Can We Prevent Worst Climate Change Scenarios?
posted by: GinaMarie Cheeseman 44 days ago
The UN Environmental Program recently released an analysis about climate change, and it is sobering. It concluded that warming of at least 1.4 degrees Celsius by 2100 and as much as 4.3 degrees Celsius will happen. The reason, according to the analysis, temperatures will warm by at least 1.4 degrees is because carbon emissions increased faster than predicted. The analysis is an update to the last IPCC report on climate change released two years ago, and reviewed over 400 studies from the past two years.
The analysis stated changes such as carbon sinks becoming less able to absorb more carbon “characterize a carbon cycle that is generating stronger-than-expected and sooner-than-expected climate forcing.” However, it concludes with the good news that the worst possible scenarios can be prevented by “immediate, cohesive, and decisive action to both cut emissions and assist vulnerable countries adapt.”
Carbon emissions decreased the last two years
During the two years since 2007, carbon emissions decreased nine percent, according to a Earth Policy Institute study. The study attributes the decrease partly to the recession, but also partly to energy efficiency gains and replacing coal with “natural gas, wind, solar, and geothermal energy.”
In 2008, oil use decreased five percent, coal one percent, and carbon emissions three percent. Estimates for 2009 show oil use decreased five percent. Carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels decreased nine percent since 2007. Coal expected to decrease five percent.
Electricity use decreased, and there is the potential for it to decrease further. The Rocky Mountain Institute calculated that if the 40 least efficient states reached the energy efficiency of the ten most efficient states, national electricity would be reduced by one-third; the equivalent of 62 percent of the nation’s coal-fired power plants closing.
Lester Brown of the Earth Policy Institute, stated that the U.S. ended “a century of rising carbon emissions and has now entered a new energy era, one of declining emissions.”
Read more: global warming, climate change
comments
The Human Species really has a hard time with taking responsibility for its actions. Bottom Line, WE POLLUTE
The Rainforests are the lungs of the earth and what are we doing we are cutting them down, they also help control the temperature of the planet and at the current rate of destruction they will be gone by 2040. So we can start gasping for oxygen by then, I have no use for skeptics what they should do is educate themselves. Basically, we cause the problem now it's time to pay the bill greed is a terrible thing it will destroy the human race.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Its all very well and good saying naysayers are scared of change, but let it be noted that this one is not. Yes there are going to be changes in climate, it is a natural phenomena, it is cyclic and its called mother nature. There are more contentious issues involving our planet with pollution than trying to control CO2.
The biggest problem and one people do not realize is we humans are a migratory people the same as the animals and the birds the world over. We have chosen to rivet ourselves in one spot, in one small square and expect or should I say, demand that nothing changes?
Recently we have seen earthquakes and tsunamis and in reality this is going to get worse and not because of an accumulation of CO2. One of the most diverse ways man can assist in balance with mother nature is to do as mother nature intended and this starts with agriculture.
Agriculture has stopped natural sequestration of CO2, now farmers are beginning to realize that they play a big part in natural CO2 capture and those that are turning back to this way of farming are reaping the benefits as CO2 is a natural food and crop yields are starting to increase again.
In Roman times the temperature of the earth was some 3 degrees C higher than they are now and farming was in abundance. All this information can be found online if people care to look and stop being scientific.
The truth of the matter is the planet is undergoing change with or without mans contribution are you ready for it?
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
By the way, Reagan B wouldn't be the first person the reject the views of the majority only to eventually have it that the majority was wrong.
The majority telling you you're wrong doesn't by shear force make them right.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
I'm not sure who Dian is ranting at about "the reality of the situation"? No one denies it's reality (atleast any reasonable person) but I also don't think theories about this being an unavoidable aspect of nature should be denied either.
It's to accept this theory because it's something we have no control over...no matter how bad we want it or afraid of looking at what that might mean. But truthfully, we know that this has happened before and while it does make life nicer and the air cleaner to take care of the planet that takes care of us...how much time is wasted on worrying about the inevitable, rather than insuring people make the most of the time we have. How sad is that?
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
It's here. It's real. Whether you believe it or not, it is here. It is real. If you were MY AGE, you would KNOW it is real.
While ALL of it may not be caused hy humans, YES, 75-80% is!
Don't hand me that crap about It is not real. You must still be WET behind the ears!
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Reagan B... You are among the minority of people that disbelieve in global warming as caused by man. 84% of all scientists are in support of global warming. The other 16% can be argued to be lobbiests. The 84% of scientists who support global warming are not supporting it because they have money to gain from it, science always has room to grow, without global warming as an issue, they would have other avenues to explore; it is just a pertinant issue.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Unfortunately even though the data is correct or close to it the reason for climate change are incorrect and also unpreventable.
If we could get the archeologists, climate change scientists, and astronomers together then the answer would be apparent. Every 12,000 to 20,000 years the planet undergoes a shift of magnetic poles. This is proven through archeology. It basically means that the north and south magnetic fields trade places. this is "normal" in planetray terms. this is also why we are seeing our climate model changing slowly right now.
This will speed up. In 2012 earth will be lined up with the Milky Way galaxies magnetic rift; or center. This is proven through astronomy. This is also a "normal" planetary function and unstoppable.
It is at this point the earth will complete it's pole shifting and if it occurs slowly we will see minimal further damage. If it occurs rapidly then we could be in for many cataclysmic events in a short period of time.
Either way; it is normal, we are just the unfortunate generations living through it.
That being said it doesn't hurt to reduce overall emissions, recycle, and keep pursuing green vs. fossil fuel technologies. If for nothing else than purer air and a better standard of living for more people.
My analysis is rock solid. Check it out for yourselves.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
If enough of us speak out loud and clear, and commit to change--talk is always the easiest of those two--we can get government to listen. An interesting point--the much-maligned Chinese have invested heavily in clean technology and has earmarked nearly 10 percent of its recent $586 billion stimulus package for sustainable development; and has established a renewable energy target of 15 percent of primary energy consumption by 2020. Can't we at least match their efforts?
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
I think its safe to say that most, excluding the one track minded Rush Limpballs and his dildo-head followers, will all concur that CO2 traps heat no matter what side of the Global Warming issue one's on. Most will also agree that the earth is warming.
So, why is the part where emitting hundreds of thousands more tons per year of the gas into the atmosphere and oceans split the arguers into different camps? Doesn't it make sense that more CO2 will only create a more exorbitant accummulation and add to the demisive situation no matter what one feels is the original cause of the event.
So what if there are multiple source points to Global Warming, why add to its ill-effects?
The point is, when it comes to the end result the naysayers begin to disagree and argue not for what is actually happening, for they can read and see results. It is merely due to fear of change. They are quite comfortable in the status quo of how America's energy industries contemporarily operate and do not want it to change whether it stems from greed in benefiting monetarily from current practice or from ignorance in being swayed by those who are benefitting.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Reduce Global Warming? Stop supporting the number one cause: animal agriculture. Al Gore and most people ignore this most important action.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Facebook account:
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.
1277154