Delivering maximum protection

The goal of the UN Framework Convention on Climate, adopted in 1992, was to “prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system”. 

But by 2020, the damaging impacts of climate change (via intensified and more frequent extreme weather events and earth system, ecological and social process changes) are so great that it is now clear that humans have failed to achieve the UN Climate Convention’s goal – we are now living in the early stages of catastrophic climate change. 

With the failure of the old goal, we now need a new goal to drive our climate action work.

Breakthrough – National Centre for Climate Restoration, has written and released a new report, “Delivering maximum protection”.

Read the report: “Delivering maximum protection: an effective goal for a climate emergency response."

It was 84 degrees near the Arctic Ocean this weekend as carbon dioxide hit its highest level in human history

Over the weekend, the climate system sounded simultaneous alarms. Near the entrance to the Arctic Ocean in northwest Russia, the temperature surged to 84 degrees Fahrenheit (29 Celsius). Meanwhile, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere eclipsed 415 parts per million for the first time in human history.

Carbon dioxide levels from approximately 1750
 to present. (Scripps Institute of Oceanography)

By themselves, these are just data points. But taken together with so many indicators of an altered atmosphere and rising temperatures, they blend into the unmistakable portrait of human-induced climate change.

Saturday’s steamy 84-degree reading was posted in Arkhangelsk, Russia, where the average high temperature is around 54 this time of year. The city of 350,000 people sits next to the White Sea, which feeds into the Arctic Ocean’s Barents Sea.

Read the story from The Washington Post by Jason Samenow - “It was 84 degrees near the Arctic Ocean this weekend as carbon dioxide hit its highest level in human history.”

Quantifying our Faustian bargain with fossil fuels

The climate system will heat well past 1.5 degrees Celsius (°C) and perhaps up to 2°C without any further fossil fuel emissions. That’s the conclusion to be drawn from new research which should also help demystify the rhetoric from the 2015 Paris climate talks of keeping warming to below 1.5°C .

Our Faustian bargain: the byproduct of burning dirty 
fossil fuels are short-lived atmospheric aerosols 
which provide temporary cooling.

It’s not that 1.5°C isn’t dangerous: in fact, at just 1–1.1°C of warming to date, climate change is already dangerous. A safe climate would be well below the present level of warming, unless you think it is OK to destroy the Arctic ecosystem, tip West West Antarctic glaciers into a self-accelerating melt, and lose the world’s coral reefs, just for starters.

Read the story from Climate Code Red by David Spratt - “Quantifying our Faustian bargain with fossil fuels.”

(Listen to David Spratt on "Climate Conversations")

Quantifying our Faustian bargain with fossil fuels

The climate system will heat well past 1.5 degrees Celsius (°C) and perhaps up to 2°C without any further fossil fuel emissions. That’s the conclusion to be drawn from new research which should also help demystify the rhetoric from the 2015 Paris climate talks of keeping warming to below 1.5°C .

Our Faustian bargain: the byproduct of burning dirty
fossil fuels are short-lived atmospheric aerosols
which provide temporary cooling

It’s not that 1.5°C isn’t dangerous: in fact, at just 1–1.1°C of warming to date, climate change is already dangerous. A safe climate would be well below the present level of warming, unless you think it is OK to destroy the Arctic ecosystem, tip West West Antarctic glaciers into a self-accelerating melt, and lose the world’s coral reefs, just for starters.

The new research quantifies the effect of losing the very temporary planetary cooling provided by atmospheric aerosols.

Aerosols (including black-carbon soot, organic carbon, sulphates and nitrates and dust) are very short-lived particles in the atmosphere that have a cooling impact that lasts around a week. Most of these aerosols are anthropogenic, that is produced by human activity, and most of the anthropogenic aerosols are a byproduct of the extraction and burning of fossil fuels. Perhaps best known are the polluting sulphates and nitrates from coal-fired power stations, that combine with water molecules in the atmosphere to produce what is popularly known as “acid rain”.

Read the Climate Code Red story by David Spratt -“Quantifying our Faustian bargain with fossil fuels.”

Attempts to manage Earth’s climate system is inherently dangerous

The idea that we can manage Earth’s climate system is inherently dangerous.

Dr Hugh Hunt.

However, the idea does have some positives as its successful implementation would demand global cooperation among all nations, a quality, that until now, has escaped humanity.

Earth’s “money masters” have called all the shots until now and so unless they see geo-engineering as an opportunity to make even greater profits, nothing will happen, but if and when it does eventuate be assured it will be about further enriching the already rich with little or no concern about the longer term wellbeing of Earth.

