Comments on: Is 450 ppm (or less) politically possible? Part 0: The alternative is humanity’s self-destruction http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/ The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:38:10 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Asteroid Miner http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-59478 Asteroid Miner Tue, 26 May 2009 06:10:56 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-59478 Joe Romm: The tundra has not survived 387 ppm CO2 which is 430 ppm equivalent due to the other greenhouse gasses. Those tipping points turn out to be already crossed and only draconian action can save us, if it is still possible. I mean really extreme action is necesary to avoid the extinction of Homo Sap. Tipping points already crossed: Tipping Point 1. Reference: "With Speed And Violence" by Fred Pearce, 2007. Mr. Pearce has seen formerly frozen peat bogs in the tundra in Siberia that are now lakes outgassing so much methane that they don't freeze over in Siberian winter. There is enough methane in tundra peat bogs to raise the global temperature by 18 to 21 degrees Fahrenheit. Reference: "Six Degrees" by Mark Lynas. Another 10 degrees Fahrenheit will surely cause our extinction. Tipping Point 2. Methane is bubbling out of the Arctic Ocean. This methane is coming from the methane clathrates that are frozen at the bottom of the ocean. [A CLATHRATE is an ice thing that traps methane.] Tipping Point 3. Loss of ice on the Arctic Ocean. The dark ocean water absorbs sunlight. Ice on the ocean reflects sunlight. A change in the amount of ice tends to run away. We are about to cross Tipping Point 4. 450 parts per million [ppm] CO2 equivalent. We are at 387 ppm CO2 but when you add in the CH4 [methane] and the other greenhouse gasses, we Are at 430 ppm equivalent and rising fast. "The vanishing Face of Gaia" by James Lovelock, 2009, page 153 says that paleohistory shows a sudden 9 degree rise at 450 ppm equivalent. The physics is not stated. We are almost there. Note that climate does not change in a continuous, linear fashion. The climate lurches. The climate has in the past made many sudden and unexpected changes. There seem to be stable states. In between stable states, the climate jumps back and forth between the stable states. Arctic ocean ice makes as much difference as 70% of the 386 ppm of CO2. Source: "The vanishing Face of Gaia" by James Lovelock, 2009. With Zero CO2, the earth average temperature would be at, if memory serves, [don't depend on my memory] 18 degrees below zero Centigrade. Actual earth average temperature is 15 degrees centigrade above zero. That is a 33 degree centigrade difference. Melting all of the Arctic ocean ice adds 70% of 33C which is 23 degrees centigrade or 41.4 degrees Fahrenheit. Add 20 degrees for the methane coming out of the tundra peat bogs and 20 degrees for the methane coming out of the Arctic Ocean clathrates. That makes 81 degrees of temperature rise. If the land temperature is above 75 degrees F, it turns into a desert because of fast evaporation. Source: "The vanishing Face of Gaia" by James Lovelock, 2009. The sum of the 3 tipping points that we have already tipped is 8 TIMES what is required to make Homo Sapiens extinct. We not only have to shut down ALL coal fired power plants NOW. We also have to cover the peat bog lakes and the Arctic Ocean with some kind of reflective surface so that they can freeze over again. We have to collect the methane that is coming from the bog lakes and the ocean and use it as fuel because methane is such a powerful greenhouse gas. I don't know how to cover all of that surface, so here is a silly idea: Cover the ocean with ping pong balls. I don't know how to collect methane from such a wide area either. Joe Romm: The tundra has not survived 387 ppm CO2 which is 430 ppm equivalent due to the other greenhouse gasses. Those tipping points turn out to be already crossed and only draconian action can save us, if it is still possible. I mean really extreme action is necesary to avoid the extinction of Homo Sap. Tipping points already crossed:
Tipping Point 1. Reference: “With Speed And Violence” by Fred Pearce, 2007. Mr. Pearce has seen formerly frozen peat bogs in the tundra in Siberia that are now lakes outgassing so much methane that they don’t freeze over in Siberian winter. There is enough methane in tundra peat bogs to raise the global temperature by 18 to 21 degrees Fahrenheit. Reference: “Six Degrees” by Mark Lynas. Another 10 degrees Fahrenheit will surely cause our extinction.
Tipping Point 2. Methane is bubbling out of the Arctic Ocean. This methane is coming from the methane clathrates that are frozen at the bottom of the ocean. [A CLATHRATE is an ice thing that traps methane.]
Tipping Point 3. Loss of ice on the Arctic Ocean. The dark ocean water absorbs sunlight. Ice on the ocean reflects sunlight. A change in the amount of ice tends to run away.
We are about to cross Tipping Point 4. 450 parts per million [ppm] CO2 equivalent. We are at 387 ppm CO2 but when you add in the CH4 [methane] and the other greenhouse gasses, we Are at 430 ppm equivalent and rising fast. “The vanishing Face of Gaia” by James Lovelock, 2009, page 153 says that paleohistory shows a sudden 9 degree rise at 450 ppm equivalent. The physics is not stated. We are almost there. Note that climate does not change in a continuous, linear fashion. The climate lurches. The climate has in the past made many sudden and unexpected changes. There seem to be stable states. In between stable states, the climate jumps back and forth between the stable states.
Arctic ocean ice makes as much difference as 70% of the 386 ppm of CO2. Source: “The vanishing Face of Gaia” by James Lovelock, 2009. With Zero CO2, the earth average temperature would be at, if memory serves, [don't depend on my memory] 18 degrees below zero Centigrade. Actual earth average temperature is 15 degrees centigrade above zero. That is a 33 degree centigrade difference. Melting all of the Arctic ocean ice adds 70% of 33C which is 23 degrees centigrade or 41.4 degrees Fahrenheit. Add 20 degrees for the methane coming out of the tundra peat bogs and 20 degrees for the methane coming out of the Arctic Ocean clathrates. That makes 81 degrees of temperature rise. If the land temperature is above 75 degrees F, it turns into a desert because of fast evaporation. Source: “The vanishing Face of Gaia” by James Lovelock, 2009. The sum of the 3 tipping points that we have already tipped is 8 TIMES what is required to make Homo Sapiens extinct.
We not only have to shut down ALL coal fired power plants NOW. We also have to cover the peat bog lakes and the Arctic Ocean with some kind of reflective surface so that they can freeze over again. We have to collect the methane that is coming from the bog lakes and the ocean and use it as fuel because methane is such a powerful greenhouse gas. I don’t know how to cover all of that surface, so here is a silly idea: Cover the ocean with ping pong balls. I don’t know how to collect methane from such a wide area either.

