"In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Posts Tagged ‘Fossil Fuel Related Emissions’

“We’re running out of time. The laws of physics are non-negotiable”: Ocean Acidification & Greenhouse Gases Soar Fastest In 30 Years To New Record Levels

In Uncategorized on September 14, 2014 at 6:05 pm

Oldspeak:We know without any doubt that our climate is changing and our weather is becoming more extreme due to human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels…The Greenhouse Gas Bulletin shows that, far from falling, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere actually increased last year at the fastest rate for nearly 30 years. We are running out of time. The laws of physics are non-negotiable….The Bulletin provides a scientific base for decision-making. We have the knowledge and we have the tools for action to try to keep temperature increases within 2°C to give our planet a chance and to give our children and grandchildren a future. Pleading ignorance can no longer be an excuse for not acting.” –Michel Jarraud, secretary-general, World Meteorlogical Organization

“As I’ve said many times before, it’s just physics at this point. Emissions and ocean acidification are accelerating faster and faster each day Industrial Civilization plunders on. We are in deadly paradox. If Industrial Civilization continues, we’re fucked. If Industrial Civilization stops, we’re fucked.  Contrary to the secretary-generals assertion, the knowledge and tools for action even if by some stretch of the imagination they are ever used, are useless. There are no truly effective mitigation plans or actions to make. Keeping temperatures below 10c is not gonna happen, much, much less 2c.  We’ve exited the window of time where human actions could affect the madness to come 40 years ago. Multiple non-linear irreversible positive feedback loops have started and there’s noting we can do to stop them. As the earth warms, more and more carbon will be released from permafrost & sea floors. There is no way to stop this from happening. We barely even understand truly what’s going on. The complex interactions among various systems in the ecology are too variegated and unpredictable for our climate models to account for. It’s just a matter of time before our mother ceases to support complex life. Tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick…” -OSJ

By Alex Kirby @ Climate News Network:

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) reports that the amounts of atmospheric greenhouse gases reached a new high in 2013, driven by rapidly rising levels of carbon dioxide.

The news is consistent with trends in fossil fuel consumption. But what comes as more of a surprise is the WMO’s revelation that the current rate of ocean acidification, which greenhouse gases (GHGs) help to cause, appears unprecedented in at least the last 300 million years.

The details of growing GHG levels are in the annual Greenhouse Gas Bulletin [3], published by the WMO—the United Nations specialist agency that plays a leading role in international efforts to monitor and protect the environment.

They show that between 1990 and 2013 there was a 34 percent increase in radiative forcing—the warming effect on our climate—because of long-lived greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane and nitrous oxide.

Complex interactions

The Bulletin reports on atmospheric concentrations—not emissions—of greenhouse gases. Emissions are what go into the atmosphere, while concentrations are what stay there after the complex system of interactions between the atmosphere, biosphere (the entire global ecological system) and the oceans.

About a quarter of total emissions are taken up by the oceans and another quarter by the biosphere, cutting levels of atmospheric CO2.

In 2013, the atmospheric concentration of CO2 was 142 percent higher than before the Industrial Revolution started, in about 1750. Concentrations of methane and nitrous oxide had risen by 253 percent and 121 percent respectively.

The observations from WMO’s Global Atmosphere Watch [4] network showed that CO2 levels increased more from 2012 to 2013 than during any other year since 1984. Scientists think this may be related to reduced CO2 absorption by the Earth’s biosphere, as well as by the steady increase in emissions.

Although the oceans lessen the increase in CO2 that would otherwise happen in the atmosphere, they do so at a price to marine life and to fishing communities [5]—and also to tourism. The Bulletin says the oceans appear to be acidifying faster than at any time in at least the last 300 million years.

“We know without any doubt that our climate is changing and our weather is becoming more extreme due to human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels,” said the WMO’s secretary-general, Michel Jarraud.

Running out of time

“The Greenhouse Gas Bulletin shows that, far from falling, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere actually increased last year at the fastest rate for nearly 30 years. We are running out of time. The laws of physics are non-negotiable.

“The Bulletin provides a scientific base for decision-making. We have the knowledge and we have the tools for action to try to keep temperature increases within 2°C to give our planet a chance and to give our children and grandchildren a future. Pleading ignorance can no longer be an excuse for not acting.”

Wendy Watson-Wright, executive secretary of the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission [6] of UNESCO, said: “It is high time the ocean, as the primary driver of the planet’s climate and attenuator of climate change, becomes a central part of climate change discussions.

