2012 is the year we learned Climate Change is Real. 2013 will be the year we get Sticker Shock.

[Junkdrawer]

So now you're convinced. Climate Change is real and we better address the issue.

Great.

Now, we have to figure out what is necessary. And that ALL depends on what CO2 level is beneath the various tipping points in the climate systems.

What tipping points? See this video:

Three numbers: 350, 450 and 550. Those are parts-per-million figures for carbon. 350 is what Bill McKibbon and Jim Hansen believe is the danger threshold for carbon. 450 is what the IPCC has been and will probably continue to use as the basis for suggested governmental action. 550 or more is what the Big Oil lobby wants to push.

Today, we're at 391.07 ( see: http://co2now.org/)

If 350 is correct, we will need to radically restructure of our society to address the issue.

If 450 is correct, we might, might, be able to stay under the limit by aggressive-but-not-radical industrial and social changes.

If 550 is correct, we can burn all the cheap oil and change sometime before we need to go to, say, shell oil.

The problem is that while 450 and 550 might be politically expedient, 350 looks to be the actual answer. And while on most issues a "the perfect is the enemy of the good" philosophy kind of works, on this issue it's deadly.

More later. Even an overview of the cluster of issues that surround Climate Change is more than one post can contain. But I'm warning you: this will NOT be easy. And when the costs of addressing Climate Change start to come out, you can expect a push-back.

[Taverner]

1. I think it might be too late

We might be able to keep it from getting worse, but it's going to take a few hundred years before it goes back to "normal"

[Junkdrawer]

3. There's "worse" and there's "WORSE".

I've been spending a good bit of the last year doing an intensive (the wife would say obsessive) study of the issue.

We really, really need to roll up the sleeves and get started. As a nation. As a planet. The alternatives are just too awful.

[sendero]

9. Let me know..

... when you figure out how you are going to get China, India and Brazil on board, for starters.

In the history of mankind and the totality of human nature, I just don't see any real action taking place on this issue.

So while I wish you luck, I'm not holding my breath here. I believe we are in for some nasty weather for a very long time. And I believe it will have to get much much must nastier and more widespread before there is a glimmer of a hope of getting the developing nations on board.

[Taverner]

11. There is only one way to do that

Find an energy source they can obtain and use that costs less than coal or gas

[Junkdrawer]

13. My crazy idea....

How hard would it be to develop a deep underground heat exchanger? The oil guys do deep directional drilling. Could we drill an underground star pattern and then bury a heat exchanger? Kind of a large scale heat-pump? I mean, our planet is really a big ball of intensely hot magma with a relatively thin crust. If we could only tap that energy.

[AverageJoe90]

16. Geothermal?

[Junkdrawer]

18. Advanced geothermal

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2011/07/advanced-geothermal-projects-garner-another-11-million-in-doe-grant-money

[Taverner]

22. Or a solar farm in space

Sending the power to the earth via microwave

[sendero]

25. Well..

.... the end-game for this entire scenario will be some kind of technological breakthrough for energy. I mean like something we don't even know about right now.

[AverageJoe90]

7. We definitely CAN keep it from getting worse, it's just a matter of how and when.

Luckily for us, we have some very hard-working minds on our side. Skeptical Science had a highly valuable article that details just a few things we can do.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/solving-global-warming-not-easy-but-not-too-hard.html

TBH, it may indeed be too late to completely reverse Arctic ice loss and cut back on emissions without also needing sequestration. And certainly, most of the species that have gone extinct may never be savable. Sad but true.

But we can still act, and better to do it sooner rather than later: we wait too long, and direct Co2 output, along with feedbacks(such as methane), could possibly make ~6*C a reality. The odds are not all that high, TBH, but it's not a gamble we can afford to take. At all.

[Junkdrawer]

10. Again, that program keeps us under 500 ppm. Better than Business-As-Usual....

(or the planned Worse-than-Business-As-Usual) but it may not be nearly enough.

Hence my Sticker Shock concern. If a patient needs aggressive chemo, and you know that the only thing they will accept is a change of diet.... Tough moral call.

[AverageJoe90]

15. I don't think 500 ppm will be enough, either.

Of course, granted, we'll still be here and in all likelihood, so will global civilization. How well off we'll be is another question altogether. We might be able to stabilize at 400-425 or so with just plain old emissions reduction but I'm afraid that might not really be enough now. We really do need to start thinking about sequestration because now, it'll make a world of a difference.

[Junkdrawer]

17. I read that the next IPCC Report will have carbon sequestration in it....

I hate to think what the report after that will need to include "And by 2050, after we solve the plasma containment problem and deploy cheap Fusion energy..."

[AverageJoe90]

19. Well.....

I really don't see what plasma has to do with this, TBH. Care to elaborate?

[Junkdrawer]

23. Plasma containment has been the Holy Grail in the search for fusion power.....

Fusing hydrogen into helium requires such high temperatures that the hydrogen atoms loose their electrons and you have a superheated plasma. Any normal containment would cool the plasma, so magnetic containment is needed. But the moving hydrogen nuclei creates magnetic fields that breach the containment. So finding a topology that allows for both has been the Holy Grail.