]]> By: Asteroid Miner http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-59471 Asteroid Miner Tue, 26 May 2009 05:54:59 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-59471 Mr [is it Mark?] Raven is an example of why I want to be involved with my local school board. If every high school student was required to take 4 years of physics, 4 years of chemistry, 4 years of biology and 8 years [double classes] of math, we would not have problems like Mr. Raven. We need laboratories in all high schools good enough to enable/require every high school student to repeat the 1850s research on the optical properties of CO2. Having done the experiment himself, Mr. Raven would understand the role of CO2 in global climate. He would also understand the difference between science and rhetoric. Namely that you don't argue with Nature. [Insert margarin commercial concerning the hazards of trying to fool Mother Nature.] Nature is always the one who determines the right answer, never you. Mr. Raven's arrogance amounts to blastphemy against Nature. Mr [is it Mark?] Raven is an example of why I want to be involved with my local school board. If every high school student was required to take 4 years of physics, 4 years of chemistry, 4 years of biology and 8 years [double classes] of math, we would not have problems like Mr. Raven. We need laboratories in all high schools good enough to enable/require every high school student to repeat the 1850s research on the optical properties of CO2. Having done the experiment himself, Mr. Raven would understand the role of CO2 in global climate. He would also understand the difference between science and rhetoric. Namely that you don’t argue with Nature. [Insert margarin commercial concerning the hazards of trying to fool Mother Nature.] Nature is always the one who determines the right answer, never you. Mr. Raven’s arrogance amounts to blastphemy against Nature.

]]> By: Dave http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-57112 Dave Thu, 21 May 2009 22:00:42 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-57112 Joe, When will the people who claim that they are concerned about global heating begin to scream for a rapid build-up of new nuclear capacity? Even at this late stage of the game, I barely hear whispers. I find it difficult to take seriously climate control advocates who either completely discount or only half-heartedly endorse a massive replacement of fossil-fired power plants with nuclear plants. The existing capabilities of "green" power alternatives just don't cut it. Nuclear's the only technology available to meet energy demands without breaking the bank and baking the planet. Thanks. Joe,

When will the people who claim that they are concerned about global heating begin to scream for a rapid build-up of new nuclear capacity? Even at this late stage of the game, I barely hear whispers.

