Climate scientists: it's time for 'Plan B'

[IndianaGreen]

Climate scientists: it's time for 'Plan B'

Poll of international experts by The Independent reveals consensus that CO2 cuts have failed – and their growing support for technological intervention

By Steve Connor, Science Editor and Chris Green
Friday, 2 January 2009

An emergency "Plan B" using the latest technology is needed to save the world from dangerous climate change, according to a poll of leading scientists carried out by The Independent. The collective international failure to curb the growing emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere has meant that an alternative to merely curbing emissions may become necessary.

The plan would involve highly controversial proposals to lower global temperatures artificially through daringly ambitious schemes that either reduce sunlight levels by man-made means or take CO2 out of the air. This "geoengineering" approach – including schemes such as fertilising the oceans with iron to stimulate algal blooms – would have been dismissed as a distraction a few years ago but is now being seen by the majority of scientists we surveyed as a viable emergency backup plan that could save the planet from the worst effects of climate change, at least until deep cuts are made in CO2 emissions.

What has worried many of the experts, who include recognised authorities from the world's leading universities and research institutes, as well as a Nobel Laureate, is the failure to curb global greenhouse gas emissions through international agreements, namely the Kyoto Treaty, and recent studies indicating that the Earth's natural carbon "sinks" are becoming less efficient at absorbing man-made CO2 from the atmosphere.

Levels of CO2 have continued to increase during the past decade since the treaty was agreed and they are now rising faster than even the worst-case scenarios from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations body. In the meantime the natural absorption of CO2 by the world's forests and oceans has decreased significantly. Most of the scientists we polled agreed that the failure to curb emissions of CO2, which are increasing at a rate of 1 per cent a year, has created the need for an emergency "plan B" involving research, development and possible implementation of a worldwide geoengineering strategy.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/climate-scientists-its-time-for-plan-b-1221092.html

[mrreowwr_kittty]

1. P-O-P-U-L-A-T-I-O-N

The real problem that dare not speak its name.

[tinrobot]

3. Yep

[OKIsItJustMe]

8. OK, you spoke it, what do you propose to do about it?

Shall we start the genocides now? Who's first?

[GliderGuider]

9. Well, there are these horsemen I know...

We will collectively do precisely nothing about overpopulation. It will fix itself as it always has in every other overpopulated species. Thinking about humane solutions is noble, but an utterly pointless waste of mental horsepower. Preparing ourselves for the arrival of the horsemen is a better bet, IMO.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

11. It pains me to say but you may be right

This is an area where too many people have shown themselves to be resistant to reason.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

10. Well, I am childfree by choice.

That alone is worth 72 years of recycling.

Seriously though, you can be a smartass and joke about genocide all you want but the plain fact is that we human beings are breeding ourselves out of existence. Overpopulation needs to stop being treated as a taboo subject in public discourse. Contraception needs to be made widely available and its use strongly encouraged. And, I'm sorry to tell you, but policies that incentivize procreation in developed countries need to be ended.

This organization takes the view that the human race should voluntarily become extinct. http://www.vhemt.org/

[Barrett808]

12. I always thought it would be cool to genetically engineer a sterilizing food...

...you can eat, but you can't breed. Sorry.

[OKIsItJustMe]

13. Actually, I'm not being a smartass

The policies you speak of (contraception, sex education, family planning etc.) are important. However, they will only be effective over the span of generations. If you think we're already overpopulated, the only way you will put a real dent in the population is some sort of mass killing (either intentional or incidental.)

So, unless you're proposing that as a solution, you're going to need to find some other way of addressing the problem short term.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

15. Obviously, I'm not for mass killing

And yes we are already overpopulated and it's a big problem. And no, I am not required to come up with a solution because I identified a problem. I did my part by not breeding. Be nice if I lived in a society that didn't view me as a freak and penalize me monetarily and in the workplace for it. Like I said, I don't have the answer but a good start would be people were no longer expected to become parents by everyone else. I constantly get asked why I don't want children but I'll bet you've never been asked why you do (or did) want them. It's just assumed that everyone should have children and hardly anyone examines it or considers the global impact of their personal decision.

[OKIsItJustMe]

16. Why do you assume everyone but yourself (including me)

Has chosen to have children?

[mrreowwr_kittty]

17. I don't know what your situation is

But typically it's parents who get all butt-hurt and offended when people talk about overpopulation. If that's not you, then it's not you. :shrug:

[OKIsItJustMe]

18. "… I'll bet you've never been asked why you do (or did) want them. …"

You're guilty of the very same prejudice you find so abhorrent in others.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

19. Which is what, exactly?

I assumed you are a parent or a would-be parent. I may be wrong about that, but then again you haven't disclosed your situation so I may be right. But so what? Wrongly assuming someone IS a parent is hardly as damaging to the world as assuming that people SHOULD be parents.

[OKIsItJustMe]

20. There is this eco-arrogance, where people imagine they are the only enlightened ones alive

You believe you are the only one (or you and your significant other are the only ones) who are wise enough to see that overpopulation is a problem. (Imagine the odds against you two—the only ones in the entire world who would choose not to have children—meeting one another!?)

Some of us have been quite aware of the "http://www.amazon.com/Population-Bomb-Paul-R-Ehrlich/dp/B000EI3XOS/">population bomb" for decades.

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/population/012510.html

… 20 percent of women 40 to 44 were childless in 2006, twice as high as the level 30 years earlier …

[mrreowwr_kittty]

21. Then there is eco-breeder arrogance

Where people assume that their precious and genetically superior offspring are the non-polluting kind and will, of course, grow up to be Einsteins who will save the planet. :shrug:

Very good news about the increase in childless women.