“If global warming is not a strong enough reason to cut CO2 emissions, ocean acidification should be, since its effects are already being felt and will increase for many decades to come.”

The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere reached 396.0 parts per million (ppm) in 2013. At the current rate of increase, the global annual average concentration is set to cross the symbolic 400 ppm threshold within the next two years.

More potent

Methane, in the short term, is a far more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2—34 times more potent over a century, but 84 times more over 20 years.

Atmospheric methane reached a new high of about 1,824 parts per billion (ppb) in 2013, because of increased emissions from human sources. Since 2007, it has started increasing again, after a temporary period of levelling-off.

Nitrous oxide’s atmospheric concentration in 2013 was about 325.9 ppb. Its impact on climate, over a century, is 298 times greater than equal emissions of CO2. It also plays an important role in the destruction of the ozone layer that protects the Earth from harmful ultraviolet solar radiation.

The oceans currently absorb a quarter of anthropogenic CO2 emissions—about 4kg of CO2 per day per person. Acidification [7] will continue to accelerate at least until mid-century, according to projections from Earth system models.

 

 

 

World’s Largest Ice Sheets Melting At Fastest Rates In Recorded History

In Uncategorized on August 29, 2014 at 7:31 pm

Oldspeak: “Our planetary thermostats are melting. This trend is irreversible. And with sociopathic corporocratic governments jockeying for position and engaging in all varieties of proxy and direct resource wars to secure and exploit any and all remaining fossil fuels; we can expect warming and melting to increase.  The more ice melts, the more climate refugees are created. The more coastal cities and islands go underwater. The more and more catastrophic damage will be done by ever more powerful and extreme weather events. The more life extinguishing, climate altering greenhouse gasses are released. Sooner rather than later, the conditions necessary for sustaining life will be no more.  We are bearing witness to earths 6th and quickest developing mass extinction. Enjoy the show! Tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick, tick…” -OSJ

By John Queally @ Common Dreams:

The world’s two largest ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are melting at the fastest rates ever recorded, according to a new study based on detailed satellite imagery.

Presented by scientists at the Germany-based Alfred Wegener Institute, the new research was conducted with the help of sophisticated mapping technology and the use of an ESA satellite (called CryoSat-2) which used radar technology to generate highly accurate elevation measurements of the ice sheets.

What the detailed look at the ice shows is devastating.

“The volume loss in Greenland has doubled since the [year 2000],” explained AWI glaciologist and co-author of the report Prof. Dr. Angelika Humbert. “The loss of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet has in the same time span increased by a factor of three. Combined the two ice sheets are thinning at a rate of 500 cubic kilometres per year. That is the highest speed observed since altimetry satellite records began about 20 years ago.”

Speaking with the BBC, Humbert went further, stating: “The contribution of both ice sheets together to sea level rise has doubled since 2009,” she said. “To us, that’s an incredible number.”

The Huffington Post reports:

The glacier melting the fastest among those measured was the Jakobshavn Glacier in Greenland and the Pine Island Glacier in West Antarctica. The Jakobshavn Glacier is descending into the ocean at a rate of 46 meters — or half a football field — each day. Last year, a chunk of ice twice the size of Detroit broke off the tip of the Pine Island Glacier.

Robert Bindschadler of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center recently contributed to a similar study for the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. “Rising sea level is widely regarded as a current and ongoing result of climate change that directly affects hundreds of millions of coastal dwellers around the world and indirectly affects billions more that share its financial costs,” he said in a press release. By 2100, ice melt from Antarctica alone could add up to 37 centimeters, or more than 14 inches, to global sea levels.

Another study published in the journal Science this month shows that in the last 20 years, human-caused climate change has become the primary driver of glacial melt.

 

 

 

 

IPCC Reports ‘Diluted’ Under ‘Political Pressure’ To Protect Fossil Fuel Interests Of Top Greenhouse Gas Emmitters In Saudi Arabia, U.S.,China, & Brazil

In Uncategorized on May 23, 2014 at 9:38 am
Berlin: April 14th 2014. Sigmar Gabriel speaking at the IPCC WG3 briefing. Future protestors watch him in silence.

