Sounds to me like good news: that what most of us here have already been convinced of for some time, is getting some attention in the mainstream. Emissions reduction won't do; we need geoengineering.
On Jan 27, 12:21 pm, "John Nissen" <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Alvia, for your posting. > > The paper is very careful to avoid sounding "alarmist", but the implications > are alarming. The paper is important, by strongly implying out that emissions > reduction, however drastic, will not alone save us from hundreds of years of > global warming, which of course would be catastrophic in the long run. > Scientists, such as Bob Watson, and environmentalists, such as George > Monbiot, should not be telling governments that the only solution is a low > carbon economy and that emissions reductions can save the day. They are > simply wrong. > > However the paper does not go nearly far enough. The climate damage, > described in the paper, doesn't even include the Arctic sea ice and other > tipping points that threaten us over the next few years. This article does > not indicate the seriousness of the situation we are in. Nor does it give > hope to retrieve the situation. Nor does it give the urgency for action - > the action that could save us. > > For geoengineering could potentially halt both global warming and rising > levels of atmospheric CO2. And geoengineering (involving tropospheric and/or > stratospheric clouds) still has a chance to save the Arctic sea ice. But > once the sea ice is gone, yes, it is probably too late. Too late to prevent > many degrees of local warming. Too late to prevent a massive and > irreversible discharge of methane from frozen structures, giving many degrees > of global warming. Too late to prevent an irreversible disintegration of > Greenland, giving metres of sea level rise - possibly within a few decades. > Too late to prevent the sixth great extinction event. Too late to prevent > the collapse of our own civilisation? > > John (Nissen) > Chiswick, London W4 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Alvia Gaskill > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 11:34 AM > Subject: [geo] Too Late Baby, It's Too Late > > Of course, we cannot say today what kind of technology will be available > over the next 1000 years that could reverse the irreversible changes > described in the paper. However, this does illustrate that stopping further > "irreversible" change is of paramount importance. And the only way to do > this in the near term (next 50 years) is by a combination of geoengineering > and emissions reduction. The analogy with Type II diabetes is unfortunately > a good one. > > http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090126/ap_on_sc/sci_greenhouse_irreversi... > > Report: Some climate damage already irreversible > By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID, AP Science Writer Randolph E. Schmid, Ap Science > Writer Mon Jan 26, 6:33 pm ET > WASHINGTON – Many damaging effects of climate change are already basically > irreversible, researchers declared Monday, warning that even if carbon > emissions can somehow be halted temperatures around the globe will remain > high until at least the year 3000. > > "People have imagined that if we stopped emitting carbon dioxide the > climate would go back to normal in 100 years, 200 years; that's not true," > climate researcher Susan Solomon said in a teleconference. > > Solomon, of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Earth > System Research Laboratory in Boulder, Colo., is lead author of an > international team's paper reporting irreversible damage from climate change, > being published in Tuesday's edition of Proceedings of the National Academy > of Sciences. > > She defines "irreversible" as change that would remain for 1,000 years even > if humans stopped adding carbon to the atmosphere immediately. > > The findings were announced as President Barack Obama ordered reviews that > could lead to greater fuel efficiency and cleaner air, saying the Earth's > future depends on cutting air pollution. > > Said Solomon, "Climate change is slow, but it is unstoppable" — all the > more reason to act quickly, so the long-term situation doesn't get even worse. > > Alan Robock, of the Center for Environmental Prediction at Rutgers > University, agreed with the report's assessment. > > "It's not like air pollution where if we turn off a smokestack, in a few > days the air is clear," said Robock, who was not part of Solomon's research > team. "It means we have to try even harder to reduce emissions," he said in a > telephone interview. > > Solomon's report "is quite important, not alarmist, and very important for > the current debates on climate policy," added Jonathan Overpeck, a climate > researcher at the University of Arizona. > > In her paper Solomon, a leader of the International Panel on Climate Change > and one of the world's best known researchers on the subject, noted that > temperatures around the globe have risen and changes in rainfall patterns > have been observed in areas around the Mediterranean, southern Africa and > southwestern North America. > > Warmer climate also is causing expansion of the ocean, and that is expected > to increase with the melting of ice on Greenland and Antarctica, the > researchers said. > > "I don't think that the very long time scale of the persistence of these > effects has been understood," Solomon said. > > Global warming has been slowed by the ocean, Solomon said, because water > absorbs a lot of energy to warm up. But that good effect will not only wane > over time, the ocean will help keep the planet warmer by giving off its > accumulated heat to the air. > > Climate change has been driven by gases in the atmosphere that trap heat > from solar radiation and raise the planet's temperature — the "greenhouse > effect." Carbon dioxide has been the most important of those gases because it > remains in the air for hundreds of years. While other gases are responsible > for nearly half of the warming, they degrade more rapidly, Solomon said. > > Before the industrial revolution the air contained about 280 parts per > million of carbon dioxide. That has risen to 385 ppm today, and politicians > and scientists have debated at what level it could be stabilized. > > Solomon's paper concludes that if CO2 is allowed to peak at 450-600 parts > per million, the results would include persistent decreases in dry-season > rainfall that are comparable to the 1930s North American Dust Bowl in zones > including southern Europe, northern Africa, southwestern North America, > southern Africa and western Australia. > > Gerald Meehl, a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric > Research, said, "The real concern is that the longer we wait to do something, > the higher the level of irreversible climate change to which we'll have to > adapt." Meehl was not part of Solomon's research team. > > While scientists have been aware of the long-term aspects of climate > change, the new report highlights and provides more specifics on them, said > Kevin Trenberth, head of climate analysis at the center. > > "This aspect is one that is poorly appreciated by policymakers and the > general public and it is real," said Trenberth, who was not part of the > research group. > > "The temperature changes and the sea level changes are, if anything > underestimated and quite conservative, especially for sea level," he said. > > While he agreed that the rainfall changes mentioned in the paper are under > way, Trenberth disagreed with some details of that part of the report. > > "Even so, there would be changes in snow (to rain), snow pack and water > resources, and irreversible consequences even if not quite the way the > authors describe," he said. "The policy relevance is clear: We need to act > sooner ... because by the time the public and policymakers really realize the > changes are here it is far too late to do anything about it. In fact, as the > authors point out, it is already too late for some effects." > > Co-authors of the paper were Gian-Kaspar Plattner and Reto Knutti of the > Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich and Pierre Friedlingstein of > the National Institute for Scientific Research, Gif sur Yvette, France. > > The research was supported by the Office of Science at the Department of > Energy. > > ___ > > On the Net: > > PNAS:http://www.pnas.org > > Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information > contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or > redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. > > Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. > > > > ap_logo_106.png > < 1KViewDownload --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
