tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-76953871773226983962024-03-12T21:28:01.831-07:00Change our worldSam Caranahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12376449209858411775noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7695387177322698396.post-91459550313619111102008-03-30T19:58:00.000-07:002008-06-15T03:06:23.157-07:00Reduce emissions by 80% by 2020<span style="font-weight: bold;font-size:180%;" >Symptoms of Global Warming</span><span style="font-weight: bold;font-size:180%;" ><br /></span><br />Virtually all countries have ratified the Kyoto protocol. Yet, global warming continues and the symptoms are visible everywhere.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DFbeatcKI/AAAAAAAAALM/GxIv4mCvv3Q/s1600-h/kyoto.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DFbeatcKI/AAAAAAAAALM/GxIv4mCvv3Q/s400/kyoto.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5183860246915674274" border="0" /></a>Warming trends in a third of the world's large ocean regions are two to four times greater than the average trends reported in 2007 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a U.N.-backed <a href="http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/HAN290742.htm">environmental study</a> said.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DFuOatcLI/AAAAAAAAALU/m0srAUM6kuE/s1600-h/arctic.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DFuOatcLI/AAAAAAAAALU/m0srAUM6kuE/s400/arctic.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5183860569038221490" border="0" /></a>One year ago, <a href="http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2007/seaice.shtml">a study</a> pointed out that actual data showed that artic ice was already retreating faster than the IPCC's worst-case scenario.<br /><br />The world's glaciers continue to melt away, with record losses announced in the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) report <a href="http://hqweb.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=530&ArticleID=5760&l=en">Meltdown in the Mountains</a>.<br /><br /><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">The situation isn't much better on Antarctica. The article </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977294876">Antarctic ice shelf collapse</a></span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"> describes how a huge ice shelf, measuring 5,282 square miles (13,680 square kilometers), has begun to collapse because of rapid climate change on Antarctica. The </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">Wilkins Ice Shelf is located</span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"> on the southwest Antarctic Peninsula, about 1,000 miles south of South America.</span></span></span><br /><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"><br /></span></span></span><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DKH-atcMI/AAAAAAAAALc/l8FgKz5auac/s1600-h/wilkins4.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DKH-atcMI/AAAAAAAAALc/l8FgKz5auac/s400/wilkins4.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5183865409466364098" border="0" /></a><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">It is</span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"> one of a string of shelves that have collapsed in the West Antarctic Peninsula in the past thirty years. The Larsen B became the most well-known ice shelf to collapse, disappearing in just over thirty days in 2002.<br /></span></span></span><br /><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">In the past 50 years, the western Antarctic Peninsula has been </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">warming by 0.9 degree Fahrenheit (0.5 degree Celsius) per decade. In early 2005, some 75% of the 400 mountain glaciers were in retreat on the peninsula.<br /><br /></span></span></span><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DKNeatcNI/AAAAAAAAALk/1-28NYvTjO0/s1600-h/wilkins5.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DKNeatcNI/AAAAAAAAALk/1-28NYvTjO0/s400/wilkins5.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5183865503955644626" border="0" /></a><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">Glaciers within the much larger west Antarctic Ice sheet are also starting to disappear. In 2005, after</span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"> evaluation of data from three glaciers, including Pine Island and Thwaites, </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">the conclusion was that they were losing more ice - mainly through the calving of icebergs - than was being replaced by snowfall, the difference between the mass lost and mass replaced being some 60%. The melting of these three glaciers alone was contributing an estimated 0.01 inch (0.24 millimetres) per year to sea level.<br /><br /></span></span></span><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DKR-atcOI/AAAAAAAAALs/dWbyAhvt3_A/s1600-h/wilkins6.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DKR-atcOI/AAAAAAAAALs/dWbyAhvt3_A/s400/wilkins6.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5183865581265055970" border="0" /></a><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">Antarctica contains more than 90% of the world's ice and 70% of the freshwater on Earth. </span></span></span><span class="t12">Temperatures on the West Antarctic ice sheet appear to rise most rapidly and t</span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">he disappearance of the</span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"> West Antarctic ice sheet alone could raise worldwide sea levels by an estimated 20 feet (6.1 meters). </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">In 2001, the IPCC said that collapse of this ice sheet was unlikely during the 21st century. This assessment now seems rather conservative. </span></span></span><span class="t12"><br /><br />The IPCC, as <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSN1441637320080114">Reuters reports</a>, thought </span> that Antarctica would not contribute at all to sea level rise, and in fact predicted a growth of the big ice sheet that covers much of the continent from enhanced precipitation, resulting from increased evaporation from the oceans due to global warming. However, this has not eventuated. <span class="t12"> <a href="http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2006/86.html">Research at the University of Colorado at Boulder</a> in 2006 </span> concluded that the Antarctic ice sheet is experiencing an annual loss of up to 36 cubic miles of ice, or 152 cubic kilometers, with the bulk of loss occurring in the West Antarctic ice sheet. <span class="t12">Ice loss in Antarctica increased by 75% in the last 10 years due to a speed-up in the flow of its glaciers and is now nearly as great as that observed in Greenland, according to a <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080123181952.htm">recent study by NASA and two California universities</a>.</span><br /><span style="font-size:180%;"><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">How could this have happened?</span></span><br /><br /><span class="t12">The evidence indicates that global warming is not slowing down. In part, this is because of the momentum of previous emissions and associated 'positive feedback', such as albedo change, methane release from previously frozen biomass, etc. However, the situation appears to be even worse than the IPCC had predicted. </span>How could all this have happened, if under the Kyoto Protocol developed countries had pledged to reduce their emissions compared to 1990 levels, altogether with 116 million metric tons of carbon emissions?