Berlin: April 14th 2014. Sigmar Gabriel speaking at the IPCC WG3 briefing. ‘TheFuture.net’ protestors watch him in silence

Oldspeak: “Every word and line of the text previously submitted by the scientific community was examined and amended until it could be endorsed unanimously by the political representatives…The summary for policymakers is a document of appeasement, not fit for purpose. In reality, if my calculations are correct, we not only don’t have much of a carbon budget left, we have already overshot that budget – we’re in overdraft.” -Dr. David Wasdell, Director, Apollo-Gaia Project

“Omitted climate impacts. Deleted references to increases in greenhouse gas emissions. “….minimising text that could be perceived to be inconsistent with their negotiating positions.” Political wrangling devoid of any basis in science. This is what the most expansive & important international report on climate change was reduced to.  An absurdly flawed work of  “scientific vandalism”. The reality is we’ve already blown our carbon budget. We are well past the safe amount of carbon that can be emitted to avoid global ecological catastrophe. Every molecule of greenhouse gasses emitted plunges our world deeper into carbon debt. Accelerating every day, the rate of Anthropogenic global warming and climate change. The strength and number of amplifying positive feedbacks that are accelerating climate change continues to grow, as politicians negotiate. There is no negotiation with our Great Mother. The deal is done. Extinction of  the vast majority of life on earth is the only plausible outcome. ignore all the hopium fueled reports that we have time to fix, fight, or mitigate extinction inducing climate change. it’s nonsense. Time’s up. We’re fucked. Dead Species Walking. Accept this most basic of realities and live out the rest of your days on this dying planet in peace, compassion, gratitude & love.” -OSJ

By Dr. Nafeez Ahmed @ The U.K. Guardian:

Increasing evidence is emerging that the policy summaries on climate impacts and mitigation by the UN Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) were significantly ‘diluted’ under political pressure from some of the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitters, including Saudi Arabia, China, Brazil and the United States.

Several experts familiar with the IPCC government approval process for the ‘Summary for Policymakers’ (SPM) reports – documents summarising the thousands of pages of technical and scientific reports for government officials – have spoken out about their distortion due to political interests.

According to David Wasdell, who leads on feedback dynamics in coupled complex global systems for the European Commission’s Global System Dynamics and Policy (GSDP) network, “Every word and line of the text previously submitted by the scientific community was examined and amended until it could be endorsed unanimously by the political representatives.”

In a detailed paper critiquing the WG1 Summary for Policymakers, Wasdell revealed that:

“Greatest pressure to establish grounds for the highest possible budget came from those countries whose national economy, political power and social stability depend on sustaining the asset value and production revenue derived from exploitation of their resources of fossil energy. Additional pressure was applied to the political agents by those vested interests whose sustained profitability was based on the extraction, refining, marketing and use of fossil energy as the ground of the global economy.”

As an accredited reviewer for the IPCC’s 2007 Fourth Assessment Report, Wasdell had previously criticised the political approval process for playing down amplifying feedbacks which could accelerate climate change. That charge was strongly denied by the IPCC’s lead authors at the time, although political interference amounting to “scientific vandalism” was alleged by other sources.

Wasdell told me that scientists familiar with the political approval process in Stockholm for the new WG1 Summary for Policymakers – including WG1 co-chair Prof Thomas Stocker who had signed the 2007 rejoinder to Wasdell – had confirmed that governments fought to amend text that would damage their perceived interests. His paper says:

“… the objections were led by Saudi Arabia, strongly supported by China, and associated with an emerging group of ‘like-minded nations.’ The impasse was broken following suggested modifications of both text and diagram provided by the representatives of the USA. The resulting compromise safeguards the vested interests of global dependency on fossil sources of energy, while constraining the capacity of the international community to take any effective action to deal with the threat of dangerous climate change.”

WG1 co-chair Prof Thomas Stocker, however, denied any knowledge of such political pressure, describing these allegations as “not correct for WG1.” He conceded that “the situation is different” for WG2 and WG3.

Wasdell said that the draft submitted by scientists contained a metric projecting cumulative total anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions, on the basis of which a ‘carbon budget’ was estimated – the quantity of carbon that could be safely emitted without breaching the 2 degrees Celsius limit to avoid dangerous global warming. He said that the final version approved by governments significantly amended the original metric to increase the amount of carbon that could still be emitted.

The total carbon budget according to this estimate is about 1,000 gigatonnes of carbon (GtC) – although over 531 GtC was emitted already by 2011, leaving 469 GtC left. Applying the “corrected non-linear function” reduces this available budget to just “280 GtC” – this figure does not account for the role of greenhouse gases other than CO2, including the potential impact of thawing permafrost or methane hydrates.

