Home » Posts tagged 'greenhouse gases' (Page 7)

Tag Archives: greenhouse gases

Lightning strikes across the deserts skies near Stateline NV

Working out whether human activity is supercharging extreme events, such as floods, storms, droughts and heatwaves, is one of the youngest branches of climate science. But it’s moving at breakneck pace.

So much so, that the US National Academy of Sciences has fast-tracked a report, published today, taking stock of the science and where it’s heading.

Event attribution is the field of science that asks if extreme weather around the world would look any different if we could replay the last 200 years or so, without human-caused greenhouse gases.

Today’s report is an overview, rather than a showcase for new results. And at about 150 pages long, it’s not a light read. But its weightiness is apt for a topic that has come to underpin climate conversations everywhere from flooding in the UK to climate change adaptation.

Carbon Brief has been speaking to key scientists in the world of attribution about how far the science has come, experimenting with communicating the nuances, and the thorny issue of making results public at lightning speed, often before peer review.

One thing is for sure, Dr Heidi Cullen, chief scientist at Climate Central and a contributor to today’s report, tells Carbon Brief:

“The days of saying no single weather event can be linked to climate change are over. For many extreme weather events, the link is now strong.”

‘A universal talking point’

Storms, droughts, heavy rain, heatwaves and other extreme weather events are of huge interest to society because of their often disastrous consequences for people and property.

As Prof Ted Shepherd, professor of climate science at the University of Reading in the UK, explains in a recent commentary in the journal Current Climate Change Reports:

“Just as weather is a topic of daily conversation, extreme weather events…provide a universal talking point.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Canadians conflicted about 3 Es: Environment, energy and the economy

March 14, 2016

Canadians conflicted about 3 Es: Environment, energy and the economy

EKOS-CBC poll suggests 56% more worried about the economy than the environment

Alberta produces the most greenhouse gases of any province in the country, and has for more than a decade.

Alberta produces the most greenhouse gases of any province in the country, and has for more than a decade. (CBC)

Justin is still working as an oil well cementer in Lloydminster, but his income is down by 50 per cent and the family is dealing with a painful readjustment of their future.

“For the first time in three years, I actually didn’t pay a bill,” said Leanne. “We didn’t have the money to pay it, so I pay a little on this one and all of that one, and the next month, I’ll pay the rest of that one and just try to keep up.”

Justin and Leanne Mills are struggling to pay their bills as work dries up in Alberta’s oilpatch

‘We don’t have a big truck, or a big house, or fancy things and we’re still having trouble getting by.’– Justin Mills, oilwell cementer

Their struggles are one side of the conflict gripping Canadians right now as tension grows between the importance of the environment and the economy. A new CBC EKOS Research poll suggests the country is conflicted between the two priorities, especially when discussing the future of the oil and gas industry.

Leanne has been trying to get pregnant for four years and after a string of miscarriages, she began fertility treatments that cost $600 a month. But, with their drop in income, they can no longer afford the treatments.

EKOS poll Canadians worried about economic issues

“I turned 40 last November and when we spoke to our doctor last, I said that we might not be able to do this for a while,” Leanne said.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Forget the Praise: BC’s Carbon Tax Is a Failure

March 9, 2016

Forget the Praise: BC’s Carbon Tax Is a Failure

Higher emissions, slow growth, regressive taxation. Sorry, what’s to celebrate?

‘We think in British Columbia a carbon tax is a really successful way to go,’ BC’s premier said last year. The only problem is it doesn’t work. Photo of Premier Clark at GLOBE 2016 by Mychaylo Prystupa.

“Let’s cut the crap about B.C.’s carbon tax. The impact of the carbon tax has been overstated by people who love carbon taxes, and it’s annoying that the tax has generated so much uncritical praise.” — Marc Lee, pro-carbon tax economist.

To hear it from Premier Christy Clark, our province is a beacon of trailblazing perfection in the battle against climate change.

And the crowning glory of B.C.’s efforts is the carbon tax introduced in 2008. The tax now adds 6.67 cents a litre to the price of gasoline and imposes costs on other fuels for residents and industries.

