Emergency Brakes Needed to Stop Climate Crash
TORONTO - In the end, governments accepted evidence from the world’s top scientists that climate change impacts could be abrupt and irreversible, and that they require urgent action.
“The threat is real,” said United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.
“I have seen the impacts of climate change in Antarctica and the Amazon with my own eyes,” Ban said in a press conference in Valencia, Spain, at Saturday’s public unveiling of the Synthesis Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
“It is a very strong document. It sends a stark message that we face abrupt and irreversible impacts,” said Hans Verolme, director of the climate change programme for the international environmental group WWF.
“The report shows that the window for action is closing. Policy-makers need to take action,” Verolme told Tierramérica in an interview from Valencia Saturday.
The 24-page Synthesis Report and shorter Synthesis Summary for Policymakers summarise the scientific findings from the IPCC’s 2,800-page, three-volume assessment of climate change released earlier in the year.
“The Synthesis Report sets out concrete and affordable ways to deal with (climate change),” noted Ban.
The report details various effects, including increased extreme weather and sea level rises of more than one metre by 2100, and what future global temperature increases may come, depending on how much more carbon dioxide (CO2 - the main greenhouse gas) ends up in the atmosphere.
Previously, the IPCC had suggested stabilising the climate by preventing CO2 concentrations from surpassing about 450 parts per million by 2050. Current CO2 levels are around 381 ppm.
Shockingly absent from the new report is the scientific assessment of the need to reduce emissions 25 to 40 percent by 2020 in order to achieve that stabilisation target.
At an informal IPCC meeting Aug. 31 in Vienna, representatives from industrialised countries agreed that greenhouse gas emissions should be reduced by 25 to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.
Based on the dire warnings from scientists of the need to sharply curb emissions, even the United States and Canada “swallowed hard and accepted this”, says Verolme.
Although Verolme thought this first-ever agreement on a reduction range for industrialised nations was mentioned in one of the report’s many tables, Tierramérica could find no reference to it anywhere in the document.
It appears not to have survived the word-by-word examination by government representatives.
“There is no debate about the science. The debates are about the words,” says Monirul Mirza, an environmental scientist at the University of Toronto and one of the three dozen authors of the draft of the Synthesis Report.
“We summarised the key findings of the main report,” Mirza told Tierramérica from Valencia.
Confidential early drafts had previously been sent to every country and to representatives of civil society such as WWF for comment. After their review and revisions, the governments approved the text in Valencia.
“It is a very transparent process. Countries cannot play around with the scientific findings,” he said.
But Verolme disagrees, saying that government representatives tend to water down the scientific findings in the summaries.
The summary of “The Physical Science Basis” report, released in February, failed to mention the increased incidence of potentially destructive hurricanes, the warming of the Pacific Ocean and the loss of glaciers in the European Alps, he said.
The negotiations were closed to the media and Mirza could not comment on what words the countries were arguing about. There will be no new science included because it is a summary. Furthermore, the IPCC cut-off for the incorporation of new scientific findings was a year ago, he said.
That means a number of recent scientific studies documenting the rapid melt of the Greenland ice sheet and the Arctic Ocean sea ice, increasing acidity of the oceans or the slowing ability of forests and seas to absorb CO2 are not included.
“Climate change is going faster than our worst-case scenarios of five or six years ago,” said Verolme.
Meanwhile, the science in climate change is moving so quickly that it is nearly impossible to keep up. The WWF has asked the IPCC to issue special reports, such as on sea level increases, when there are new findings.
“The IPCC is a consensus process and tends to be cautious, leaving out the more alarmist scientific findings,” Verolme said.
While that may make the IPCC less vulnerable to attack by critics, it may do the world a disservice by underestimating the potential risks.
Even the gloomiest of the IPCC predictions underestimate the severity of climate change, eminent British scientist James Lovelock told the Royal Society — Britain’s national academy of science — in late October.
One of the reasons is that the IPCC does not take the influence and impacts of natural ecosystems into account, he said.
Biological systems are changing and the IPCC does not assess those very well, agrees Stephen Tonser, an ecologist at the University of Pittsburgh, in the north-eastern U.S. state of Pennsylvania.
The effects of climate change on biodiversity will be profound. The IPCC says almost one-third of the world’s species will face extinction if greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise. Tonser says that prediction likely falls short of reality.