<br /><br /><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"> Firstly, the United States, the world's largest </span></span></span>carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>)<span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"> emitter, has until now refused to ratify Kyoto.<br /><br />Secondly, </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">China did not have to make reductions under Kyoto and China has experienced rapid economic growth. According to several reports, China in 2006 actually overtook the US as largest emitter, and <a href="http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/newsrel/international/03-08ChinasCarbonDioxideEmissions.asp">a new analysis</a> now puts the annual increase in <span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">CO<sub>2</sub></span></span></span> emissions for China to at least 11% for the period between 2004 and 2010, far more than the IPCC estimates that the region that includes China would see only a 2.5% to 5% annual increase in <span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">CO<sub>2</sub></span></span></span> emissions for this period. According to this recent analysis, there will be an increase by 2010 of 600 million metric tons of carbon emissions in China over</span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"> the country's levels in 2000, which adds more than five times as much as the reductions pledged under Kyoto.</span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"></span></span></span><br /><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"><br />Thirdly, </span></span></span>emissions are rising even faster than the worst-case estimates by the IPCC, because s<span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">ome emissions were underestimated by the IPCC, e.g. data for international aviation and </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977258269">shipping emissions were grossly underestimated</a></span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"> and were not included in the Kyoto protocol at all. </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">Also, the impact of some other emissions was underestimated - </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">according to one study, </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"> black carbon has a warming effect in the atmosphere <a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977306586">three to four times greater</a> than the IPCC estimated. </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">At the same time, there is growing evidence of a diminished capability of </span></span></span>the oceans to absorb <span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">CO<sub>2</sub>.</span></span></span></span></span></span>Near-surface ozone has doubled since 1850 due to chemical emissions from vehicles, industrial processes, and the burning of forests, and this could affect vegetation's <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070725143612.htm">ability to soak up <span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">CO<sub>2</sub></span></span></span></span></span></span></a> <br /><span class="t12">from the atmosphere.<br><br>So, what is the impact of the Kyoto Protocol and its Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)? If all projects listed under the CDM will be successfully implemented, reductions in future CO<sub>2</sub> emissions through 2012 will total about 175 millions tons of carbon, delaying total CO<sub>2</sub> emissions <a href="http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/climate_change/0013676_days_in_2012_effe.html">by only 6.5 days</a>. In conclusion, the Kyoto protocol isn't going to slow global warming very much.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-size:180%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">So, what should be done now?</span></span><br /><br /><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">James Hansen, NASA's top climate scientist, says in </span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"><a href="http://www.columbia.edu/%7Ejeh1/2008/TargetCO2_20080407.pdf">Target CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?</a> that </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">the EU target of 550 parts per million (ppm) of CO<sub>2</sub> - the most stringent in the world - was not good enough, as this would cause the world to warm by 6C, rather than the previous estimate of just 3C. Hansen </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">says targets should be slashed to 350 ppm.</span></span></span><br /><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"><br />Kyoto will end in 2012 and needs to be followed up by an agreement that will result in much more dramatic reductions in emissions. Negotiations focus on what targets countries should commit to, to what extent it should be left up to each place to decide how to reach those targets and what</span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText"> should happen if countries fail to meet their targets. Many believe that a renewed </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">global commitment to reduce emissions should be backed up by trade sanctions against countries that fail to cooperate.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:180%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">A Framework of FeeBates</span></span><br /><br /></span></span></span><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://feebate.net/"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DL1OatcQI/AAAAAAAAAL8/DsnEF74Qw1M/s400/feebate.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5183867286367072514" border="0" /></a><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">While such negotiations take place, why not take the lead by setting out to make dramatic cuts in greenhouse gas emissions? That could be done by implementing a framework of <a href="http://feebate.net/">feebates</a>, including a 10% fee on gasoline cars that funds local rebates on zero emission vehicles, and a 10% fee on fossil fuel that funds local facilities that produce electricity in clean and safe ways.<br /><br />As the Environmental Protection </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">Agency's <a href="http://epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads06/07Annex1.pdf">inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2005</a> shows, well over 80% of US emissions are caused by fossil fuel - the mining of fossil fuel and burning it in power plants and in transportation. So, if we switched to electric vehicles over a period of a dozen years and to electricity produced in clean and safe ways, such as with wind and solar power, this would achieve an 80% cut by 2020.<br /><br /></span></span></span><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DMzuatcRI/AAAAAAAAAME/EBdPXtjeNwo/s1600-h/emissions-cut400.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DMzuatcRI/AAAAAAAAAME/EBdPXtjeNwo/s400/emissions-cut400.