I find it difficult to take seriously climate control advocates who either completely discount or only half-heartedly endorse a massive replacement of fossil-fired power plants with nuclear plants.

The existing capabilities of “green” power alternatives just don’t cut it. Nuclear’s the only technology available to meet energy demands without breaking the bank and baking the planet.

Thanks.

]]> By: Day Trading http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-44507 Day Trading Sat, 02 May 2009 01:42:02 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-44507 Nice post I am going to look around your site seems you have some great stuff and will be giving you a link back from my site. Nice post I am going to look around your site seems you have some great stuff and will be giving you a link back from my site.

]]> By: Rav http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-34934 Rav Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:12:51 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-34934 Joe, This might sound mad, but I think we need a clearer, more emotive explanation of the world 1000ppm+ would create. The phrase "humanity's self-destruction" is effective, but the idea of "sea level rise of 80 feet to 250 feet" is not scary in the way that "New York underwater" would be. I understand reluctance to make specific predictions; but I often find that when I read descriptions of life in a 5-degree or more warmer world, I find myself thinking, "that doesn't sound too awful." Is there any level of warming where the actual extinction of human life becomes likely? If not, would it be possible to estimate an overall "death toll" for, say, 6 degrees of warming? Joe,

This might sound mad, but I think we need a clearer, more emotive explanation of the world 1000ppm+ would create. The phrase “humanity’s self-destruction” is effective, but the idea of “sea level rise of 80 feet to 250 feet” is not scary in the way that “New York underwater” would be. I understand reluctance to make specific predictions; but I often find that when I read descriptions of life in a 5-degree or more warmer world, I find myself thinking, “that doesn’t sound too awful.”

Is there any level of warming where the actual extinction of human life becomes likely? If not, would it be possible to estimate an overall “death toll” for, say, 6 degrees of warming?

]]> By: フランチャイズ http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-32984 フランチャイズ Mon, 16 Mar 2009 08:19:44 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-32984 We need to nationalize the coal fired power plants, and convert them to carbonized biomass power as in the article from U. of Hawaii. Convert these power plants also to oxy-fuel combustion and sequestration by deep injection, as in the Scientific American article above. <a href="http://www.cashingdesk.com" rel="nofollow">おまとめローン</a> We need to nationalize the coal fired power plants, and convert them to carbonized biomass power as in the article from U. of Hawaii. Convert these power plants also to oxy-fuel combustion and sequestration by deep injection, as in the Scientific American article above. おまとめローン

]]> By: msn nickleri http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-26363 msn nickleri Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:58:14 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-26363 Paul K, there is a plan, but you keep suggesting is unnecessary for unknown reasons. It involves putting a price on GHG emissions (e.g. cap-auction-rebate or many other schemes). Paul K, there is a plan, but you keep suggesting is unnecessary for unknown reasons. It involves putting a price on GHG emissions (e.g. cap-auction-rebate or many other schemes).

]]> By: superyumancrew http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-19143 superyumancrew Mon, 15 Sep 2008 13:23:18 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-19143 What to do? Bury global warming - <em>Scientific American</em> - <a href="http://www.climate-change.ir/en/CO2%20Capture%20and%20Storage.pdf" rel="nofollow">Can we Bury Global Warming?</a> With one further wrinkle - University of Hawaii - <a href="http://www.hnei.hawaii.edu/flash_carb_biomass.pdf" rel="nofollow">Flash Carbonization of Biomass</a> Biomass plus sequestration can actually take carbon out of the biosphere and inject it deep into the earth. We need to nationalize the coal fired power plants, and convert them to carbonized biomass power as in the article from U. of Hawaii. Convert these power plants also to oxy-fuel combustion and sequestration by deep injection, as in the Scientific American article above. Convert all other fossil fuel power to carbon capture, except for vehicles, which could run on electricity. Install massive wind and solar networks. And do it really fast. Would that stop it? Maybe not, but it would give us a chance. It's technically possible to fix this thing, I think, but not with the massive amount of psychological denial taking place in the general population. We need to seize the coal fired power plants, for starters, and build a political constituency that will force every government on earth to do this. Otherwise, we are doomed, I think. What to do? Bury global warming –

Scientific American – Can we Bury Global Warming?

With one further wrinkle -

University of Hawaii – Flash Carbonization of Biomass

Biomass plus sequestration can actually take carbon out of the biosphere and inject it deep into the earth. We need to nationalize the coal fired power plants, and convert them to carbonized biomass power as in the article from U. of Hawaii. Convert these power plants also to oxy-fuel combustion and sequestration by deep injection, as in the Scientific American article above. Convert all other fossil fuel power to carbon capture, except for vehicles, which could run on electricity. Install massive wind and solar networks.