If included, they would reduce the budget even further. Current emissions reduction pledges, therefore, still guarantee disaster. His paper reads:

“… present levels of international contribution towards the reduction of emissions still led to a cumulative total of 2000 GtC by the year 2100. That left an emissions reduction gap of some 1097 GtC between promised reductions and the 903 GtC required to prevent temperature increase exceeding the policy goal of 2°C.”

Wasdell thus told me:

“The summary for policymakers is a document of appeasement, not fit for purpose. In reality, if my calculations are correct, we not only don’t have much of a carbon budget left, we have already overshot that budget – we’re in overdraft.”

Wasdell’s claims about the politicisation of the IPCC’s summary reports for policymakers are corroborated by other scientists.

In a letter addressed to senior IPCC chairs dated 17th April, Prof Robert Stavins – a lead author for the IPCC’s Working Group 3 focusing on climate mitigation – complained of his “frustration” that the government approval process “built political credibility by sacrificing scientific integrity.” His critique was, however, widely misrepresented by climate deniers as proving that the IPCC’s scientific verdict about the dangers of global warming are too alarmist.

Leading the pack, Daily Mail reporter David Rose attempted to equate Stavins’ concerns with those of economist Richard Tol, who withdrew “from the summary of an earlier volume of the full IPCC report, on the grounds it had been ‘sexed up’ by the same government officials and had become overly ‘alarmist.'”

Yet as noted by Dimitri Zenghelis, principal research fellow at the London School of Economics Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, Tol’s claims about alarmism in the Stern review on the economics of climate change are riddled with “significant errors and misrepresentations,” “selective” and “misleading” quoting, and based on his own paper containing “a number of mistakes”, as well as a “fundamentally flawed” understanding of “the risks of climate change.”

The IPCC’s assessments of the potential costs of climate change “is probably an underestimate,” argued Zenghelis, “because it omits consideration of many of the impacts of climate change, including potentially catastrophic risks.”

Prof Stavins himself dismissed the denialist “fringe elements of the press and blogosphere” which “capitalised on the situation by distorting the message of my original post to meet their own objectives.”

“My expressed concerns,” Stavins told me, “were about the government approval process of one section on international cooperation of the Working Group 3 Summary for Policymakers.” He emphasised: “My remarks did not include any comments on and have no implications regarding the integrity of climate science.” Rather, government representatives in Berlin sought to “protect their respective countries’ interests by minimising text that could be perceived to be inconsistent with their negotiating positions.”

Stavins’ remarks were also backed up by Oxford University’s Prof John Broome, a IPCC WG3 lead author:

“At our IPCC meeting, they treated the SPM as though it were a legal document rather than a scientific report. To achieve consensus, the text of the SPM was made vaguer in many places, and its content diluted to the extent that in some places not much substance remained.”

Far from being too alarmist, these criticisms suggest that the IPCC’s summary reports are too conservative. Like Wasdell, Broome describes how “a coalition of countries led by Saudi Arabia” at the April approval session in Berlin “insisted” that all “figures” depicting increases of greenhouse gas emissions in countries classified by ‘income group’ “should be deleted.”

Saudi Arabia, he said, also “wanted to delete all references to any part of the main report that mentioned income groups… in the end Saudi Arabia got its way completely.”

According to the Sydney Morning Herald, other countries leading the drive to dilute the document included China, Brazil and the United States.

________________________________________________________________________________________

Dr Nafeez Ahmed is executive director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development and author of A User’s Guide to the Crisis of Civilisation: And How to Save It among other books. Follow him on Twitter @nafeezahmed

• This article was amended on 20 May 2014. An earlier version quoted comments by Dimitri Zenghelis and said they were in response to Richard Tol’s claims about “IPCC alarmism”. In the article Zenghelis was commenting on, Tol compares the IPCC’s conclusions on climate change costs with what he considers to be biased estimates in the Stern review on the economic effects of climate change.

U.N. Weather Agency: “We need to act now… time is not on our side.”- Atmospheric Greenhouse Gas Concentrations At Record High. Again.

In Uncategorized on November 12, 2013 at 1:18 pm

By absorbing much of the added heat trapped by atmospheric greenhouse gases, the oceans are delaying some of the impacts of climate change. Photo: WMO/Olga Khoroshunova

Oldspeak: “Heat-trapping gases from human activities have upset the natural balance of our atmosphere and are a major contribution to climate change… Our climate is changing, our weather is more extreme, ice sheets and glaciers are melting and sea levels are rising.  We need to act now, otherwise we will jeopardise the future of our children, grandchildren and many future generations. Time is not on our side.-WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud.