The rate of extinctions will almost certainly accelerate with changing conditions brought on by climate change. “Most species simply can’t move fast enough,” he said.
Scientists do not know what the full effects of this rapid decline in species would be, he said.
The IPS news agency reported on Nov. 6 that new research showed that when a forest loses too many unique species, it can reduce the total number of plants in that forest by half.
As a direct consequence, “half of the oxygen they produced is lost. Half of the water, food and other ecological services they provide are lost,” stated the article, “How Many Species Are ‘Enough’?”
“We are riding in an airplane with the bolts falling out while heading into a storm,” Tonser said.
The IPCC has greatly underestimated the climate storm ahead, says Lovelock. He calculates that when all the earth systems are taken into account an atmospheric concentration of 500 ppm of CO2 will result in a six degree rise in global temperatures, not the two degrees Celsius the IPCC says is most likely.
“The IPCC’s Synthesis Report must show that while it is already too late to prevent some of global warming’s impacts, we do have the ability to stop the rot,” says Stephan Singer, head of WWF’s European climate and energy programme.
“Governments must wake up. They could be responsible for the next mass extinction of species if they don’t act to stop carbon pollution now,” said Singer
(*Originally published by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierramérica network. Tierramérica is a specialised news service produced by IPS with the backing of the United Nations Development Programme and the United Nations Environment Programme.)
© 2007 Inter Press Service
Emergency brakes are a myth. They are actually parkng brakes. We’ll go over the edge with the parking brake set. Sorry, the brakes should have been applied long ago. I seriously doubt, there is anythig productive man can do now to stop this runaway train.
The one thing we can do is at least try to find solutions. Peace amongst the “militaries” might be a good place to start. Then we go from there.
Hopefully the US Air Force is now back with the People. One can hope.
Peace,
Ken Hausle
P.S. Kem, i hope you enjoyed your fishing trip.
It seems that one thing that separates our species from the many that have come and gone before us, is our big brain. Unfortunately, that same big brain that is capable of producing wonderful ideas and things also harbors our innate need for status (and hoarding) leading to uncontrollable greed. Add to that our invention of the corporation, to which we have given human personhood without even the slightest human constraints, and we have manufactured an entity run completely by greed. It is this greed and concern for the present without any regard to the future that is going to take us all down. I agree with others here, as pessimistic as this sounds, we will keep arguing about hitting the breaks as the train on which we all are rushes headlong into the abyss.
kickboxr - to a certain degree i agree with your sentiment, but i also think that the “train” might go somewhere besides the abyss….
Besides, the “corporation” is nothing but a “legal construct” - there is no way it can be alive. Regardless, “if alive”, then obviously “the corporate entity” can be charged with murder. If found guilty, the punishment for “corporate murder” should be “death to the corporation”.
Seems simple to me, but what do i know.
Peace,
Ken Hausle
Its a long road from here. The view might not be so pretty.
If progressives truly want positive change regarding the heating of our planet then they should support a presidential candidate who will mobilize the immense problem-solving talents of the American people. America has pushed the limits of technology before in great national efforts. The Manhattan Project in WWII and the Apollo Moon Missions in the 1960’s are two examples. We could restore America’s progressive future by weaning the nation from its oil/gas addiction. It is time for a Great American Initiative for the 21st Century - clean, green energy independence.
It should be the stated goal of the next President of America that they will lead our nation in this effort. We could show the world what it means to be an American - innovative, problem-solving, goal-directed, protector of the Commons. Serious challenges demand great efforts. It is time for the progressive community to call for a new Great American Initiative. We should do it now.
Let our children say 25 years from now that this generation led the world from the brink of environmental collapse. Is there a more noble purpose than the salvation of our civilizations? Can we demand that our next President lead the way?
jungleboy - to be honest with you, the view for me could not be better.
I have faith in human ingenuity, and frankly if its all “out in the open”, then i think that is the best view.
Peace,
Ken Hausle
True–It’s already happening vs. lets stop before its too late. For forty years we have been saying the latter. Now we must act in the middle of the disaster.
Existentially we find ourselves in the midst of “already happening” and we shall define ourselves by how we manage ourselves in the midst of the disaster. There is no one but ourselves to whom to send the SOS, MayDay… etc. But at least we can hold the incompetent Captain accountable (Impeach) and find some better leadership to man the life boat.