And do it really fast.

Would that stop it? Maybe not, but it would give us a chance.

It’s technically possible to fix this thing, I think, but not with the massive amount of psychological denial taking place in the general population. We need to seize the coal fired power plants, for starters, and build a political constituency that will force every government on earth to do this.

Otherwise, we are doomed, I think.

]]> By: Asteroid Miner http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-18133 Asteroid Miner Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:36:42 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-18133 1000 ppm =EXTINCTION Environmental policy = energy policy Energy policy = environmental policy because Global Warming can lead to Hydrogen Sulfide gas coming out of the oceans. Hydrogen Sulfide gas will Kill all people. Homo Sap will go EXTINCT unless drastic action is taken. October 2006 Scientific American "EARTH SCIENCE Impact from the Deep Strangling heat and gases emanating from the earth and sea, not asteroids, most likely caused several ancient mass extinctions. Could the same killer-greenhouse conditions build once again? By Peter D. Ward downloaded from: http://www.sciam.com/ article.cfm?articleID= 00037A5D-A938-150E- A93883414B7F0000& sc=I100322 ....................Most of the article omitted...................... But with atmospheric carbon climbing at an annual rate of 2 ppm and expected to accelerate to 3 ppm, levels could approach 900 ppm by the end of the next century, and conditions that bring about the beginnings of ocean anoxia may be in place. How soon after that could there be a new greenhouse extinction? That is something our society should never find out." Press Release Pennsylvania State University FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, Nov. 3, 2003 downloaded from: http://www.geosociety.org/meetings/2003/prPennStateKump.htm "In the end-Permian, as the levels of atmospheric oxygen fell and the levels of hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide rose, the upper levels of the oceans could have become rich in hydrogen sulfide catastrophically. This would kill most of the oceanic plants and animals. The hydrogen sulfide dispersing in the atmosphere would kill most terrestrial life." www.astrobio.net is a NASA web zine. See: http://www.astrobio.net/ news/modules.php?op= modload&name=News& file=article&sid=672 http://www.astrobio.net/ news/modules.php?op= modload&name=News& file=article&sid=1535 http://www.astrobio.net/ news/article2509.html http://astrobio.net/news/ modules.php?op=modload &name=News&file=article &sid=2429&mode=thread &order=0&thold=0 These articles agree with the first 2. They all say 6 degrees C or 1000 parts per million CO2 is the extinction point. The global warming is already 1.3 degree Farenheit. 11 degrees Farenheit is about 6 degrees Celsius. The book "Six Degrees" by Mark Lynas agrees. If the global warming is 6 degrees centigrade, we humans go extinct. See: http://www.marklynas.org/ 2007/4/23/six-steps-to-hell- summary-of-six-degrees-as- published-in-the-guardian "Under a Green Sky" by Peter D. Ward, Ph.D., 2007. Paleontologist discusses mass extinctions of the past and the one we are doing to ourselves. ALL COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS MUST BE CONVERTED TO NUCLEAR IMMEDIATELY TO AVOID THE EXTINCTION OF US HUMANS. 32 countries have nuclear power plants. Only 9 have the bomb. The top 3 producers of CO2 all have nuclear power plants, coal fired power plants and nuclear bombs. They are the USA, China and India. Reducing CO2 production by 90% by 2050 requires drastic action in the USA, China and India. King Coal has to be demoted to a commoner. Coal must be left in the earth. If you own any coal stock, NOW is the time to dump it, regardless of loss, because it will soon be worthless. I have no financial connection to the nuclear power industry. 1000 ppm =EXTINCTION
Environmental policy = energy policy
Energy policy = environmental policy
because Global Warming
can lead to Hydrogen Sulfide gas coming out of the oceans.

Hydrogen Sulfide gas will Kill all people. Homo Sap will go
EXTINCT unless drastic action is taken.

October 2006 Scientific American

“EARTH SCIENCE
Impact from the Deep
Strangling heat and gases emanating from the earth and sea, not
asteroids, most likely caused several ancient mass extinctions.
Could the same killer-greenhouse conditions build once again?
By Peter D. Ward
downloaded from:
http://www.sciam.com/
article.cfm?articleID=
00037A5D-A938-150E-
A93883414B7F0000&
sc=I100322
………………..Most of the article omitted………………….
But with atmospheric carbon climbing at an annual rate of 2 ppm
and expected to accelerate to 3 ppm, levels could approach 900
ppm by the end of the next century, and conditions that bring
about the beginnings of ocean anoxia may be in place. How soon
after that could there be a new greenhouse extinction? That is
something our society should never find out.”

