Weatherdem's Weblog

Bridging climate science, citizens, and policy


1 Comment

Climate in the News – 12/29/08

As 2008 winds down, lots of news and reports have come out on different aspects of the climate.  Here are a few that caught my eye recently:

Just about the only tangible action that came out of the Poznan Climate Conference was the announcement that poor countries would receive a few million dollars to begin financing projects to deal with climate change.  $60 million might sound like a lot of money, but it will be a drop in the bucket of funds necessary if GHGs are allowed to increase at today’s rates much longer.

The UK’s Independent asks if recent Arctic ice and temperature anomalies are indicative of a tipping point having been passed, as I alluded to in my last State of the Arctic post.

Add ski resorts to the Great Climate Change Conspiracy.  Resorts will likely have to move operations further up in altitude and make up to 3X as much snow as they have in the past in the face of a changing climate.  The resorts will have to do so under conditions that are expected to yield less steady precipitation events.  Left unchecked, climate change will make water a very sought-after resource.  The resorts will have to compete with many other interests in the West to grab the water they’d need for snowmaking operations.  One bit of “good news” in the article: it points out that GHG emissions the past 5 years have already exceeded the study’s “business-as-usual” examination.  Additionally there was this:

“Ski industry officials know that warming is real, and that small changes in climate have substantial effects on ski areas,” said Williams, also a fellow at CU-Boulder’s Institute of Arctic and Alpine research.

I’ve written a little bit about areal extent of Arctic sea ice.  Of more importance is what the condition of Arctic sea ice volume is.  Well, the news isn’t good this year: a lot of ice volume was lost in the past year.


Leave a comment

Some Poznan Climate Meeting Results

World diplomats met at Poznan, Poland last week in an effort to work toward a 2009 Copenhagen Conference where a draft to replace the Kyoto Protocol is expected.  U.S. diplomats, at the direction of lame-duck Bush, hemmed and hawed and stymied efforts to make progress in North America.  Joining Bush’s efforts to delay action were Germany, Japan, Australia, Canada and New Zealand.  The news from the European Union was slightly more positive – they announced preliminary efforts to cut CO2 emissions by 2020.  The rate at which they do so is up for discussion, as there are different ways to measure cuts.  Diplomats claimed they are shooting for a 20% reduction of CO2 emissions by 1990 standards by 2020.  Some environmental groups countered that the net effect of the system presented would only reduce emissions by 4%.

At this early stage, I think I’m closer to agreeing with the critics due to the methods announced.  EU countries would be able to sponsor green projects in developing countries – use offsets in other words.  That doesn’t reduce their actual emissions, which is what will have to be done eventually.  The longer we wait to do so, the more expensive and disruptive it will be.  Further, it seems liklier to me that officials are willing to say they’re doing something in feel-good gestures rather than force a shift of their constituents’ lifestyles.  Too many people are passing the responsibility down to the next generation.  If a crisis occurs, it will be too late to continue this deceitful practice.  That’s the biggest problem with having politicians deciding which actions to take.  I suppose the good news is taking some action today could help decisions to take more action later.

What will change things worldwide is a new American President.  Thankfully, President-elect Obama appears to be making a new energy and climate change policy a priority in his future administration.  It will take somebody that is bold to bring bold change to the way things are done.  The biggest question right now is can Obama make a difference prior to the 2009 Copenhagen Conference?  Given the plate-full of disasters that Bush is merrily passing along (see a trend?), I’m starting to think action within the U.S. will be difficult to achieve in the first year of an Obama presidency.  It won’t be impossible and I am in no way advocating for Obama to do nothing.  But I think an honest assessment of the possibilities before us should be made.  I do think that an economic recovery is dependent on the development of green economy and not the other way around.  Another point of good news: states that have taken the lead in initiating action will help Obama’s programs get off the ground.  Real-life examples of how 21st century energy policies create good American jobs and boost economies can already be made.  They just need to be publicized better.

That assessment includes realizing that the fossil fuel industries will fight every little piece of progress that Obama and others can and will put forward.  Nothing that involves a change from the status quo will meet with their approval.  Remember that as you continue to pay high prices for every kind of fuel: your money is going to pay for executives and lobbyists to convince Congress not to change any energy policies.  That’s millions of dollars of your and my hard-earned money.  They’ll happily use our money to fund PR campaigns to tell us they’re fighting for us to keep our hard-earned money.  They’ve done it for a generation and look where it’s left us.

The big picture is this: the next Protocol will need to call for countries to make challenging but attainable changes.  CO2 concentrations must be brought back under 350ppm, 37ppm less than what is present today.  That means emissions must slow down, stall, then decrease.  The next Protocol is supposed to take effect in 2012.  If our habits haven’t changed by then, it will be more difficult and more expensive to change those habits.  Of course, we’re likely to be responding to the climate forcing that has already occurred at the same time we paying to change our habits.  Those costs will compound quickly, leaving us with fewer oppurtunities in the future to do things we want to do, above and beyond the things we need to do.


Leave a comment

Global Warming: Disinformation; Poznan; 2008 (so far); Energy Security; European Plan

Jon Caldara (Independence Institute) let James Taylor (Heartland Institute)  spout off global warming disinformation on his show last week.  That’s what passes for proof in Con circles: let each other get away with lies on the media you control and label the results as valid.  When Taylor tells audiences that persons listed on the Oregon Petition have demanded they be taken off (which hasn’t happened, to my knowledge), he can cite the remainder of the delayers as he chooses.  Until then, Caldara and Taylor are charlatans.

As of yesterday, talks were very much behind schedule at Poznan, Poland.  The meeting is supposed to help tame the path toward a Kyoto Protocol upgrade, which many want negotiated at the end of next year (Kyoto expires in 2012).  The rest of the world is still struggling to deal with the inaction of the U.S. under George Bush and the Cons.  Jan. 20th can’t come soon enough.

Global temperatures in 2008 (through November) continued to be high.  Even with a stubborn La Nina working to cool things off for more than 2 years, the 2000s look to be on track to be the warmest decade in human recorded history.  That has real effects on the globe, none of which I would consider good.

The Center for American Progress has released an energy security framework paper.  Highly recommended.

Europeans are thinking of building an incredible renewable energy networkTREC would combine solar power in north Africa with wind power from the Eastern Mediterranean to the North Sea, bio-mass, and hydropower with a high-voltage direct current (HVDC) system of power lines to provide assured renewable electricity for the Mediterranean basin and Europe.  A massive undertaking?  Yes.  But it’s doable and it might be absolutely necessary.  Oh, north Africans and Middle Easterners would benefit by getting clean, fresh water out of the project, which would undoubtedly improve the geopolitical tensions of the region.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 164 other followers