It’s interesting to note that those most vocal in their opposition of climate change, are among the geo-engineering boosters, which appears a blatant contradictory stance, for if you are convinced something is not happening why agree to a fantastically expensive process that is even more fantastically risky - it’s unknown how it will work, if it will work, who will control it, and who will clean up the resultant mess.

Cambridge University’s Dr Hugh Hunt from the engineering department talk here in a 36 minute YouTube about “Controlling the Climate: can we refreeze the Arctic?”

Meet El Niño’s cranky uncle that could send global warming into hyperdrive

You’ve probably heard about El Niño, the climate system that brings dry and often hotter weather to Australia over summer.

Firefighters fight forest fire in
Indonesia, triggered in part by El Nino. 

You might also know that climate change is likely to intensify drought conditions, which is one of the reasons climate scientists keep talking about the desperate need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and the damaging consequences if we don’t.

El Niño is driven by changes in the Pacific Ocean, and shifts around with its opposite, La Niña, every 2-7 years, in a cycle known as the El Niño Southern Oscillation or ENSO.

But that’s only part of the story. There’s another important piece of nature’s puzzle in the Pacific Ocean that isn’t often discussed.

Read the CSIRO blog - “Meet El Niño’s cranky uncle that could send global warming into hyperdrive.”

It’s even more critical now that we truly put our “big brain” to work

-       Robert McLean

Climate change is the product of man’s big brain – we imagined and thought our way through problems to find technological solutions; solutions so grand and so effective that we are now altering earth’s climate system.

Our 'big brain' is  to be admired,
but now is the time to put it to work.

Subsequently, many continue to see even further technological breakthroughs as the answer to what presently ails humanity and threatens not only it, but many other species that have thrived in what has been a Goldilock’s-like period (not too hot, not too cold) in the Earth’s history.

The technology most envisage has been directed at resolving the obvious, that is controlling the amount of heat from the sun reaching Earth or removing and sequestering the carbon dioxide emitted from our voracious use of fossil fuels, or even both.

However, what Andrew Masterson discusses is a different issue altogether and although the technological changes he envisages are not primarily aimed at resolving, or easing, climate change, the unintended consequence could bring on such changes to our behaviour that the human impact on climate could dissipate, and maybe make it no longer our greatest threat.

The suggestion that we may spend more time in virtual reality (VR) worlds concerns me.

If artificial intelligence (AI) is to allow people more free time, and a “social wage” absolving the need to work to live, we should be spending more time connecting with real people, doing things that answer our needs and those of our neighbour and others around us, and generally learning to live a more socially abundant life, building strong and resilient communities.

It’s even more critical now that we truly put our “big brain” to work.

Read Andrew Masterson’s story in today’s Melbourne Age - “As the pace of technological advancements grows, just what jobs – if any – will we be doing in the future?”

Federal Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg slammed online for response to South Australia blackout

 

Energy Minister John Frydenberg critized for
comments about renewable energy
in the wake of SA storms,

Recent South Australian storms (they are still happening) have generated considerable comment, most of it ill-directed and avoiding the inescapable conclusion.

It would be unreasonable, and probably scientifically suspect, to attribute the storms, but stripped of their finery, the storms have been worsened in intensity by earth’s human-induced disruptions to Earth’s climate system.

And so to blame the state-wide power failure on the State’s propensity for renewable energy is clearly wrong and at best politically mischievous.

It is power generators driven by fossil fuels – coal and gas – that have thrown sand in the gears of Australia’s electricity grid, not the renewable energy segment.

All those who favour the polluting status quo, from the Federal Energy Minister Josh Frydenbnerg down have taken political advantage of the storm to criticize renewable energy.

In the News.com.au story – “Federal Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg slammed online for response to South Australia blackout”- the Minister has been widely criticized.

 

Paris climate agreement 'extraordinary'

The Paris climate agreement is an extraordinary achievement. It codifies the long-term goal of keeping global temperature increases below 2°C. It also sets a more ambitious aspirational target of capping global warming at 1.5°C degrees.

But this more ambitious target will be beyond our reach within a decade or two at current rates of fossil fuel use around the world.

Beyond how achievable the goals are, and at what cost they can be achieved, they are aggressive and consistent with minimising the dangerous interference of human activities on the climate system.

Read what CSIRO Scientist, and Executive Director of Global Carbon Project, Pep Canadell, and a Professor of Earth System Science at Stanford University, Rob Jackson, have written on The Conversation - “The Paris climate agreement: the real work starts now.”

The time for debating climate change is long gone

T

he time for debating climate change is long gone.

Professor Katharine Hayhoe.

Instead of procrastinating and prevaricating about the science, we should be enthusiastically discussing workable abatement and how we can live with the evolving changes global warming will bring to earth’s climate system and so weather.

