3.3°F above the long term average. Except Washington, which was near average, every state across the contiguous U.S. had warmer than average temperatures for the period.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Meanwhile, in the arctic, it was a bit premature, IMO, when written ten days ago:

Northwest Passage as good as open

...I don't think it will be declared open officially yet. There is still some ice rubble here and there in Parry Strait and Lancaster Sound, and ice in the Beaufort Sea is still blocking McClure Strait for now. But the rubble will clear and the ice will pull back, making the NWP navigable for the fifth time in six years (previously in 2007, 2008, 2010 and 2011). With the Northern Sea Route almost open as well, we witness yet another summer in which both Arctic sea routes have opened up. This was a very rare occurence in the past, but has already become almost normal in current times...

http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2012/07/northwest-passage-as-good-as-open.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


But today's image (below) looks like it's very close to time to call both passages open.

opemnhttp://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_daily_extent_hires.png" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A most interesting Arctic summer

August 6, 2012

Arctic sea ice extent declined quickly in July, continuing the pattern seen in June. On August 1, ice extent was just below levels recorded for the same date in 2007, the year that saw the record minimum ice extent in September. Low sea ice concentrations are present over large parts of the western Arctic Ocean. Warm conditions dominated the weather for most of the Arctic Ocean and surrounding lands...

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[LEAFfan]

Well...I wasn't too stupid to notice! I remember taking out a 30yr mortgage on our house @ 15.7% interest rate. I also remember our 300+ Americans held as hostages @ our embassy in Iran until the day after Carter vacated the White House, when they were released. I voted for him because he was honest, and a Christian. But IMHO, he was one of the most ineffective, inept presidents in our history.

Yeah, funny how that release happened. You can can thank our 'actor' pres for that as it is well known what Reagan did before the election. I agree that Jimmy was one of the best we've had. Under Reagan, I had to take out an 18% VARIABLE loan to have our roof pitched. And how did his 'trickle down economics work'? Yeah, that was a 'brilliant' idea! It didn't work and it will never work. It just makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. Reagan was one of the worst we've ever had. Although, he did a GREAT acting job!

 

[LEAFfan]

worse than who thought?? Jimmy Carter told us 40 years ago that it would be "tolerable" if we immediately cut our emissions in half. well that did not happen and he warned us this would happen and he pretty much nailed it. well, that is what they thought of him. he was one of the most educated and brightest presidents we ever had and it showed. too bad we were too stupid to notice

In the 30's and 40's, Edgar Cayce 'saw' the global changes coming.

 

[AndyH]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHP9Rh-ooh0[/youtube]

 

[AndyH]

Here's an excellent 'intro to climate variability' from the 2012 Association for the Study of Peak Oil conference. The speaker starts with the three main astronomical sources of slow climate variability - Earth's orbit, precession, and axis tilt - and moves from there.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQrav3HeSUQ[/youtube]

ASPO 2012 Conference page - all papers and videos are available:
http://www.aspo2012.at/

ASPO 2012 Conference Youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/aspo2012

 

[AndyH]

http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/369/1934/20.full

Yes, another paper that says a 2°C increase is not attainable. But again - that depends on the opening assumptions and real desire to act.

If, for example, we define the problem as presented by Dr. Helga Kromp-Kolb in the above ASPO 2012 video (absolute carbon emissions about 13 minutes 20 seconds into the presentation), then we can see that we must make an abrupt change in the highly developed world's emissions profile (the Annex 1 nations):



Were I, for example, to dig out my military hat (hmmm...a bit snug - haven't worn that in a while...) and convene a meeting, we'd no doubt agree that we have a serious problem that is a 'clear and present danger' to not only our economy and our citizenry, but to the rest of the world with which we're intertwined. Since military options are selected after politics and diplomacy fail, we can move on to solve the problem and to deal with the consequences.

So, here's the plan: The "Annex 1/highly-developed world" has 3 years to stockpile food, water, and other emergency supplies to support their populations for a five year period, and to plan a 100% emissions shut-down. The non-Annex 1/lesser developed world will have to prepare to have the Annex 1 countries off-line for a time. On 1 Jan three years hence (if all nations don't perform systems shutdowns voluntarily), all of the world's nuclear powers will detonate nuclear devices in the high atmosphere, or use other means to trigger continental scale electromagnetic pulses in order to disable all fossil fuel generation, polluting industry, and ICE/hybrid vehicles on the planet. The following global stand down will stop anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. The next step is to use available non-polluting power generation to manufacture and deploy more generation capability. This generation manufacturing will be the primary focus of the world's people - think of the run-up to WWII. We move out of the emergency once power generation is deployed and once we retool fossil fuel plants to remove and sequester carbon from the atmosphere.

Yes, this 'science fiction' is very possible. But not very probable. Which is unfortunate in many ways, because politics and diplomacy have has more than 50 years to fix the problem.

We're headed for a powerful 'time-out' from Mother Nature one way or another. Maybe she'll be easier on us if we head to the back yard to cut our own willow branch for the beating. Either way, I recommend stocking up on Neosporin and bandages...


A nuclear refresher:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY[/youtube]