“We think in British Columbia a carbon tax is a really successful way to go,” Clark said in November 2015 before jetting to the Paris climate change talks.

Cue the applause, from the New York Times to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development to new group Smart Prosperity that launched last week in Vancouver, with none other than Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to validate Clark’s claims that you can price carbon and reduce greenhouse gas emissions — without hurting your economy.

The only problem is that B.C.’s carbon tax doesn’t work.

Whether you look at greenhouse gas emissions or economic statistics, B.C. carbon tax has tanked.

Marc Lee, senior economist for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives in the province, likes carbon taxes. But “don’t believe the hype on B.C.’s carbon tax,” he says.

“The reality is that since 2010, B.C.’s GHG emissions have increased every year; as of 2013 they are up 4.3 per cent above 2010 levels,” Lee writes on the CCPA website.

Even on a per capita basis, emissions have risen.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

World’s Climate Threatened by Greed and Militarism, Official Canada Remains Part of the Problem, Not Solution

January 18, 2016

World’s Climate Threatened by Greed and Militarism, Official Canada Remains Part of the Problem, Not Solution

shutterstock_80847415

A leading columnist in Canada’s Globe and Mail daily newspaper known in the past to voice concern about the global warming emergency has penned two columns recently in support of Alberta tar sands pipelines, including praising the efforts of the premier of Alberta to sell the construction of these project to an increasingly sceptical and wary public in Canada

Jeffrey Simpson has argued for years for a more rational capitalist approach to energy production in which some account would be made for the global warming emergency. He co-authored a book in 2007 with several climate scientists titled Hot Air: Meeting Canada’s Climate Change Challenge.[1] But his columns in the January 14 and 15 editions of the Globe reveal him as just a born again shill for the Alberta tar sands industry.

Simpson begins his Jan 14 column (accessible online to Globesubscribers only) with, “Alberta Premier Rachel Notley, to her government’s great credit, has tried for the first time to outline a comprehensive and serious plan for the province to curb greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change.”

Simpson is referring to Premier Notley’s fanfare announcement on November 22, 2015 purporting to be an energy “plan” with greenhouse gas reduction components. The “plan” includes a few piecemeal promises such as reducing coal-fired electricity production in Alberta over the next few decades (presently, the province generates 50 per cent of its electricity from coal). But the centrepiece of her “plan” is to green light an increase in tar sands production in the coming years by as much as 43 per cent, most of which would be sold in foreign markets. A plan to “curb greenhouse gas emissions”, indeed.

Edmonton writer Gordon Laxer explained in a commentary published in the Edmonton Journal on December 3:

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

A Shaky Promise on Global Warming

December 29, 2015

A Shaky Promise on Global Warming

The Paris climate conference produced an international agreement for curtailing global warming, but resistance from some leaders, particularly Republicans in the U.S., makes the prospect for its implementation doubtful and thus dangerous, writes Lawrence Davidson.

Paris was certainly 2015’s center for ticking bombs. The year was bracketed by major terrorist attacks in Paris – first in January (murders at Charlie Hebdo’s offices) and in November (shootings and bombings that killed 130 people at several locations) – and ended with a December environmental conference which, given its non-binding results, opens the door to even more terror, albeit of a different kind, into the next century and beyond.

The 21st Conference of Parties, or COP21, ended in Paris on Dec. 12. If you are not familiar with the name or acronym, it refers to the latest gathering of nations (195 of them) looking toward a collective decision to limit global warming by slowing the release of greenhouse gases. Following the conference closure there was a short spate of positive reactions that has now been followed by a rather ominous silence.

