Hansen: Tar Sands Means CO2 Game Over

[wtmusic]

"While this blog disagreed with Hansen’s position on nuclear power for base-load electric power, this blog agreed with the position this leading climate scientist takes on tar sands. Treehugger began their interview on Climate Change and Intergenerational Justice by noting Hansen’s concern: 'the phase out of emissions from coal is, itself, an enormous challenge. However, if the tar sands are thrown into the mix, it’s essentially game over.' And, James Hansen elaborated upon his aversion to such development.

'The tar sands are the deposits, primarily in Canada, where there’s oil mixed with sand. And you can extract the oil but it’s a very energy-intensive process. So you end up emitting a lot more carbon dioxide than you would in a pure oil deposit. So it’s not a very efficient way to get energy. But the basic point is that we know there’s enough CO2 in the easily available oil and gas to take us up to the dangerous level of atmospheric CO2.

And what that means is that we can’t afford to develop these unconventional fossil fuels. It just will push us far into the dangerous zone, and we will end up having to try to figure out how to get that CO2 back out of the atmosphere. So it just doesn’t make sense to develop them to begin with.'"

http://jcwinnie.biz/wordpress/?p=10262

[bbinacan]

1. I guess it's time

for us to go live in a tent.

[anthroman]

2. Plant more trees

I am shocked that more environmental groups are not pushing tree planting, all over, which would help absorb more CO2. Rainforest depletion, overpopulation, 2 issues NOT being discussed AT ALL.

[Angry Dragon]

4. But then trees emit CO2 at night

People have become sick when they have had too many plants in their bedrooms when they sleep

I do not know the equations for CO2 absorption during the day vs night time emission

[jimlup]

6. Ultimate yes, every tree, plant, etc absorbs CO2 and turns it into biomass

But the amount needed to make even a dent in the Keeling Curve is enormous. But yeah, enviromentalists do advocate trees and plants. I'm proudly growing a vegetable garden this summer. This cuts down my CO2 emissions two ways. I don't have to eat vegetables which are grown far from my house and than transported by truck or whatever creating CO2. Also since I eat a certain amount of carbon material each year, I might as well increase the amount that I take directly out of the atmosphere in my own (and family's) diet.

[OKIsItJustMe]

7. Actually these issues are being discussed

Please, by all means, do plant trees. However, please don't fool yourself. Looking at ice core data, an intact biosphere (without us cutting down forests and such) is able to decrease carbon dioxide levels by about 1ppm/1,000 years.

Oh, and the news gets worse…

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0010867

Ecosystem Carbon Stock Influenced by Plantation Practice: Implications for Planting Forests as a Measure of Climate Change Mitigation

…

Abstract

Uncertainties remain in the potential of forest plantations to sequestrate carbon (C). We synthesized 86 experimental studies with paired-site design, using a meta-analysis approach, to quantify the differences in ecosystem C pools between plantations and their corresponding adjacent primary and secondary forests (natural forests). Totaled ecosystem C stock in plant and soil pools was 284 Mg C ha⁻¹ in natural forests and decreased by 28% in plantations. In comparison with natural forests, plantations decreased aboveground net primary production, litterfall, and rate of soil respiration by 11, 34, and 32%, respectively. Fine root biomass, soil C concentration, and soil microbial C concentration decreased respectively by 66, 32, and 29% in plantations relative to natural forests. Soil available N, P and K concentrations were lower by 22, 20 and 26%, respectively, in plantations than in natural forests. The general pattern of decreased ecosystem C pools did not change between two different groups in relation to various factors: stand age (<25 years vs. ≥25 years), stand types (broadleaved vs. coniferous and deciduous vs. evergreen), tree species origin (native vs. exotic) of plantations, land-use history (afforestation vs. reforestation) and site preparation for plantations (unburnt vs. burnt), and study regions (tropic vs. temperate). The pattern also held true across geographic regions. Our findings argued against the replacement of natural forests by the plantations as a measure of climate change mitigation.

[wtmusic]

3. Kinda wish I could block E/E threads from the Latest page

Some people chime in with the most idiotic comments.

[OKIsItJustMe]

8. But… then… who on E/E doesn't know that this (production of oil from tar sands) is a bad development

So, the only real reason to post it is to try to bring it to the attention of non-regulars.

[wtmusic]

10. Good point.

:thumbsup:

[snot]

5. This needs to be better understood; and you can get there even without the tar sands.

I.e., drill baby drill has never been a viable solution, bec. even just burning all the readily available oil will turn the planet into a hot house.

[OKIsItJustMe]

9. Well, no, not necessarily

Hansen (and company) have argued that the conventional oil would run out quickly enough, so long as unconventional sources are not developed:

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/TargetCO2_20080407.pdf

…

Phase-out of coal emissions by 2030 (Fig. 6) keeps maximum CO₂ close to 400 ppm, depending on oil and gas reserves and reserve growth. IPCC reserves assume that half of readily extractable oil has already been used (Figs. 6, S12). EIA <80> estimates (Fig. S12) have larger reserves and reserve growth. Even if EIA estimates are accurate, the IPCC case remains valid if the most difficult to extract oil and gas is left in the ground, via a rising price on carbon emissions that discourages remote exploration and environmental regulations that place some areas off-limit. If IPCC gas reserves (Fig. S12) are underestimated, the IPCC case in Fig. (6) remains valid if the additional gas reserves are used at facilities where CO₂ is captured.

…