Climate change
Jetpak is Public
Created By: squidgy
Last Modified: 08/11/07
Summary: A jetpak created on Sun, 29 Jul 2007 06:55:56 GMT

http://europe.theoildrum.com/story/2006/11/18/93514/869

Thanks Chris for an excellent post. Dr. Hanson is a great scientist and hero.

There are a few issues to deal with:

1) Note on fig. 2, the temperature charts for the past several interglacials, that trough to peak involves temperature changes of 10 deg. C., or 18 F. Note also that in all but the Holocene there were immediate and progressive declines in warmth, as the interglacial slid inexorably back into the grinding ice age.

If not for anthropomorphic changes since the ancient Greeks, we would probably right now be sliding back into a world where ice sheets were grinding Canada and northern Europe back down to bedrock. As Greg Easterbrook noted in "A Moment on the Earth," an ice sheet is an environmental catastrophe in anyone's book.

If CO2 emissions do not continue to progressively expand after PO, we may actually arrive at a happy medium; no new ice age, and no run away greenhouse warming.

2) I really have to dispute Dr. Hanson's guesstimate about a "50% extinction rate" caused by a 3 deg. C. rise in temp. As noted above in fig 2, the world has periodically seen rapid temperature rises of three times that amount (admittedly from a lower threshold).

We know from the Younger Dryas, as well from earlier temperature shocks, that these changes have happened with startling rapidity, and yet the 17 or so interglacials saw few extinctions until the beginning of the Holocene, which saw an enormous die off of mega fauna, but few changes in micro fauna. (As Tim Flannery put it in "North America: The Eternal Frontier" -- 65 million years of ecological history -- the megafauna disappeared into a black hole; the black hole between the nose and chin of paleolithic hunters.)  

3) Note in fig. 6; there is a 50% decline of CO2 levels (from emissions) in a mere 20 years. 66% reduction in a century, and 78% in 500 years. If an economic crash accompanies PO, GW gas emissions will decline markedly. CO2 levels will have more time to balance. Also, with a crash it will be far more difficult to come up with investment capital to figure out how to exploit shale oil and methane hydrates.

4)which brings us to coal. As Dr. Hanson shows, oil and gas aren't as likely to destroy the climate, but coal may. This suggests two very different objectives:

a) It is imperative that we funnel money and political power to those forces opposing mountain top removal, and which block greater coal exploitation. Further, we need to oppose switching transportation from oil to coal based electricity.

b) We need to be honest about the psychological division in each of our minds. On the one hand we are horrified by runaway climate warming, but we also are horrified by the prospect that PO may cause our global economy to collapse.

This isn't just on our site; it pervades institutional thinking, as typified by The Economist. The Economist has gotten the bug on stopping global warming, but they are not only in denial about PO, but they favor doing everything in their power to increase power supplies to increase the chances for exponential economic growth.

We can't have it both ways. If we demand exponential economic growth (and what other kind is there?) then we must accept all the consequences of global warming and the literal rape of the land from strip mining. But if we accept the limitations of  both global warming and PO, then we must radically change our conception of what constitutes an acceptable economic model.  


From: http://europe.theoildrum.com/story/2006/11/18/93514/869

http://europe.theoildrum.com/story/2006/11/18/93514/869

When looking forward things became interesting, Hansen suggesting it is feasible to contain CO2 emissions, chiefly because the reservoirs of oil and gas are limited. Figure 6 indicates the potential carbon contributions from oil and gas. This, coupled with the decay of CO2 emissions means that the combustion of remaining oil and gas aren’t critical to climate change.


Figure 6, Click to enlarge.

The problem lies squarely with Coal. Hansen’s plan for dealing with coal?

  • Sequester CO2 at new coal power plants after 2012/2022 in developed/developing countries
  • Bulldoze Coal Power Plants without sequestration during 2025-2050
  • Stretch oil/gas via slowly increasing carbon tax, avoiding use of non-conventional fossil fuels, permitting time to develop non-CO2 technologies

From: http://europe.theoildrum.com/story/2006/11/18/93514/869

The image “http://europe.theoildrum.com/uploads/465/cv_hansen_fig5.png” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

The image “http://europe.theoildrum.com/uploads/465/cv_hansen_fig5.png” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

Summary: The image “http://europe.theoildrum.com/uploads/465/cv_hansen_fig5.png” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.
From: http://europe.theoildrum.com/uploads/465/cv_hansen_fig5.png

http://europe.theoildrum.com/story/2006/11/18/93514/869

Hansen believes the IPCC are conservative with their estimations for sea level rise as they only consider thermal expansion and alpine glacier melt, believing the major ice sheets to be in approximate mass equilibrium and taking millennia to respond. He suggested ice sheet disintegration may start slowly but multiple positive feedbacks can lead to rapid non-linear collapse, noting the equilibrium sea level rise for 3°C warming is 25±10m.

