1C Additional Rise - Maybe 10 Years - To Climate Point Of No Return

[hatrack]

EDIT

A task force of senior politicians, business leaders and academics spell out the warning in the report Meeting The Climate Change Challenge - and it is remarkably brief. In as little as 10 years, the report says, the point of no return on global warming may have been reached.

This point will be 2C above the average world temperature prevailing in 1750 before the industrial revolution, when human activities - mainly the production of waste gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2) - first started to affect the climate. But it points out that global average temperature has already risen by 0.8C since then, with more rises already in the pipeline - so the world has little more than a single degree of temperature latitude before the crucial point is reached. More ominously still, the report says a 400 parts per million concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere will make that two-degree rise inevitable - and the level is already 379ppm and rising at 2ppm every year.

"There is an ecological time bomb ticking away," said Stephen Byers MP, the former British Transport Secretary who co-chaired the report with American Republican Senator Olympia Snowe. The report makes clear that, although global warming's effects may seem distant, time is actually very short and it is action taken - or not taken - in the next few years which will be decisive for climate change this century and beyond. The authors urge all countries in the G8 group of rich nations to generate a quarter of their electricity from renewable sources by 2025, and to double their research spending on low-carbon energy by 2010.

The study also calls on the G8 to form a climate group with leading developing nations such as China. But its major impact will be in linking the twin climate danger thresholds of a 2C temperature rise and of the 400ppm concentration of carbon dioxide. Perversely, although preventing "dangerous" climate change is the principal objective of the UN climate treaty signed in 1992, no-one has yet defined what dangerous actually is, and next week the British Government is hosting a major scientific conference to try to do so.

EDIT

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?mode=headlines&c_id=2&ObjectID=10007899

[niallmac]

1. If the article is about climate change you can just about

bet it wasn't found on CNN or Fox or any other U.S. MSM. This is my impression anyway. I am more informed about the science and the debate going on over climate change from reading BBC than any other source. The article cited in this thread is from NZ!
It's pathetic really. I will jump to the personal conclusion that this is a prime example of why the MSM should not be owned by corporations.
Anyone hear Bill Maher on NPR recently? He was brilliant . Among other things he said:
'Fascism is when corporations run the government.' to paraphrase. He also had a new rule for fox News; 'When referring to the president, Fox News reporters have to say "My Liege"
Cracked me up.

[enough]

2. And for at least three of those ten years,

the US will be doing nothing to help it.

[Ian David]

3. Soylent Green is Republicans! It's made from Republicans!

If we have a famine, we should eat the Republicans first.

[phantom power]

4. These people can't even make up their mind in 10 years.

Forget about actually accomplishing anything. If it's really happening in 10 years, then it's going to happen.

[ramapo]

5. We're past the point of mitigation

The next three years are a writeoff. There is no way that Americans will wake up from their coma of delusion to realize that this really is a big problem and the only way to address is a drastic change in our lifestyles.

It is possible that the wakeup call will come within the next ten years but it will be far too late to do anything.

How long will it take to implement efficient mass transit systems to replace the need for Americans complete reliance on the automobile.?

How long to replace coal as one of the primary fuels for generating electricity? How long to implement true conservation measures to reduce energy consumption?

How long to rollback suburban sprawl and the deforestation of the world?

Nature will mitigate the effects of global warming over time. We may not like her solutions though.

[phantom power]

6. In theory, we could do all those things very quickly.

But it would be in a sort of "apollo project" mode. The government and the citizens would have to be on more or less the same page, and all thinking in the mode of "we have to make this happen in 10 years, and no obstacle is standing in our way."

It would probably require an exercise of eminent-domain on a historic scale. Appropriating people's property to build mass-transit, fast-tracking nuclear reactors (or vast wind farms, or whatever).

Our usual way of doing business, where we argue about the various rights of property, land use, etc, or demagogue endlessly about the "unfair cost to taxpayers," would have to be thrown out the window.

As you say, it would take some kind of national emergency to provoke that kind of thinking from Americans. And by that time, it's too late to prevent anything. It might still be worth doing, but we'll be doing it while dealing with climate chaos.