President Barack Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and other heads of state and delegations, observe a minute of silence for the Paris attack victims during the opening ceremony of the 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21), in Paris, France, Nov. 30, 2015. (White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Until very recently there was a large number of people — mostly business people, lobbyists and politicians — who denied that human practices, such as the use of fossil fuels, had any significant impact on planetary warming, and some dismissed the idea of warming altogether. These numbers seem to have shrunk, and most of those still adhering to such notions are not often heard in public. This muted opposition helped pave the way for the at once limited and over-hyped result achieved at the Paris conference.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Too Little, Too Late

December 24, 2015

Too Little, Too Late

Last week, after a great deal of debate, the passengers aboard the Titanic voted to impose modest limits sometime soon on the rate at which water is pouring into the doomed ship’s hull. Despite the torrents of self-congratulatory rhetoric currently flooding into the media from the White House and an assortment of groups on the domesticated end of the environmental movement, that’s the sum of what happened at the COP-21 conference in Paris. It’s a spectacle worth observing, and not only for those of us who are connoisseurs of irony; the factors that drove COP-21 to the latest round of nonsolutions are among the most potent forces shoving industrial civilization on its one-way trip to history’s compost bin.

The core issues up for debate at the Paris meeting were the same that have been rehashed endlessly at previous climate conferences. The consequences of continuing to treat the atmosphere as a gaseous sewer for humanity’s pollutants are becoming increasingly hard to ignore, but nearly everything that defines a modern industrial economy as “modern” and “industrial” produces greenhouse gases, and the continued growth of the world’s modern industrial economies remains the keystone of economic policy around the world. The goal pursued by negotiators at this and previous climate conferences, then, is to find some way to do something about anthropogenic global warming that won’t place any kind of restrictions on economic growth.

What that means in practice is that the world’s nations have more or less committed themselves to limit the rate at which the dumping of greenhouse gases will increase over the next fifteen years. I’d encourage those of my readers who think anything important was accomplished at the Paris conference to read that sentence again, and think about what it implies.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Arctic methane emissions persist in winter

December 23, 2015

Arctic methane emissions persist in winter

Summer and winter, wet and dry, high and low, the Arctic tundra continues to emit methane.
Image: Bureau of Land Management (Delta WSR) via Wikimedia Commons

Methane, a key greenhouse gas, is released from Arctic soils not only in the short summer period but during the bitterly cold winters too.

LONDON, 22 December, 2015 – The quantity of methane leaking from the frozen soil during the long Arctic winters is probably much greater than climate models estimate, scientists have found.

They say at least half of annual methane emissions occur in the cold months from September to May, and that drier, upland tundra can emit more methane than wetlands.

The multinational team, led by San Diego State University (SDSU) in the US and including colleagues from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the University of Sheffield and the Open University in the UK, have published their conclusion, which challenges critical assumptions in current global climate models, in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Methane, a potent greenhouse gas, is about 25 times more powerful per molecule than carbon dioxide over a century, but more than 84 times over 20 years. The methane in the Arctic tundra comes primarily from organic matter trapped in soil which thaws seasonally and is decomposed by microbes.

It seeps naturally from the soil over the course of the year, but climate change can warm the soil enough to release more methane from organic matter that is currently stable in the permafrost.

“Virtually all the climate models assume there’s no or very little emission of methane when the ground is frozen. That assumption is incorrect”

Scientists have for some years been accurately measuring Arctic methane emissions and incorporating the results into their climate models. But crucially, the SDSU team says, almost all of these measurements have been obtained during the Arctic’s short summer.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

ExxonMobil, Peabody Coal Lobbying for Bill Preventing Climate Change Accounting in US Trade Deals

December 20, 2015

ExxonMobil, Peabody Coal Lobbying for Bill Preventing Climate Change Accounting in US Trade Deals

That bill, the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 (H.R.644), now may proceed for full-floor votes in both the House and the U.S. Senate after its conference report was agreed upon. A DeSmog review of lobbying records shows the bill has received heavy fossil fuel industry support, but more on that later.

The language in the bill originally dictated that “trade agreements do not require changes to U.S. law or obligate the United States with respect to global warming or climate change.”

Image Credit: U.S. Government Printing Office

According to National Journal, Congress changed that language in the conference report to “greenhouse gas emissions” and took “global warming or climate change” off the table.