The only legitimate hierarchy is the hierarchy of ethics - good over evil. Catastrophically, liberals shun such ethical hierarchy while embracing class hierarchy, the domination of the many by the few, enabling the runaway capitalist train we see crashing today. Suggestion: Forget about “dear leader” and realize that the power and responsibility are in the hands of the people, always.
Overpopulation, resource concentration and depletion, environmental pollution and species extinction. The four horsemen.
Ken Hausle - I agree with you that a corporation is nothing more than a legal construct or “legal fiction.” However, the US Supreme Court has elevated this legal fiction to personhood, with all the rights and privileges of a person, and so it is “alive” and well under the U.S. Constitution. Of course, you are right just as they are given the right, we the people can take that right away, either through legislation or through a constitutional amendment. Whether that would ever happen is another question.
Peace
All of these dire warnings are appearing everywhere but in the US. Sunday’s Independent/UK had a story about the acidification of the oceans due to CO2 absorption,and pointed out that increasing levels of acidity are demineralizing corals, shellfish and the base of the food chain, plankton, and that the oceans are reaching a saturation point of CO2 and that the oceans are dying.
Scientists are predicting abrupt and irreversible consequences. I believe, as I have all along, that we ain’t seen nothing yet. We are creating a shift in the balance of nature that we can’t quantify or predict. It is ridiculous to create timeline projections of the consequences of global warming, it’s like trying to make a budget of your expenses when you don’t even know what they are or how much money you have.
The only solution, as Molly Ivins would say, when in a hole, the first rule is to stop digging. Meanwhile, China is running full bore ahead with new coal fired plants, Russia is excavating as much coal as they can and so are we. China wants us to take the first step and even then, are making no promises. We’ve got Crazy George saying we can solve the problem with voluntary compliance, like it worked for the skies of Texas.
Everyone agrees the problem is one of political will - that is, there isn’t any. Our elected leaders wouldn’t dream of offending the corporate criminals who don’t care about the survival of humankind if it affects their bottom line.
I’ve started reading Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire. Doesn’t look too good for us. Rudy is even more of a thug than George, although at least he doesn’t think he’s the Messiah. Still, he would take us down the road to fascism even faster. It’s clear that Hillary wouldn’t put the brakes on the corporations, and her voting record, including her recent votes is not at all reassuring. Besides, nominating her is the most likely way for a Republican to win after the swift boaters get through with her and the Republicans steal her votes. And she’s given them plenty of ammunition.
Of the candidates the corporate media is permitting us to consider, Edwards is our only dim hope, and as far as what he would actually do, all we can do is hope. Meanwhile, Raul Emanuel is making sure progressives are being kept out of primaries for Congress. The country is ready for progressive change, but the corporate system will not allow it.
Yes, the really frightening thing is that we know that the IPCC is not painting a realistic picture but an optimistic one because of pressure from the governemnts of the world, notably America and Australia. And that the effects on ecosystems are being paid little attention (since no government anywhere appreciates that the economy of a country is dependent on having healthy ecosystems). The four horsemen in all governments are stupidity, ignorance, greed and malice, and all four have played a role in politicians watching as the Earth disintegrates. In addition there has been the mindless distraction of “war on terrorism”. the real war in Iraq, and the disintegration of Brittney Spears. Can’t expect the media to hold governments to account on climate change when there are important things to report. Only the blogosphere (eg http://www.blognow.com.au/mrpickwick/Climate_change/) is providing the warning that the geese provided to the Romans.
Yes, the really frightening thing is that we know that the IPCC is not painting a realistic picture but an optimistic one because of pressure from the governments of the world, notably America and Australia. And that the effects on ecosystems are being paid little attention (since no government anywhere appreciates that the economy of a country is dependent on having healthy ecosystems). The four horsemen in all governments are stupidity, ignorance, greed and malice, and all four have played a role in politicians watching as the Earth disintegrates. In addition there has been the mindless distraction of “war on terrorism”. the real war in Iraq, and the disintegration of Brittney Spears. Can’t expect the media to hold governments to account on climate change when there are important things to report. Only the blogosphere (eg http://www.blognow.com.au/mrpickwick/Climate_change/) is providing the warning that the geese provided to the Romans.
Ike, if you were writing about it in 2001 I congratulate you. I first wrote about it in 2000 (http://www.blognow.com.au/mrpickwick/History_Conquerors/). Prior to 2000 it was hard to be certain, although many of us were, but anyone who has remained a climate change denier in the 21st century either hasn’t been paying attention or has been paid not to.