Press Release
Pennsylvania State University
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, Nov. 3, 2003
downloaded from:
http://www.geosociety.org/ meetings/ 2003/ prPennStateKump.htm
“In the end-Permian, as the levels of atmospheric oxygen fell and
the levels of hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide rose, the upper
levels of the oceans could have become rich in hydrogen sulfide
catastrophically. This would kill most of the oceanic plants and
animals. The hydrogen sulfide dispersing in the atmosphere would
kill most terrestrial life.”

http://www.astrobio.net is a NASA web zine. See:

http://www.astrobio.net/
news/modules.php?op=
modload&name=News&
file=article&sid=672

http://www.astrobio.net/
news/modules.php?op=
modload&name=News&
file=article&sid=1535

http://www.astrobio.net/
news/article2509.html

http://astrobio.net/news/
modules.php?op=modload
&name=News&file=article
&sid=2429&mode=thread
&order=0&thold=0

These articles agree with the first 2. They all say 6 degrees C or
1000 parts per million CO2 is the extinction point.

The global warming is already 1.3 degree Farenheit. 11 degrees
Farenheit is about 6 degrees Celsius. The book “Six Degrees” by
Mark Lynas agrees. If the global warming is 6 degrees
centigrade, we humans go extinct. See:
http://www.marklynas.org/
2007/4/23/six-steps-to-hell-
summary-of-six-degrees-as-
published-in-the-guardian

“Under a Green Sky” by Peter D. Ward, Ph.D., 2007.
Paleontologist discusses mass extinctions of the past and the one
we are doing to ourselves.

ALL COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS MUST BE
CONVERTED TO NUCLEAR IMMEDIATELY TO AVOID
THE EXTINCTION OF US HUMANS. 32 countries have
nuclear power plants. Only 9 have the bomb. The top 3
producers of CO2 all have nuclear power plants, coal fired power
plants and nuclear bombs. They are the USA, China and India.
Reducing CO2 production by 90% by 2050 requires drastic action
in the USA, China and India. King Coal has to be demoted to a
commoner. Coal must be left in the earth. If you own any coal
stock, NOW is the time to dump it, regardless of loss, because it
will soon be worthless.
I have no financial connection to the nuclear power industry.

]]> By: Jon http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-14371 Jon Fri, 13 Jun 2008 02:28:42 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/04/26/is-450-ppm-or-less-politically-possible-part-0-the-alternative-is-humanitys-self-destruction/#comment-14371 It is interesting to me that no one in this discusion has talked about the other sources of heating that are a result of the present increase in CO2; the feedback loops, deforestation, open water at the poles becoming heat sinks, increases in tropical cyclones moving more heat toward the poles, the oceans abilities to soak up CO2 slowing, all of these and many more, more important at a level of CO2 at 450 ppm, in causing increased warming than the CO2 level itself. As I understand it, once the temperature has reached a point to set off multiple tipping points and feedback loops, the CO2 level could drop while global warming continued a pace, or even increased in intensity. We have a collision of factors that will occur with unmitigated disaster, similar to what is now happening to the US and World Economy, where it is now no longer possible to stop the disaster by controlling inflation, or creating jobs, or strengthening the dollar, but it will require a huge combination of treatments to stave off a collapse of the World Economy! It is interesting to me that no one in this discusion has talked about the other sources of heating that are a result of the present increase in CO2; the feedback loops, deforestation, open water at the poles becoming heat sinks, increases in tropical cyclones moving more heat toward the poles, the oceans abilities to soak up CO2 slowing, all of these and many more, more important at a level of CO2 at 450 ppm, in causing increased warming than the CO2 level itself. As I understand it, once the temperature has reached a point to set off multiple tipping points and feedback loops, the CO2 level could drop while global warming continued a pace, or even increased in intensity. We have a collision of factors that will occur with unmitigated disaster, similar to what is now happening to the US and World Economy, where it is now no longer possible to stop the disaster by controlling inflation, or creating jobs, or strengthening the dollar, but it will require a huge combination of treatments to stave off a collapse of the World Economy!

]]>