Koch-Funded Politician Inserts Language

National Journal also detailed that U.S. Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) inserted the original language into the bill and he is content with the amended language, too.

“He finds it acceptable because he received assurance from [U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman] that the [Trade Promotion Authority] bill does not provide the administration any new authority to enter into climate-change agreements,” Sensenbrenner spokeswoman Nicole Tieman told National Journal.

Sensenbrenner, campaign finance records show, maintains Koch Industries as one of his top donors. He also has well over $1 million in fossil fuel industry investments. Those include:

-$100,001 to $250,000 in BP stock

-$39,253 in Chevron stock

-$564,717 to $1,064,716 in ExxonMobil stock

-$250,001 to $500,000 in General Electric stock

-$100,001 to $250,000 in Wisconsin Energy Corporation stock

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

A climate rant: an idiot is an idiot is an idiot

December 16, 2015

A climate rant: an idiot is an idiot is an idiot

It was yesterday that I gave a talk on climate at a meeting in Florence. It was a rather formal meeting, in the “Aula Magna” of the University of Florence, and my talk was part of a multidisciplinary series of lectures. I gave my talk to a public mainly composed of faculty members, although only some of them were physical scientists.

It was not a specialized talk, but I tried to explain the basic elements of what we know about the earth’s climate. How more than a hundred years of research has led to developing a new understanding of what makes climate change. I said that it is a true scientific revolution, on a par with several others as – say – cosmology; linking to a talk given just before by a colleague.

I showed data, mainly about paleoclimate, about over the geological eras, greenhouse gases have been the main element (although not the only one) determining the earth’s surface temperature. And I showed how temperatures are rapidly rising now as a result of human-generated carbon emissions. I described the risks we are facing, and the importance of acting as soon as possible. And I showed my own work on modeling the energy transition to renewables.

And that was it. I received some applauses, then the conference went on. Later on, there was the coffee break; the speakers and the public collected in the open air, in the courtyard of the University’s central building. And, there, someone patted me on the shoulder. He smiled at me and he said, “See, Ugo, how cold is it today? Don’t you think we need some global warming?”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Net-Zero Imperative

December 15, 2015

The Net-Zero Imperative

OXFORD – The world has reached an historic agreement on climate change. The deal concluded at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris commits countries to take steps to limit warming to “well below” 2º Celsius relative to pre-industrial levels and to pursue “efforts” to limit warming to 1.5ºC. It also obliges developed countries to provide $100 billion per year in assistance to developing countries. But, unfortunately, the final negotiations dropped the one number that truly matters for the future of our planet: zero.

That is the net amount of carbon dioxide we can emit if we are ever to stabilize the planet’s temperature at any level. Zero, none, nada. The Earth’s atmosphere-ocean system is like a bathtub filling up with CO2 and other greenhouse gases: The higher the level, the warmer the planet will be.

The emissions tap must be turned off once the bathtub reaches a level associated with a certain level of warming – say, 2ºC, above which, scientists nearly unanimously agree, the risks become severe, tipping points become possible, and civilization’s ability to adapt is not guaranteed. Otherwise, the atmospheric bathtub will keep being filled, warming the planet 3º, 4º, 5º, and so on, until emissions eventually stop – or we go extinct. The sooner we turn off the tap, the lower the temperature at which the climate stabilizes, the less risk we will face, and the lower the cost we will incur in adapting to a warmer planet.

Only about half the CO2 we dump into the atmosphere stays there – the rest is quickly redistributed into the oceans and biosphere. But, as the oceans become increasingly saturated and able to absorb less, the amount that is redistributed is declining. Likewise, warming temperatures cause soils to release more CO2, causing yet more warming.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Major Climate Science Denial Groups Offer to Hide Fossil Fuel Funding, Greenpeace Investigation Finds

December 9, 2015

Major Climate Science Denial Groups Offer to Hide Fossil Fuel Funding, Greenpeace Investigation Finds

Greenpeace operatives posing as representatives of coal and oil companies were told that while the reports could be produced, there were ways that the sources of funding could be hidden.