From: http://europe.theoildrum.com/story/2006/11/18/93514/869

The image “http://europe.theoildrum.com/uploads/465/cv_hansen_fig4.png” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

The image “http://europe.theoildrum.com/uploads/465/cv_hansen_fig4.png” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

Summary: The image “http://europe.theoildrum.com/uploads/465/cv_hansen_fig4.png” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.
From: http://europe.theoildrum.com/uploads/465/cv_hansen_fig4.png

http://europe.theoildrum.com/story/2006/11/18/93514/869

Hansen suggested a 3°C warming from where we are now would result in a likely species extinction rate of 50%. 3°C was described as the business as usual scenario. The “Alternative” scenario with falling CO2 emissions and only 1°C temperature increase would result in a likely species extinction rate of 10%.

From: http://europe.theoildrum.com/story/2006/11/18/93514/869

The image “http://europe.theoildrum.com/uploads/465/cv_hansen_fig2.png” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

The image “http://europe.theoildrum.com/uploads/465/cv_hansen_fig2.png” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

Summary: The image “http://europe.theoildrum.com/uploads/465/cv_hansen_fig2.png” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.
From: http://europe.theoildrum.com/uploads/465/cv_hansen_fig2.png

7(x) Earth's Climatic History

7(x) Earth's Climatic History

From: http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/7x.html

note - Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:47:12 GMT


From: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3oMf_WnaA8&mode=related&search=

note - Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:12:39 GMT


From: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3oMf_WnaA8&mode=related&search=

Video: James Hansen at Global Rountable on Climate Change


From: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUohLJ8bMxc

James Hansen on NPR

Spacer

NASA and Global Warming  
Aired: Friday, February 03, 2006 10-11AM ET

Email this story to a friend
By host Tom Ashbrook:

The lead story on page one of the New York Times last Sunday read: top NASA climate scientist says the Bush administration is trying to stop him from speaking out on global warming.

The scientist is James E. Hansen - NASA's number one climate watcher, who says he's been muzzled on a dire threat facing the planet. The media James Hansen was trying to talk to? Well, yes, it was NPR, as the Times reported, but more specifically, it was us -- On Point.

And today he will talk to us about the danger of a different planet being inevitable soon without dramatic action, and the danger of politics cutting the public off from the warnings of their own scientists.

Listen to a conversation with NASA's top climate scientist James E. Hansen -- unmuzzled.

Guests
Spacer
· Andrew Revkin, Environment Reporter for the New York Times and author of the forthcoming book, "The North Pole Was Here: Puzzles and Perils at the Top of the World"
· James E. Hansen, Director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Adjunct Professor at Columbia University's Department of Earth & Environmental Sciences.