Utopia rarely arrives without a discordant note somewhere and so many still have to go to the public with convincing arguments about what is holding us back and why.

One who beats the drum on behalf of her fellow climate scientists is atmospheric scientist from the Texas Tech University, Professor Katharine Hayhoe, seen here on TEDx asking the question, “What if climate change is real?”

Shell about to exploit the world's last wilderness

F

ossil fuels have disrupted the world’s climate system to such a degree that wilderness areas once inaccessible are now about to be exploited as global warming has freed up areas that until now had been naturally locked away.

News services around the world, among them the BBC, have reported that the oil and gas giant Shell is expected to begin drilling for oil in the Arctic within the next two weeks.

The BBC said. “Thirty ships left Dutch Harbor in Alaska on Thursday for the Arctic to support two initial exploratory wells.

“The company has already committed about $7bn (£4.5bn) to the controversial project, and is confident it will find huge quantities of oil in the region.

“But if the initial wells do not find oil, Shell will contemplate walking away from the region entirely.”

Climatologists, and many others, hope that Shell does walk away from the region entirely as it is clearly understood that considering the world’s damaged climate system, the only rightly place for fossil fuels is in the ground.

Beyond that the world’s environmental groups fear an oil spill that, in the Artic would cause imaginable damage.

Most argue that whatever the profits might be from such a project, that they are simply not worth the inevitable risks.

Read the BBC story - “Shell Arctic oil drilling to commence within weeks”.

Reliance on fossil fuels disrupted our health and earth's climate system

R

eliance on fossil fuels for transport has produced many ills, among them the deterioration of our health and, of course, serious disruption to earth’s climate system.

Riding to work - a common scene in
European cities and one which is
 becoming increasingly
so here in Australia.

Human powered transport, the bicycle, is both good for our health and because if demands little in the way of fossil fuels, also eases our climate change problems.

Looking primarily at our health, the Calming Technology Lab at Stanford University has a prescription: ride a bike to work.

The lab found that not only did cyclists arrive at work less stressed, but an hour later were still more relaxed than those who came by transit or car. They are also in better shape when they reverse the commute and go home.

Treehugger reports on the lab’s work here - “Stressed at work? Commute by bike.”

David Roberts puts his view on 'the climate thing'

W

riting in Grist about a literary fiction author - “Jonathan Franzen is confused about climate change, but then, lots of people are” – David Roberts makes this observation.

His thoughts resonate and would be understood by most who care about the damage we are casing to the world’s climate system.

 

“Shouldn’t our responsibility to other people, both living and not yet born, compel us to take radical action on climate change? The problem here is that it makes no difference to the climate whether any individual, myself included, drives to work or rides a bike. The scale of greenhouse-gas emissions is so vast, the mechanisms by which these emissions affect the climate so nonlinear, and the effects so widely dispersed in time and space that no specific instance of harm could ever be traced back to my 0.0000001-per-cent contribution to emissions. I may abstractly fault myself for emitting way more than the global per-capita average. But if I calculate the average annual quota required to limit global warming to two degrees this century I find that simply maintaining a typical American single-family home exceeds it in two weeks. Absent any indication of direct harm, what makes intuitive moral sense is to live the life I was given, be a good citizen, be kind to the people near me, and conserve as well as I reasonably can.”

-      David Roberts.

The stakes could not be higher

The stakes could not be higher.

In December 2015, the Government of France will host the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Paris.

Twenty-three years after the signing of the Framework Convention, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are still rising fast, dangerously disrupting the climate system, and posing a grave threat to sustainable development in all countries.

Avoiding highly dangerous climate change will require sustained efforts and profound changes in the world’s energy systems, land-use patterns, and socio-economic development trajectories.

The global agreement reached at COP21 in Paris must be a decisive turning point for the world’s efforts to fight climate change. COP21 will be the last chance to adopt a global agreement that makes it possible to secure a safe climate.

Read the full report here: “Key Elements for Success on Climate Change Mitigation at COP21 in Paris”.

New research warns temperatures will soar

Joe Romm.

New research from a major national lab projects that the rate of climate change, which has risen sharply in recent decades, will soar by the 2020s.

This is according an article by American author, blogger, physicist and climate expert, Joe Romm, published on climateprogress.

He says, “This worrisome projection — which has implications for extreme weather, sea level rise, and permafrost melt — is consistent with several recent studies.”

His story, “Rate Of Climate Change To Soar By 2020s, With Arctic Warming 1°F Per Decade” tells readers that Earth’s climate system is about to move “into a regime in terms of multi-decadal rates of change that are unprecedented for at least the past 1,000 years.”