[ramapo]

7. In theory yes, but we've failed the test.

The ability of the United States to initiate and successfully run an "Apollo" project ended in 1970 when we basically gave up science for mediocrity.

There has been 35 years of talk about creating an "Apollo" project to address any number of problems, energy being problem number one. Politics, delusion, laziness, and a lack of fiscal and intellectual discipline have blocked progress time and time again.

There will be a tipping point when Americans are slapped in the head by a large, heavy block of reality. There will be a tremendous clamor. Unfortunately the patient has grown much, much sicker over the past 35 years and it will be almost infinitely more difficult to mitigate the mess created since 1970.

[phantom power]

8. So true. Even the original Apollo project...

was basically an emergency response to Russia's space program. I don't know for sure, but I think it's not a coincidence that NASA started to lose it's "golden-age" focus at about the same time that it became clear we didn't have to worry about any other countries achieving dominance in space.

[Boomer]

10. Ah, but in reality....

A small town not too far from where I live finally voted to build a sewage treatment plant. The most controversial aspect of the plan was that people would be required to have indoor plumbing.

I kid you not, at the turn of the 21st century, in a town less than a two hour's drive from the national capital, people had to be FORCED to abandon an outhouse in favor of an indoor bathroom.

And we think we can turn this country green in a decade?

Even if every person in this country were willing, and we had the contractors who could do the work, just how many people can afford to install a $30,000 solar heating system in their home AND buy a hybrid car while they're waiting for mass transit to be built?

My neighbors are lucky if they have enough money to pay the rent, and their landlords balk at painting the front porch or fixing a door lock.

I'm in a more fortunate position, but when I started doing research on the feasibility of solar power, the closest qualified contractor was in the next state and my city housing inspector didn't know whether or not I could get a permit because no one had ever asked for one before.

Ten years? It would take a hundred. And personally, I doubt we have even ten.....

[ramapo]

11. Even subsidized solar is very expensive

NJ offers a pretty hefty subsidy but after doing a bit of research I learned I'd be spending near $20,000. As the cost of natural gas goes up, there will be a smaller gap between solar and current energy cost.

[Boomer]

12. Unfortunately, my state doesn't offer subsidies

So, as you can imagine, the bill is even larger than yours.

I can afford the cost, frankly, if I liquidate a portion of my investments, but the risk factor is that I simply can't predict how much longer I will be living in this house. Maybe for the rest of my life, but maybe only for a few years more. And given my neighborhood, there's simply no way I would ever recoup the investment from the sale of the house. People with that kind of money to spend on real estate are going to be shopping in a more upscale neighborhood.

I'm here because I'm a strong believer in living well below my means, rather than above. This is wonderful house -- solidly built -- and I got it at a bargain precisely because the neighborhood is considered marginal. Suits me just fine, but it's not an ideal situation for substantial upgrades.

[Boomer]

9. We're toast

The latest reports about melting permafrost and accelerated glacier melting all point to the beginnings of a feedback loop that has a life of its own. The somewhat comforting scenario of gradual climate change is now giving way to the realization that climate switches states, and we're now dangerously close to a breakpoint.

Government has proved to be useless, and most people would rather not know, so the emotional impact of reality is going to be interesting.

[pilgrimsoul]

13. I have a dumb question

What parts of the North American continent, if any, will fare the best over the next several decades as this climate change occurs? I don't know a lot about the science behind global warming, but am concerned about desertification and need to know where it would be best to live. I would like to buy some land in a good place so that my family can make it through the next several decades okay. Would Nova Scotia be a good place?

[phantom power]

14. Here's the rub: chaos is hard to plan for.

What we're heading into is maybe more like a chaotic transition period between one stable climate and a new one. The new stable climate may be ice-age, in which case moving south is the way to go. But on the way, things may warm up before they get cold.

I'd also be interested if anybody thinks they have a good answer to this question. When I try to think it through, I'm stymied by the changing conditions that I expect to see.

[Massacure]

15. Make sure you have thick insulation, and high quality windows.

Plus make sure you finish off your basement. Basements tend to stay around 55 degrees year round. If you can raise a part of your house two feet so your basement gets a window or two, do it so you have light.