From: http://www.onpointradio.org/shows/2006/02/20060203_a_main.asp

Draft of HORIZON spot

Climate Change Code Red

Top NASA climatologists raise temperature of global warming alarm

 
By SYD BAUMEL
 
NASA's top climatologist and five of his colleagues think the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is way off in its increasingly pessimistic warnings about global warming. They're not pessimistic enough. In a scientific paper that ups the rhetoric of climate change warnings to code red, James Hansen, the Director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies – yes, the director who blew the whistle when Bush tried to muzzle him – and five other scientists forecast that global warming has put the planet on the brink of a rapid meltdown of the polar ice sheets in Greenland and West Antarctica. The flooding will be “cataclysmic” if we don't take drastic action now. If you've seen Al Gore's PowerPoint show you'll know what Hansen and his associates at the Goddard Institute, the University of California and Columbia University are talking about. It's called the “albedo flip.” Light-coloured (high albedo) objects – read: ice and show – reflect most of the sunlight that hits them. They're hard to heat up. But when they start to melt, crack, slip and sink, the relatively dark water (lower albedo) that takes their place absorbs much more heat from the sun. Suddenly the pace of ice sheet melting picks up and begins to accelerate so rapidly that a tipping point – an albedo “flip” - occurs and before you know it the world's polar ice sheets are like ice cubes vanishing from a shot glass on a hot summer's day. When the polar ice caps have gone – potentially before the end of this century, Hansen and associates predict – sea levels will have risen over 200 metres, not many centimetres as the IPCC forecasts. But that's not all. Trapped under the planet's frozen ocean floors and tundras are deposits of frozen methane (methyl hydrate). As the earth continues to heat up, these massive global warming time bombs are due to start melting. Ounce for ounce, methane has __-times the global warming power of CO2. The last time such a chain reaction occurred 55 million years ago, fun-in-the-sun lovers enjoyed a 68 degree C temperature surge - and mass extinctions, Hansen et al. caution. In fact, the history of the planet is studded with hot and cold climate change cataclysms, according to the geologic record. Like the people-powered one we're cruising to be bruised by if we don't take massive preventative action (and possibly even if we do), they have never been politely slow and steady, Hansen et al. write. Because of the chain reaction nature of global warming, they've always followed a vicious cycle, “positive feedback” pattern: a very slow burn (as we enjoyed until the 1990s), then a stampede – a “runaway greenhouse effect,” as Hansen et al. put it. “The Earth, and the creatures struggling to exist on the planet, have been repeatedly whipsawed between climate states,” Hansen and his associates write. “But civilization developed, and constructed extensive infrastructure, during a period of unusual climate stability, the Holocene, now almost 12,000 years in duration. That period is about to end.” The respected environmental writer George Monbiot has been studying and warning about global warming for years. This July he wrote that when he read the paper by Hansen et al., “I found, to my amazement, that my hands were shaking. This has never happened to me before, but nor have I ever read anything like it.” Sitting on a train at the time, Monbiot writes that he “looked up from the paper, almost expecting to see crowds stampeding through the streets. I saw people chatting outside a riverside pub. The other passengers on the train snoozed over their newspapers or played on their mobile phones. Unaware of the causes of our good fortune, blissfully detached from their likely termination, we drift into catastrophe.” Neither Hansen nor Monbiot believe we're doomed. We just have to stop drifting.

From: http://www.jeteye.com/jetpak/7bb5fab2-c94a-4c25-8188-8cce5ff90749/

Abstract of Hansen et al. 2007

Climate change and trace gases BY JAMES HANSEN 1,*, MAKIKO SATO 1, PUSHKER KHARECHA 1, GARY RUSSELL 1, DAVID W. LEA 2 AND MARK SIDDALL 3 1NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University Earth Institute, 2880 Broadway, New York, NY 10025, USA 2Department of Earth Science, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA 3Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University, Palisades, NY 10964, USA Palaeoclimate data show that the Earth’s climate is remarkably sensitive to global forcings. Positive feedbacks predominate. This allows the entire planet to be whipsawed between climate states. One feedback, the ‘albedo flip’ property of ice/water, provides a powerful trigger mechanism. A climate forcing that ‘flips’ the albedo of a sufficient portion of an ice sheet can spark a cataclysm. Inertia of ice sheet and ocean provides only moderate delay to ice sheet disintegration and a burst of added global warming. Recent greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions place the Earth perilously close to dramatic climate change that could run out of our control, with great dangers for humans and other creatures. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the largest human-made climate forcing, but other trace constituents are also important. Only intense simultaneous efforts to slow CO2 emissions and reduce non-CO2 forcings can keep climate within or near the range of the past million years. The most important of the non-CO2 forcings is methane (CH4), as it causes the second largest human-made GHG climate forcing and is the principal cause of increased tropospheric ozone (O3), which is the third largest GHG forcing. Nitrous oxide (N2O) should also be a focus of climate mitigation efforts. Black carbon (‘black soot’) has a high global warming potential (approx. 2000, 500 and 200 for 20, 100 and 500 years, respectively) and deserves greater attention. Some forcings are especially effective at high latitudes, so concerted efforts to reduce their emissions could preserve Arctic ice, while also having major benefits for human health, agricultural productivity and the global environment. Keywords: climate change; trace gases; climate feedbacks; black carbon; sea level; Arctic

From: http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2007/2007_Hansen_etal_2.pdf




ADVERTISING