Climate Change Goals
Climate Interactive has a model they use to assess the impact of various climate change proposals. They're analysis is quite sobering, indicating that the 'agreement' reached at the recent Climate Change conference, the earth's temperature would increase 7 degrees F (4 degrees C) by the year 2100. This is substantially higher than the goal for temperature rise this century is 2.7 degrees F (1.5 degrees C).
This link will take you to Climate Interactive's blog. That blog provides some additional background to the agreed goals for temperature rise, and current efforts to limit it. The New York Times had a fairly good overview article on the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference agreement.
A CBS news report contains the following chilling news:
"Reducing carbon dioxide levels to 350 would mean reversing the trend of the past couple of centuries. Carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere for as long as 100 years. And the emissions cuts currently being pledged by developed countries, including the United States and European nations, are aimed at having CO2 levels peak at around 450, not 350, in coming decades.
And even that may not be possible. Some economists say the world should plan to stop at 550.
Economist Henry Jacoby, co-director of MIT's Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, has said that even 450 is "totally impossible, there's no way we can do that."
To get down to 350, civilization has to remove massive amounts of carbon dioxide from the skies, something talked about but not yet achieved. Trees and oceans suck CO2 from the atmosphere, but that process is overwhelmed by emissions from burning coal and oil. McKibben said it would probably take 40 years to get down to 350 even if emissions stopped today.
"It may be on the edge of impossible," he said Sunday. "We could do it. At the moment, there's no sign that we are going to do it."
MIT management professor John Sterman said scientifically 350 makes sense, even if economically it seem unreachable.
"We ought to have a goal of 350 and realize we're already above that," Sterman said. "
This link will take you to Climate Interactive's blog. That blog provides some additional background to the agreed goals for temperature rise, and current efforts to limit it. The New York Times had a fairly good overview article on the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference agreement.
A CBS news report contains the following chilling news:
"Reducing carbon dioxide levels to 350 would mean reversing the trend of the past couple of centuries. Carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere for as long as 100 years. And the emissions cuts currently being pledged by developed countries, including the United States and European nations, are aimed at having CO2 levels peak at around 450, not 350, in coming decades.
And even that may not be possible. Some economists say the world should plan to stop at 550.
Economist Henry Jacoby, co-director of MIT's Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, has said that even 450 is "totally impossible, there's no way we can do that."
To get down to 350, civilization has to remove massive amounts of carbon dioxide from the skies, something talked about but not yet achieved. Trees and oceans suck CO2 from the atmosphere, but that process is overwhelmed by emissions from burning coal and oil. McKibben said it would probably take 40 years to get down to 350 even if emissions stopped today.
"It may be on the edge of impossible," he said Sunday. "We could do it. At the moment, there's no sign that we are going to do it."
MIT management professor John Sterman said scientifically 350 makes sense, even if economically it seem unreachable.
"We ought to have a goal of 350 and realize we're already above that," Sterman said. "
Comments
Post a Comment