Academics affiliated with leading US academic institutions Princeton and Penn State universities are implicated in the Greenpeace research.

According to a report on the investigation at Greenpeace’s EnergyDesk website, Princeton’s Professor William Happer had revealed he had accepted cash from coal company Peabody Energy in return for providing testimony to US congress but had routed the cash through a climate denial group. Happer also offered his services but said that a new climate science denial group, CO2 Coalition, should be used to channel the funds.

Groups including the Global Warming Policy Foundation and Donors Trust are also alleged to have been complicit in providing “peer review” services for fossil fuel clients and, in the case of Donors Trust, in providing an untraceable route for the fossil fuel payments.

The story comes as Happer is preparing to give evidence to a congressional hearing of the Senate Subcomittee on Space, Science and Competitiveness, chaired by Republican and presidential hopeful Ted Cruz. That hearing is scheduled for Tuesday December 8 and also calls fellow “sceptics” Dr John Christy, of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, Dr Judith Curryof Georgia Institute of Technology and conservative commentator Mark Steyn.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Hottest five-year period on record is 2011-2015, says WMO

November 28, 2015

Hottest five-year period on record is 2011-2015, says WMO

The World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) announced today that 2015 is likely to top the charts as the hottest year in modern observations, with 2011-15 the hottest five-year period on record.

With two full months still to add in, the global average surface temperature for January to October in 2015 was 0.73C above the 1961-1990 average. This already puts it a long way above 2014, in which average global temperature reached 0.57C above the 1961-1990 average.

This year’s record is down to a combination of rising greenhouse gases and a boost from the strong El Niño underway in the Pacific, says the WMO.

Today’s announcement is timed to coincide with the gathering of world leaders on Monday to begin talks in Paris aimed at striking a deal to reduce global emissions.

‘Significant’ milestone

To put today’s news another way, global temperature in 2015 is likely to pass the “symbolic and significant” threshold of 1C above preindustrial levels, says the WMO.

This follows the recent announcement from the Met Office that temperature in the HadCrut4 dataset – one of three global datasets the WMO uses – is expected to pass the 1C mark in 2015. Dr Ed Hawkins from the University of Reading said today:

Roughly 1.0 degrees Celsius of this warming, or around 95%, is due to human activity. Natural cycles in the climate system, including El Nino, solar activity and natural variations in weather, are likely to be responsible for the remainder of the warming.

Earlier this month, the WMO said greenhouse gases in the atmosphere had reached a new high, with spring concentrations in the northern hemisphere exceeding 400 parts per million.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

More warming will bring a more polluted future

November 17, 2015

More warming will bring a more polluted future

Global warming wil increase airborne aerosols and cause more atmospheric pollution, scientists say.

LONDON, 15 November, 2015 – The future is slightly obscured. The outlook is less than clear. For once, such phrases are not metaphorical.

A world of global warming could mean a growing haze of solid and liquid aerosols – tiny specks of salt, fine dust, sulphates, black carbon and other particles in the atmosphere, according to new research.

Robert Allen, an earth scientist at the University of California, Riverside and colleagues report in Nature Climate Change that as the planet warms because of greater concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, driven by ever greater human burning of fossil fuels, so too the air could become more murky.

Aerosols happen naturally and because of human activity. They are exquisitely small blobs of liquid or solid afloat in the atmosphere, the product of dust storms, plant pollen, wildfires, kitchen fires, smoke from factory chimneys and vehicle exhausts, volatile discharges from forests and so on. They may make humans cough or choke, and they exact a long-term toll on human health, but they also affect the climate.

Increase inevitable

These aerosols both scatter sunlight and absorb it, and climate scientists who try to model the future must also calculate the impact of aerosols on global warming: will these reflect or screen out solar radiation to slow down the process, or accelerate it?

Dr Allen and his colleagues turned the question around: what will increasing average levels of planetary temperature do for aerosols? The latest and most up-to-date climate computer simulations delivered the answer. Warmer means more haze.