“Translation: “We’re fucked. But our children and grandchildren are exponentially more fucked. ” No one in positions of power anywhere in the 1st world “advanced” nations  is interested in acting now. They’re interested in “extend and pretend”. “Delay and Pray.” They meet at ineffectual climate conferences to negotiate  incremental decades long rates of change, not the radical, revolutionary change necessary right now. There is no implementable global response to the existential threats that our current carbon-nuclear based systems are creating.  There’s no profit in it. The profit is in tar sands. Methane (a.k.a. “Natural”) gas. Coal.  Efforts are underway to expand their extraction and exploitation in previously inaccessible areas of the planet.  These systems require our destruction for its continued sustenance. We are hurtling headlong toward global ecological collapse.  So, enjoy what tolerable time we have left on this dying world, as in short order, life on earth will be come fully intolerable.  Expect the worst, because it’s coming. Sandy & Haiyan are just a primer. Our infinite growth based civilization incontrovertibly assure our destruction.” -OSJ

 

By U.N. News Center:

The amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere reached a record high in 2012, continuing an upward trend which is driving climate change and which will shape the future of the planet for hundreds and thousands of years, according to the United Nations World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

The agency’s annual Greenhouse Gas Bulletin shows that between 1990 and 2012, there was a 32 per cent increase in radiative forcing – the warming effect on the climate – because of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other heat-trapping long-lived gases such as methane and nitrous oxide.

Carbon dioxide, mainly from fossil fuel-related emissions, accounted for 80 per cent of this increase, WMO stated in a news release. The atmospheric increase of CO2 from 2011 to 2012 was higher than its average growth rate over the past 10 years.

What is happening in the atmosphere, said the Geneva-based WMO, is “one part of a much wider picture.” Only about half of the CO2 emitted by human activities remains in the atmosphere, with the rest being absorbed in the biosphere and in the oceans.

The latest findings “highlight yet again how heat-trapping gases from human activities have upset the natural balance of our atmosphere and are a major contribution to climate change,” said WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud.

He recalled that the UN-backed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stressed in its recent Fifth Assessment Report that atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide have increased to levels unprecedented in at least the last 800,000 years.

“As a result of this, our climate is changing, our weather is more extreme, ice sheets and glaciers are melting and sea levels are rising,” said Mr. Jarraud.

He underscored that limiting climate change will require large and sustained reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. “We need to act now, otherwise we will jeopardize the future of our children, grandchildren and many future generations,” said Mr. Jarraud. “Time is not on our side,” he added.

The Greenhouse Gas Bulletin reports on atmospheric concentrations – and not emissions – of greenhouse gases. Emissions represent what goes into the atmosphere, the agency pointed out. Concentrations represent what remains in the atmosphere after the complex system of interactions between the atmosphere, biosphere and the oceans.

At the same time, the Emissions Gap Report 2013, involving 44 scientific groups coordinated by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), urges wide-ranging global action to close the emissions gap.

If the international community fails to take action, the report warned, the chances of remaining on the least-cost path to keeping global temperature rise below 2 degrees Celsius this century will quickly diminish and open the door to a range of challenges.

Under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), governments have agreed to limit the global temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.

The report, which was released yesterday as leaders prepare to meet for the upcoming UN Climate Change Conference in Warsaw, finds that although pathways exist that could reach the 2-degree Celsius target with higher emissions, not narrowing the gap will exacerbate mitigation challenges after 2020.

This will mean much higher rates of global emission reductions in the medium term; greater lock-in of carbon-intensive infrastructure; greater dependence on often unproven technologies in the medium term; greater costs of mitigation in the medium and long term; and greater risks of failing to meet the 2-degree Celsius target.

“As the report highlights, delayed actions mean a higher rate of climate change in the near term and likely more near-term climate impacts, as well as the continued use of carbon-intensive and energy-intensive infrastructure,” said UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner.

“This ‘lock-in’ would slow down the introduction of climate-friendly technologies and narrow the developmental choices that would place the global community on the path to a sustainable, green future.

“However,” he added, “the stepping stone of the 2020 target can still be achieved by strengthening current pledges and by further action, including scaling up international cooperation initiatives in areas such as energy efficiency, fossil fuel subsidy reform and renewable energy.”