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5183868360108896530" border="0" /></a><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">Will such a shift drive up prices for consumers? Clean and safe ways to produce electricity are already price-competitive, while cost of </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">fossil fuel keeps rising. Sure, not everyone may immediately switch to an electric car, but economies of scale resulting from such policies should - over the timespan of 12 years - make electric cars far cheaper than gasoline cars. Cuts could also be made in agriculture, waste handling and industrial activities such as in the production of concrete, iron and steel. Additional feebates could result in cement that causes far less <span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">CO<sub>2</sub></span></span></span> emissions. Carbon could actually be incorporated in concrete, while waste could be turned into hydrogen and <a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977139103">agrichar</a>, which could be carbon-negative. There could also be a 10% fee on <a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977123673">meat</a>, funding vegan-organic meals to be served in restaurants in <a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977128488">communities without roads</a>. Of course, each area should decide on such details and monitor and adjust things, say, on an annual basis. Once such a framework of feebates is put in place, market mechanisms can further sort out what works best in each respective area.<br /><br />So, how much will this cost? Since feebates are budget neutral, little or no government money would be needed to implement this. Government doesn't need to pay subsidies to make this work. In fact, it would help a lot if government stopped the subsidies and the support that it now gives to the oil, coal and car industries. Livestock and feed for livestock are also subsidized with huge amounts of tax money.<br /><br />There will be little or no cost, in fact we will be far better off financially. Reducing our dependence on oil imports will improve our financial position. Many people will benefit from the creation of numerous jobs in clean and safe ways to produce electricity and in making the electric grid smarter. It could revitalize our car industry. Healthwise, huge improvements could be achieved with such cuts in emissions. Moreover, the alternative would be to continue paying for the rising cost of importing and transporting fuel, and for the cost of mining and dealing with waste, as well as paying the cost to offset and mitigate the damage inflicted on the environment.<br /><br /></span></span></span><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DOFeatcSI/AAAAAAAAAMM/G3Bu7cKWjOg/s1600-h/support-FeeBate.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_XIf4mSC2TMM/R_DOFeatcSI/AAAAAAAAAMM/G3Bu7cKWjOg/s400/support-FeeBate.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5183869764563202338" border="0" /></a><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">Given the obvious benefits, we don't need to await the outcome of post-Kyoto negotiations, </span></span></span><span class="t12"><span class="t13 lh18"><span class="articleText">but we should start implementing such a framework now. If the rest of the world followed our lead, we wouldn't have to send troops to the Middle East to secure the supply of oil, we wouldn't need to patrol the world to avoid nuclear material falling into the hands of terrorists, etc. We can lead the world and - for once - we can help the world, not by giving money to other countries or by sending troops, but by helping ourselves and by setting the example in the process.<br /><br /><table bgcolor="#ffffbb" border="0" cellpadding="1" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td align="center"><table border="0" width="95%"><tbody><tr><td>Articles by Sam Carana:<br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977347443&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Save the Rainforest</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977316789&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Carbon-negative building</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977347848&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Overpopulation?</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977261078&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Introducing Solar Cooking to the World</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977330869&grpId=3659174697252003" target="blank">Who goes first, the chicken or the egg?</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977277617&grpId=3659174697252003" target="blank">A Framework of Greenhouse Gas FeeBates</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977330869&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Who goes first, the chicken or the egg?</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977338833&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">A national bottle recycling bill</a> <br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977258269&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Shipping emissions grossly underestimated</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977259632&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Tariffs on imports from polluting countries?</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977139103&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Agrichar</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977123673&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Tax the sale of meat</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977128488&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Communities without roads</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977270179&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Beyond Kyoto</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977287970&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">An 80% cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977294876&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Antarctic ice shelf collapse</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977304582&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Cut carbon to 350 ppm, says James Hansen</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977266659&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">The Distributed Grid</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977264815&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Reinventing the Wheel</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977324812&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Dangers of Global Warming - update</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474976925383&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Ten Dangers of Global Warming</a><br /><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977306586&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Black carbon underestimated in global warming, study says</a><br><br><a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977334443&grpId=3659174697252003" target="_blank">Further articles by Sam Carana</a><br /></td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table></span></span></span><br /><font=-1><i>updated: May 20, 2008</i></font><br /><table border=0><tr><td><a href="http://technorati.com/claim/8eytibmh4e" rel="me">Technorati Profile</a></td><td></td><td><a href="http://technorati.com/faves?sub=addfavbtn&add=http://change-our-world.blogspot.com"><img src="http://static.technorati.com/pix/fave/btn-fave2.png" alt="Add to Technorati Favorites" /></a></td></tr></table>Sam Caranahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12376449209858411775noreply@blogger.com0