Ike Kay: As I just said to you on another thread:
Thank you for your post. I wish I could have read more than two sentences of it. I’m sure you already know this, but using ALL CAPS, in comoputer-speak, means that you are yelling at the person(s) on the other end. If I may hazard a guess - you don’t like to feel yelled at any more than anyone else.
All of us CD posters feel passionate and want to scream out our frustrations to anyone who will listen. The good news for you is that you are in good company here.
Your posts deserve to be read and your voice needs to be heard. Please observe good computer etiquette and refrain from using ALL CAPS.
Thank you.
Too many profits to be made to stop now.
Too many profits? What good will that do when you’re sloshing through floods or screaming for a glass of water? We need to realize that ‘wealth’ in the form of money, possession, property and power is all a construct to which we’ve enslaved ourselves… It is time to start talking about Real Wealth….caring for humans and the planet.
The consumer economy is a huge part of the problem–and we are all part of it in some form–making the product or buying it. So, can we all walk away at once? We can…or we’ll be forced to.
Read Riane eisler’s work….Real Wealth of Nations…creating a caring economics. It is a solution for the future. www.realwealtheconomy.com
www.rianeeisler.com
Yes, profits before people. I do not see any department stores closing early to save electricity.
I suppose the rich imagine they can find themselves an enclave tucked away from the caos.
Awareness of global warming only seems to have come about in the last decade. But I think most people already knew about chemical poisoning of the planet (oceanic poisoning, atmospheric poisoning, poisoning of ground water and our lakes and rivers) in the 1970s. Precious little was done about it. The repugs recently showed how just much they care with Orwellian “Clear Skies” and “Healthy Forest” bills designed to permit corporate polluting and destruction. For some reason, the big money does not care.
Global warming, and the depopulation that it will cause, may actually end out saving the planet.
OIL SANDS ALERT
The pursuit of mining the oil sands in Canada and the oil shales in the western U.S. while sidetracking alternative energy development, highlights the contempt for our planet by the energy cartels. Their extraction require massive amounts of energy which compounds their contributions to greenhouse gasses and related pollution. The environmental destruction resulting from their massive excavations, and wasteful consumption of water only add to their ddisasterous effects.,.
These interests are well represented in the current administration who have continuously opposed real measures for conservation & carbon warming mitigation. Until we replace this administration with one that will stand up to these thugs and invoke needed reforms, the degradation to our habitat from their reckless environmental policies can only accelerate.
ANOTHER NAIL IN THE COFFIN
The pursuit of mining the oil sands in Canada and the oil shales in the western U.S. while sidetracking alternative energy development, highlights the contempt for our planet by the energy cartels. Their extraction require massive amounts of energy which compounds their contributions to greenhouse gasses and related pollution. The environmental destruction resulting from their massive excavations, and wasteful consumption of water only add to their ddisasterous effects.,.
These interests are well represented in the current administration who have continuously opposed real measures for conservation & carbon warming mitigation. Until we replace this administration with one that will stand up to these thugs and invoke needed reforms, the degradation to our habitat from their reckless environmental policies can only accelerate.
People are treating the global warming question as so many other debates (capital punishment, evolution, abortion, invade Iraq…), and the neocon pundits and other deniers (as always) like to slam the alarmists as liberal meglomaniacs or arrogant atheists. The problem is that “life goes on” while most of these debates have gone on for generations, but global warming is not a just
parlor, political, pulpit or Op Ed page debate. Its here and now, and its leading to catastrophe. Life won’t go on.
As previous posters have observed, global warming barely makes the presidential debates. A side show at best. Meanwhile the exploitation of fossil fuels increases. Public awareness is a once in a while magazine article or network news broadcast, and then we hop in the SUV and drive 25 miles to work. Even people like Gore and RFK Jr don’t really get it with purchases of “green” power, cap and trade and biofuel nonsense, and NIMBY arrogance.
Things are going to get bad before we do anything substantial. It might take a solar peak, 400 ppm CO2, more climate related disasters and mass starvation to get our attention.
Actually, it also seems that there are natural cycles that repeat through world history regarding climate change. There is also of course human action involved, but some scientist are collecting very well researched knowledge about those natural cycles. Even the evidence that we are heading towads a new ice age.