[stuntcat]

23. I have these 'acquaintances'..

My husband's old highschool buddy and his wife.. they say over and over what serious environmentalists they are, and they're not dummies either, they feel pretty strong about living a way that helps the entire planet! Then they had a baby :eyes: which I could let slide if they didn't pretend they want to save the world. They live in a big house and eat meat 3 times a day and drive the usual family tank.

Anyway.. sorry for sounding bitchy hehe But yeah, it's some serious sense of entitlement/conceit that makes people with any knowledge of what's happening think they're the ones who must procreate.

I'd die before I gave an innocent kid the rest of this century.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

27. You and me both.

There is not one good reason to bring another human being into this world. Not one.

[OKIsItJustMe]

28. Well, that's going a bit overboard

(assuming that you want humanity to survive…)

[mrreowwr_kittty]

29. I'm not so sure I do.

We are a cancer on the earth.

[stuntcat]

31. .

to me it's clear, it's official- we're the species killing the rest of the world. Any 'glory' Mankind has from now on will just be in saving our own asses. Scientists are amazing but no one pays attention to them. People are conceited monkeys.

I love music and art, and I have to give humans some respect for making them, but the natural stuff is just as beautiful and we're wiping it out.

It's a shame that caring enough for the rest of the planet to want the animals killing it to die out is considered overboard, but 99.9% of Humanity does see it that way, oh well.. I'm glad I'm almost 40 and won't have to watch this mess much longer.

[CLANG]

2. We really royally screwed ourselves!

[Gregorian]

4. 1% CO2 increase/year translates to double the CO2 in 70 years.

Using the standard natural logarithm of 2 method. I'm only posting this to give a perspective on how disastrous even a 1% growth rate can be.

My bottom line is compassion. We're in trouble. Now we know it. There are two ways out of this situation that are compassionate. One is abstinence. The other is decreasing CO2 emissions. That's pretty much it.

[quidam56]

5. Bush/Cheney are TOXIC TERRORISTS to Appalachia

Thank GOD for the new hybrid clean coal, the pond spill in East Tennessee will be more environmentally friendly. http://www.wisecountyissues.com Hannity's America sure isn't My America.

[hatrack]

6. We know EXACTLY what we're doing! What could POSSIBLY go wrong?!?

:eyes:

[OKIsItJustMe]

14. If we attempt to address the problem, plenty of things may go wrong.

If we don't attempt to address the problem…

[XemaSab]

7. It's in LBN too

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3668244

[pscot]

22. These discussions are very discouraging

There is no plan B. There was never a coherent plan A. There is no public consensus about the nature and scale of the problem, or even that there is a problem. Meanwhile, each coal fired power plant continues to burn up 100 rail cars of of coal every day, spewing tons of CO2, and the Chinese are bringing a new one on line each week. We sit around yaking it up like we had all the time in the world, while atmospheric carbon drifts inexorably toward 400 parts per million and beyond. The consequences of acting may seem dire, but the consequences of not acting are likely to be disaster on an unimaginable scale, for ourselves, and for all the critters who share the planet with us. It's hard to escape the notion that we are well and truely fucked, with no one to blame but ourselves.

[stuntcat]

24. ..

I couldn't help noticing (in the LBN thread) how many "we better not do anything because 8 billion humans don't have any effect anyway" posts there are.
I joined DU to get away from exactly that.. now I'm ashamed.
My species is starting a mass-extinction and tearing down everything that was beautiful . for what? A nice suburban home and an SUV?

From what I'm seeing here I don't think I'm a Democrat anymore, I don't know what I am. The Ashamed Party.

[OKIsItJustMe]

26. Remember, that you're probably not seeing a statistically accurate sampling

A maxim I learned years ago was, "Statistically speaking, 'the people I know,' makes a really lousy sample."

My personal feeling is that if we do nothing, then there's a pretty good chance that we and most other species on this planet are doomed. With that in mind, "Plan B" (if you will) is the only reasonable plan of action.

I like to think that the "silent majority" agrees.

[GliderGuider]

30. I doubt the silent majority agrees

It's a nice comforting thought, but precious few of the vocal majority agrees. Just check out the comment threads after any newspaper story or op-ed piece on global warming, peak oil or overpopulation. The commenters who show any real sign of getting it are typically outnumbered 3:1 or more by the those whose views range from effectively apathetic ("I changed my lightbulbs, yay!") to downright hostile.

Yes, those comment threads are also small self-selecting samples, but I've seen enough of them now from across the English-speaking world to be convinced that these are the views of the generalized electorate. Imagine, as a politician, trying to sell people with those views on population reduction initiatives or a $2.50/gallon gasoline tax. People will readily accept enforced privation, as long as it's others that have to do without.

[pscot]

32. I see no evidence at all for a silent majority for "plan B"

or any other plan. Judging by the responses to threads on population, carbon taxes, nuclear power generation, etc, I seriously doubt you could muster a majoriy here on DU, much less in the country at large, not to mention the three billion people living in SE Asia, whose cooperation is essential. Hansen spelled it out in his letter to Obama. What's needed is a world wide consensus on the shutdown of coal fired electrical generation. Most of the proposals I've seen either peck at the margins, or offer jam tomorrow. A concerted, government sponsored effort at public education should have begun 15 years ago, under Clinton/Gore. The fact that nothing was done then is one of the more depressing failures of the Clinton years. As a result, we are years behind the curve, and the carbon clock is running, faster than anyone expected.

[MrMonk]

25. Time for "Planet B"?

http://www.throbgoblins.blogspot.com/

I think people tend to rely too much on the idea that there will be technological fixes for global problems. The real solution is to decrease the amount of resources that each person uses, even if that decrease doesn't have a beneficial effect in the short term. Regulation, taxes, etc. can provide disincentives to consume, if people won't change their habits on their own initiative.