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokamak

[AverageJoe90]

24. Interesting. n/t

[Taverner]

12. If it's true, it would be nice

But I just can't see us getting together over this - AND I can't see the fossil fuel companies, China, India, and everyone else to get onboard.


They would rather be rich and dead than alive and not rich

[AverageJoe90]

14. It's true, alright.

But we do indeed face the issue of inaction....however, though, there's one bright spot: I don't see China surviving for too much longer in its present condition, and India's not going to escape unscathed, either.

[Gregorian]

2. And the next phase is when people realize that CO2 is only a piece of the problem. Just a symptom.

But by the time we actually start making changes, I have to wonder if it will be too late for many of the problems we are seeing.

Fisheries, acidification of oceans, deforestation, renewable energy.

And people are still going to need stuff in a hurry. That means until we can develop planes that fly without fossil fuel, we will be still be burning massive amounts of petroleum.

And then there is the carbon footprint of the world's military machines.

The answer is simple. But no one wants to hear it. SLOWER. SMALLER.

Slower. Smaller. I hate to say it, but I'm not optimistic that people will ever accept those two things. I doubt most people will even agree that those are the actual problems. I've said it over and over on DU, and it just gets argumentative replies nearly every time. And we're the "smart" ones.

[Taverner]

5. AND CO2 is only one greenhouse gas

Methane is also reason for concern

[Junkdrawer]

6. Resource depletion is the biggie. The Industrial Revolution seems to be a self-limiting event....

Science and technology lets you dig stuff from the ground and give large numbers of people a To-The-Manor-Born lifestyle. And then the stuff runs out. And before it runs out completely, you make do with poorer and poorer ores by using more and more fossil fuels. And burning more and more fossil fuels....

[AverageJoe90]

8. Slower and Smaller?

If you're talking about growth and population, respectively, I'm afraid that that will not only not stop the polluters but may actually embolden them in the near future.

And no, it won't be too late to turn around. But when we do it will definitely make a world of difference. Do we want a world in which parts of the Great Plains have begun to return to desert, India's monsoon is now only a once in a few years event, and a London whose average high reaches something on the order of 88, 90 in July, instead of 75 as today? All are indeed possible by 2100 in a 5-6*C world where we went on, business as usual, and all the plausible feedbacks, methane and otherwise, kicked in(maybe 7*C in the absolute worst case!). Or can we try to mitigate the problem back down to a more manageable level? It's not a question of whether we can do the latter. The science says we most certainly can. The question is, when will we finally do it?

[Taverner]

21. I would LOVE to see population reduction. However, it ain't gonna happen...

As long as we still have religion.

[Gregorian]

33. The fact is, we are the polluters. All of us. It's the billion cars. The thousands of jets. Heating.

It's not some group of rich people running corporations. How could they possibly cause all of this global warming by themselves? They are fueled by OUR consumption.

The more of us, the more they make for us. It's quite simple: we smartly, and rightfully, got tired of being sick, tired of lightly fires for heat, and decided to do something more convenient. In other words, something that took our effort and burden, and put it on the planet's back. That's fine until we went past the point where the natural equilibrium of the planet could handle it.

Fast equals more energy. More equals more energy. It's these two things that are causing the problem. A horse is slow. But it does not cause global warming. Two people driving cars is not the problem. 1 billion cars is.

[Taverner]

20. Many may not like this, but the answer is synthetic meat

Once we discover that technology, then we won't have to overgraze, overfish and overherd the world

[handsomebwonderful]

30. Boca Burgers

those vegetarian Boca Burgers taste fantastic and are so much healthier than the typical meat patty

[Uncle Joe]

4. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Junkdrawer.

[GeorgeGist]

26. Where have you been the last 20 years?

[Jamastiene]

27. Many people refuse to believe it until it is knocking on the door.

Well, in the case of climate change, more like banging on the door, knocking the door down, then getting in their faces. Only then will some people realize it is real, sadly.

[Junkdrawer]

28. I've known about CO2 and climate in a general way for a while....

But all the details...

Carbon numbers...how long lived carbon is in the atmosphere....all the feedback loops...the connections to resource depletion

It's a lot to take in.

[handsomebwonderful]

29. .

Help me out - I know way less about climate change than I should

How do other countries and governments regard climate change? Are we alone in our anti-science head burrowing?

will check out Al Gore's film

[Junkdrawer]

31. The US was one of the few hold-outs to the Kyoto Protocol....

Since then a search for international agreement on climate change has gone poorly:

Rich countries have threatened to cut vital aid to the developing nations if they do not back the deal agreed at the UN climate summit in Copenhagen, it has emerged.

The pressure on poor countries to support the US, EU and UK-brokered Copenhagen accord came as 190 countries resumed UN climate talks in Bonn in an atmosphere of mutual suspicion.

"The pressure to back the west has been intense," said a senior African diplomat. "It was done at a very high level and nothing was written down. It was made very clear by the EU, UK, France and the US that if they did not back them then they would suffer."

According to other African climate diplomats, threats to cut aid were accompanied by promises of financial support for countries that complied.

....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/11/climate-aid-threats-copenhagen-accord

[handsomebwonderful]

32. Interesting

thanks!