Here are another very good article about this subject that made me expand my mind on this:
http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/articles/show/128521-Climate+Change+Swindlers+and+the+Political+Agenda
The only thing that I’ve heard about that would be close to a solution would be the universal conversion of our agricultural lands to Terra Preta. By converting woody agricultural and forest wastes to powdered charcoal and returning the charcoal to the soil carbon is removed from the atmosphere. The great advantage of this is that it also ats as a kind of permanent fertilizer and soil builder so that plants and fungi add as much carbon to the soil as the charcoal added.
No other carbon sequestration program could show a profit in either energy terms or cash value. Also Terra Preta is the only carbon sequstration that only requires a hoe and a machete to get started. The Amazonian indians who originally used Terra Preta agricultural methods didn’t even have metal tools and they converted a huge area of the amazon to this amazing soil.
I’m afraid we are waiting for a disaster to befall wealthy white americans before any action will be done. It will definanetly be to late at that point.
solutions2 stated incredulously “Too many profits? What good will that do when you’re sloshing through floods or screaming for a glass of water? … It is time to start talking about… caring for humans and the planet.
Well, you’ll never be CEO of Halliburton, that’s for sure! You have a huge character flaw that makes you unfit for that office — you care!
Actually, many of us here — in fact, most Americans — have a problem. We assume that because we care, our “leaders” care too. After what’s gone down here ever since November 22, 1963 (and maybe before then but it was before my time), I am mystified that anyone still cannot recognize the fundamental difference between the values and beliefs of ordinary Americans and those of the ruling class.
Here is the difference: in politics and business, as in organized crime, caring does not get you to the top. Ruthlessness, collaboration, and double-dealing get you to the top. In fact, having a conscience is a liability. Thus our administration is run by scofflaws. Lying, cheating, and fraud have become routine. We bear witness to an unending parade of corporate scandals, obscene CEO salaries and severance packages, and media sell-outs. We see assassinations, wars for profit, torture, and spying. Environmental protections are fought bitterly even when humanity itself is faces with the prospect of environmental collapse and dislocations that will affect billions — all this coming from our corporate and political “leaders”. Do you think these guys lose even a minute of sleep over the hundreds of thousands they’ve killed? The millions they’ve turned into refugees? Those they’ve tortured, swindled, or betrayed?
These things are not anomalies. These are the natural consequences of the system we — or, rather, they — have put in place. The reason that this system can survive in a supposedly free country is that we the people simply cannot fathom that such people do not share our values. We think of people without a conscience as sociopaths, but these guys wear blue suits (or pant suits) and red ties. They talk about “freedom”, “courage”, and “democracy”, and “national security”. And so we just don’t see them for what they are. This makes it virtually child’s play for those people to play us for fools. In their view, that’s what we are.
Here’s a rhetorical question: are those touch-screen voting machines the only computerized equipment built in the last 50 years that can’t be hooked up to a printer? How is it that such equipment is now used in half of our states, including virtually all of the “battleground” states? If you had a voice in this matter, would you approve the use of such equipment?
The game is rigged. If you want to avoid being among those sloshing through floods or screaming for a glass of water, you must recognize that they do not care what happens to you. The only thing they care about regarding you is what they can get from you. You must either prepare for what may come yourself by getting your family into a position where you will avoid the worst of it, or you can become perswonally involved in the political process and try to make a difference.
If you opt for the latter, expect a tough, ugly fight. And try to hang on to your conscience.
Yes. There are natural cycles. The most common one regarding warming is the 11 year solar (sunspot) cycle. People like Hanson and the NOAA/GFDL folks understand this and include natural cycles in their models. There are also unusual events such as volcanoes that can change everything.
The basic logic is CO2 holds certain wavelengths of heat energy longer than O2 and N2. Sunlight becomes heat radiated from the earth’s surface. Increased CO2 then holds the heat longer and increases the temperature near the earth’s surface. The math says that temperatures have risen gradually with CO2 for decades, and will rise more quickly as CO2 increases from where we are now (380 ppm) to 700 ppm. We are adding 1.5 - 2 ppm per year. Also we are now at the solar minimum.
So the prediction is all those 1998-2007 temperature records will be broken at the next solar max in 5-6 years, and in 2020 - 2025 we roast. It won’t be long before we know who is right, but this isn’t a high school debate. People are going to die, maybe by the millions.
There is nothing to fear. John Edwards has stepped forward with a bold plan for tackling climate change. Everybody…go out and buy yourself a 28,000 square foot compound to keep your family cozy.