In 2011, global emissions of carbon reached an all-time high of 31.6 Gigatonnes, according to preliminary IEA estimates. That was 3.2% (1.0 Gt) higher than 2010 emissions. The IEA has developed an energy pathway consistent with a 50% chance of limiting global temperature increases to only 2°C, which requires CO2 emissions to peak at 32.6 Gt no later than 2017. This reinforces statements I’ve made in the past year that a maximum of 2°C warming is no longer feasible. There is no reason short of worldwide economic collapse that emissions will peak at or below 32.6 Gt prior to 2017. As emissions continue, more warming and additional effects are locked into Earth’s climate system. The good news is due to transfer of power generation from coal to natural gas (more natural gas plants as gas prices fell in 2009 and 2010), US CO2 emissions fell by 92 Mt (1.7%) from 2010 to 2011. Indeed, emissions have fallen 7.7% from 2006 levels in the US. A significant portion of that decrease was due to the economic troubles from which we still haven’t recovered, of course. Do market forces exist to help reduce those emissions? Absolutely they exist: taxes and permit systems. Note that the second article includes a brief discussion of why previous environmental action was taken. It cites the immediate identification of the causality behind environmental disasters. I disagree with the author’s assessment that such an event will ever occur with respect to climate change. I further disagree that such a “Climate Pearl Harbor” (as it has been described elsewhere) is the only means by which bottom-up action and support can be generated.