What the scientists know 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    # 1 Must Know climate change fact  from  IPCC 2007 

    Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007

    #1 Must  Know  climate change  graph from  IPCC 2007

This IPCC graph shows the result from climate change

computer models of reducing CO2 emissions from no reduction (consant) to 100% reduction (zero).

 

 

 

 

Only a 100% reduction of CO2 emissions to Zero results in the atmopheric CO2 level (very slowly) dropping and then levelling out (stabilizing).

 

 

 

Feb 2008  Carnegie Institiute Global Ecology. 

'Global Warming Inevitable for the next 500 years'     (from Science Daily) even with Only Zero emissions.

Ken Caldeira and Damon Matthews used an Earth system model at the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology to simulate the response of the Earth’s climate to different levels of carbon dioxide emission over the next 500 years.

Matthews and Caldeira found that to prevent the Earth from heating further, carbon dioxide emissions would, effectively, need to be eliminated.

The scientists investigated how much climate changes as a result of each individual emission of carbon dioxide, and found that each increment of emission leads to another increment of warming.

So quite simply, to avoid additional warming, we have to avoid additional emissions.

With emissions set to zero in the simulations, the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere slowly fell as carbon “sinks” such as the oceans and land vegetation absorbed the gas. The model predicted that global temperatures would remain high for at least 500 years after carbon dioxide emissions ceased. (Latest is that it is over 1000years)

Just as an iron skillet will stay hot and keep cooking after the stove burner’s turned off, heat held in the oceans will keep the climate warm even as the heating effect of greenhouse gases diminishes. Adding more greenhouse gases, even at a rate lower than today, would worsen the situation and the effects would persist for centuries.

Global carbon dioxide emissions and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations are both growing at record rates. Even if we could freeze emissions at today’s levels, atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations would continue to increase. If we could stabilize atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations, the Earth would continue heating up.

Geophysical Research Letters, doi:10.1029/2007GL032388

The scientists' position on mitigating global climate change (stopping global warming) is at least a 50% GHGas emissions reduction on 1990 levels by 2050. As only zero emissions can work this position is far far too late and far too little to prevent catastrophe.

The scientists have supoorted the 2oC political so called danger limit even thought their published research for the past 20 years has shown that anything above 1oC cannot be assumed to be safe- and the evidence for this has been increaseing over that time.  

 

The scientists (with a few notable exceptions) are not caling for a global emergency response and are not even telling the governments and the public the situation is dangerous.  The Guardian newspaper had to polll scientists to get themn confirm the facts and even then they would not have their names published.

 

Two articles carried by the Guardian in April 09 could shed some light on the silence concerning the most crucial single  fact of the cmalite change science.

 

An April 2009  Guardian poll of climate scientists featured in three reports published by the Guardian April 14.

 

The news reports show the scientists have been witholding the full truth from the public and their governments (for almost 20 years).

They are still withholding the truth about the dire emergency situation and witholding the truth on the only way to prevent catastrophe.

They say there is not a hope in Hell of avoiding a catastrophic global warming of over 2oC and far above 2oC.

 

The thing is they do not say is that the only hope there has ever been to keep global warming to a safe level is to aim for zero CO2 emissions and to develop articial carbon sinks to take some carbon out of the air.

 

Nature has published an article Sucking CO2 saying that CO2 can be taken direct out of the air.  The only thing stopping the processes being developed is no money.

 

'Far from over-playing their hand to swell their research coffers, scientists have been toning down their message in an attempt to avoid public despair and inaction.

Just 7% of the 261 experts surveyed (200 of whom were researchers in climate science or related fields) said they thought governments would succeed in restricting global warming to 2C. Nearly two-fifths thought this target was impossible and 46% thought a 3 to 4C rise by the end of the century was most likely.

 

 

 

The Earth we inhabit is mainly water -  so the Earth is like water in a very large iron pot.

Once the Earth in the pot is warmed up if the heat is not turned down it will boil over. 

The heat can be considerablly reduced and it will keep on warming and boil over

.

It the heat control is turned off (no more elecrity = no more GHGas emissions) the pot will

continue to warm for some time and then it will only cool down slowly.

 

We (as a society) are like frogs being warmed up in pot of water.

 

 

 

It is a fact of the CO2 science that if GHGas emissions are not cut to zero catastrophic runaway global heating will be the result.

That's because it is a fact that  Arctic permafrost will thaw  and release its massive frozen store of methane and CO2.

 

Methane has 70 times the heat forcing effect of CO2 over its 12 years lifetime- after which it is oxidized in the atmosphere to CO2.

 

The scientists and the environmentalists have and still are failing to sound the alarm over runaway global heating and failing to say we must go to zero CO2 to avoid this catastrophe.  This the deadly legacy being left to today's children 

                Below is the clear unequivocal statement from the IPCC scientists                     

                 Why are we not hearing this from the climate change scientists                                      

 

 

This 1990 IPCC graph correlates the rate of CO2 emissions (p) with the atmospheric CO2 concentration over time.

 

The CO2 production varies directly with  business as usual economic growth  (fossil fuels).  

 

This model (in 1990) showed that only zero CO2 emissions could reduce the concentration of  atmospheric CO2 .

 

 

 

The 2007 Bali conference heard repeated calls for reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions of 50 per cent by 2050 to avoid exceeding the 2.0C threshold. While such endpoint targets dominate the policy agenda, they do not, in isolation, have a scientific basis and are likely to lead to dangerously misguided policies. To be scientifically credible, policy must be informed by an understanding of cumulative emissions and associated emission pathways.

 

Given the reluctance, at virtually all levels, to openly engage with the unprecedented scale of both current emissions and their associated growth rates, even an optimistic interpretation of the current framing of climate change implies that stabilization much below 650 ppmv CO2e is improbable (4oC by 2100).

 

 

 

 

 

                  The world is denial of what must take to stop global warming

          That denial is condeming all future generations to suffer a Hell on Earth 

                                    

 Below is one of several recent published papers proving Only Zero CO2 emissions....

Without a global emergency response aiming at zero carbon-

                                                             runaway catastrophic heating is inevitable

                                    

              The fact that only Zero CO2 emissions could stop global warming

                 Why are we not hearing this from the environmentalists                                      

 

IPCC 2007 Assessment Science Technical Report. Question 10.3

 

If emissions of Greenhouse gases are reduced, how quickly do their concentrations in the atmosphere decrease?