“Our work on the models shows that nearly all aerosol species will increase under greenhouse gas-induced climate change,” Dr Allen said. “This includes natural aerosols like dust and sea salt, and also anthropogenic aerosols like sulphate, black carbon and primary organic matter.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Why Exxon Executives Deserve the Ultimate Punishment

October 28, 2015

Why Exxon Executives Deserve the Ultimate Punishment

earns-exxon-mobile-fc95b2a9be1ad648

On October 16, 1946, shortly after the conclusion of the Nuremberg Trials, ten prominent members of the political and military leadership of Nazi Germany were marched to the gallows. Some of the former elite Nazis did not die quickly of an intended broken neck but strangled slowly. Since the trapdoor was too small, several of the condemned suffered bloody head injuries when they hit its sides while falling through.

What sort of grisly sentence shall we impose on the masters of the great capitalist carbon-industrial complex for their efforts to exterminate human (and other forms of) life by the turning the planet into a giant Greenhouse Gas chamber? The Nazis, to be sure, to be sure, killed in the tens of million, including six million Jews murdered with explicit genocidal intent. (The Allies and the U.S. also committed monumental war crimes, including the appalling atom-bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki). But anthropogenic – really capitalogenic – global warming threatens to end the human experiment altogether. Exterminist Ecocide is hard to beat when it comes to criminality.

“Oh,” one defense of the corporate Greenhouse Gassers runs, “but nobody really knew about the danger to life posed by the rapacious drilling and burning of fossil fuels until quite recently.”

Wrong. The story of climate change and the oil corporations is very much like the story of lung cancer and the big tobacco firms. Millions of Americans – including both of my parents – grew up convinced that it was okay to smoke cigarettes for years only to learn later that tobacco products were highly lethal. Their understanding of that terrible fact was tragically set back by a tobacco industry that worked for decades to knowingly obstruct the truth with a spurious message of scientific uncertainty and by advertisements that presented cigarettes as a sign and even source of healthy vitality. The tobacco companies made these commercials with full knowledge of the medical research showing that science showed that cigarettes were sending millions to early graves

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Stern warns: humanity is at climate crossroads

October 22, 2015

Stern warns: humanity is at climate crossroads

China, the world’s worst polluter, says its emissions are now set to peak earlier.
Image: Gustavo M via Flickr

Expert on the economic impacts of climate change says the stakes have never been higher for radical action to be agreed at the Paris summit.

LONDON, 21 October, 2015 − The lead author of the 2006 Stern Review on the economics of climate change says that although there will be an agreement at the UN climate conference in Paris in December, it’s what happens afterwards that is crucial.

Professor Nicholas Stern warns: “Whatever way we look at it, the action we need to take is immense.”

If governments delay taking decisive measures to halt greenhouse gas emissions, he is convinced that a tipping point on climate will be reached. “In Paris, we need recognition of what we need to do − and how radical that change will be.”

Awareness of urgency

Stern, chair of the UK’s Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and a former chief economist at the World Bank, will be involved in the Paris negotiations.

He told a packed audience at Oxford University that, on the plus side, there is now a much greater willingness to work towards a meaningful agreement on climate change.

Generally, there is far more awareness of the urgency of the issue. China and the US are not – as in the past – “dancing around each other”, but co-operating on how to bring down emissions.

“I’m very optimistic about what we can do. That’s not the same as saying I’m optimistic about what we will do”

Stern said that during talks coinciding with the state visit to the UK by China’s President, Xi Jinping, Chinese officials said the country’s emissions would peak by 2025 and then start declining. Previously, China said it would not reach peak emissions till 2030.

“I’m very optimistic about what we can do,” Stern said. “That’s not the same as saying I’m optimistic about what we will do.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Tag Archives: greenhouse gases

Content

Post categories

Economic Links

Energy/Resource Links

Environmental Links

Geopolitical Links

Liberty Links

News Links

Other Links

Survival Skills

Post Archives by Category

‘A universal talking point’

Koch-Funded Politician Inserts Language

Post navigation

Latest Posts