Hi Robert, Absolutely agree on the priority and emergency of (1) direct cooling but I think we can make this point while also remaining forceful advocates for (2) emissions reductions, (3) adaptation including loss and damage, and (4) GHG removal, by pointing out that large scale climate disaster and imminent first tipping point (arctic summer sea ice melting) is already happening at current levels of warming, and that we either are already, or are about to, cross (the now obviously too generous) 1.5 and 2.0 theoretical climate thresholds as there is no way in hell that we're going to "halve global emissions in eight years" by 2030 as the IPCC 1.5 special report indicated must be done to keep global warming below 1.5. - below is an excerpt from the latest (not officially approved) HPAC White Paper draft 😊.
"There is absolutely no possibility that we will cut half of global GHG emissions by 2030 which according to a 2021 United Nations Environmental Program report would be necessary to keep global warming below 1.5 °C by 2100.1 To the contrary, the World Meteorological Association estimates that there is a 50:50 chance of the annual average global temperature temporarily reaching 1.5 °C in at least one of the next five years (2022 – 2026)2, and recent research suggests that even if GHG emissions were stopped immediately in 2022, the level of GHGs already in the atmosphere will produce above 2.0 °C warming by 2100.3, [1] “To keep global warming below 1.5°C this century, the aspirational goal of the Paris Agreement, the world needs to halve annual greenhouse gas emissions in the next eight years.” United Nations Environmental Program. Emissions Gap Report 2021. Oct. 26, 2021: https://www.unep.org/resources/emissions-gap-report-2021 [1] World Meteorological Organization. May 9, 2022: https://public.wmo.int/en/media/press-release/wmo-update-5050-chance-of-global-temperature-temporarily-reaching-15%C2%B0c-threshold [1] Zhou, Chen, Mark D. Zelinka, Andrew E. Dressler, and Minghuai Wang. 2021. Greater committed warming after accounting for the pattern effect. Nature Climate Change Vol. 11 February: 132-136." I think we can all agree that (1) and (2) are short term emergencies, and (3) and (4) are long-term restoration and ecological regeneration efforts to reposition our entire political economy and human civilization toward a "renewable energy and materials economy" and our relationship with nature. *They (not direct climate cooling) are the heavy but necessary lift *that, without a global cap a trade regime that induces mandatory (not wholly inadequate voluntary "Climate Fund") transfers funding and technology from rich to poor countries, could take a very long time - into the next century. The cooling part is (as you have aptly put it) is a practical "tourniquet" (or I used the term "triage" paliative) effort to stem planetary bleeding as we work to actually solve the long-term problems that should be, relatively speaking, an easier lift, certainly in terms of money and resources, but also in terms of governance as it doesn't require a top to bottom transformation of the global economy. I think this is the point that your diagram is getting at - but the politics of substituting cooling and CDR for emissions reductions would I think (as many of others in this thread have noted) be a mistake. Noe of (1) - (4) above should be substitutes - the EU (as I recall) has made this point as part of an effort to set strictly separable emissions and GHG removal targets. Best, Ron On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 6:40 AM 'Robert Tulip' via NOAC Meetings < [email protected]> wrote: > The attached Climate Security Timeline shows a new suggestion on climate > priorities. > > > > It calls for a shift away from emission reduction as the main agenda, to > instead focus at global level on albedo enhancement. Brightening the > planet to reflect more sunlight can stabilise and reverse the movement > toward a hotter world as the foundation of a new climate approach. Agreed > systems to increase albedo should be in place before 2030. With a brighter > planet as the foundation, the direct cooling effects make time available to > scale up greenhouse gas conversion and removal to levels well above > emissions. By the 2040s, GGC&R can produce steady decline in GHG levels > over the second half of this century. Carbon dioxide conversion can store > hundreds of billions of tonnes of carbon in valuable locations such as > soil, biomass, etc, reducing the need to sequester as CO2. Market demand > can regulate global emissions, which at annual scale are a minor factor in > radiative forcing compared to albedo and GHG concentrations. > > > > The critical engineering path suggested for the planetary climate is like > building a house. Albedo is the foundation, greenhouse gas conversions and > removals are the walls, and decarbonisation caps the roof by a future move > away from fossil fuels. You cannot build walls and roof until you have > laid the foundation. That creates a timeline whereby global focus on a > brighter world in this decade can replace the sole political emphasis on > emissions and can give practical support to the recognition that removal of > atmospheric carbon is essential. > > > > Without higher albedo, GHG effects cannot cool the planet. Higher albedo > can only be engineered by peaceful global cooperation on new technologies > such as marine cloud brightening. Albedo needs to be addressed first, > especially at the poles, where refreezing should be an immediate global > priority for climate security. Turning the polar oceans from dark to light > by stopping the melting of summer ice will make a critical difference in > the planetary energy balance. A main focus on albedo will give time for the > slower effects of GHG conversion, removal and reduction to contribute over > the next decades to a stable and secure and productive planetary climate. > This order of priorities can sustain the biosphere conditions that have > enabled humans and all other living species to flourish on our planet Earth. > > > > Robert Tulip > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "NOAC Meetings" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/noac-meetings/061801d8741a%240aecc350%2420c649f0%24%40yahoo.com.au > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/noac-meetings/061801d8741a%240aecc350%2420c649f0%24%40yahoo.com.au?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAPhUB9AqXp3iB42r6g2f1xrVWKeqprav88R-6r3oOZGNdPi3eQ%40mail.gmail.com.
