Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
Mon May 14, 2012, 12:54 PM May 2012

University of Michigan Study: Economic downturn needed to slow global warming

Global warming: New research emphasizes the role of global economic growth

The study, conducted by José Tapia Granados and Edward Ionides of U-M and Óscar Carpintero of the University of Valladolid in Spain, was published online in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Science and Policy. It is the first analysis to use measurable levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide to assess fluctuations in the gas, rather than estimates of CO₂ emissions, which are less accurate.

"If 'business as usual' conditions continue, economic contractions the size of the Great Recession or even bigger will be needed to reduce atmospheric levels of CO₂," said Tapia Granados, who is a researcher at the U-M Institute for Social Research.


Annual growth of the world economic output (green line, trillions of 2000 US dollars) and annual change of estimated CO2 emissions (millions of Kt, black dots). Data on CO2 emisions for 2009 and 2010 were computed from preliminary estimates of carbon emissions obtained from the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) of the US Department of Energy on March 2012. All other data from the World Bank (that takes estimates of CO2 emissions from the CDIC).

Tapia Granados and colleagues found no observable relation between short-term growth of world population and CO₂ concentrations, and they show that recent incidents of volcanic activity coincided with global recessions, which brings into question the reductions in atmospheric CO₂ previously ascribed to these volcanic eruptions.

In years of above-trend world GDP, from 1958 to 2010, the researchers found greater increases in CO₂ concentrations. For each trillion in U.S. dollars that the world GDP deviates from trend, CO₂ levels deviate from trend about half a part per million, they found.

As I was saying...
15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
University of Michigan Study: Economic downturn needed to slow global warming (Original Post) GliderGuider May 2012 OP
Du rec. Nt xchrom May 2012 #1
Shouldn't those of us who want to end global warming GliderGuider May 2012 #2
Only if you 1) like watching people starve to death, or Demeter May 2012 #3
Your 2) sounds like it's worth trying. GliderGuider May 2012 #4
If you were a serious person you'd be pushing for pscot May 2012 #6
Fortunately for the world, GliderGuider May 2012 #7
Flame bait Kolesar May 2012 #8
Aren't you impressed that no one took it? GliderGuider May 2012 #9
Why don't you go play basketball or something? Kolesar May 2012 #10
Everybody? GliderGuider May 2012 #11
It took you three revisions to write a scatological insult? Kolesar May 2012 #13
I already meditate. It doesn't seem to help this character flaw. GliderGuider May 2012 #14
There is a serious point underlying my mischievous wording about solar GliderGuider May 2012 #12
The headline you used is only one way to see the results. kristopher May 2012 #5
I see economic contraction as only one way FogerRox May 2012 #15
 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
2. Shouldn't those of us who want to end global warming
Mon May 14, 2012, 02:42 PM
May 2012

be following a strategy that has a demonstrated chance of working (slowing down the global economy) instead of working endlessly on faith-based initiatives like solar power?

 

Demeter

(85,373 posts)
3. Only if you 1) like watching people starve to death, or
Mon May 14, 2012, 02:53 PM
May 2012

2) can wrestle the necessities of life from the 1% without too much destruction.

 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
4. Your 2) sounds like it's worth trying.
Mon May 14, 2012, 02:59 PM
May 2012

Now where did I put my tumbrel and that leftover guillotine?

pscot

(21,024 posts)
6. If you were a serious person you'd be pushing for
Mon May 14, 2012, 10:16 PM
May 2012

nukleer combat, toe to toe between China and India.

Kolesar

(31,182 posts)
10. Why don't you go play basketball or something?
Tue May 15, 2012, 06:23 AM
May 2012

Consume your energies in a mode that doesn't bother everybody

Kolesar

(31,182 posts)
13. It took you three revisions to write a scatological insult?
Tue May 15, 2012, 10:14 AM
May 2012

Basketball, or might I suggest yoga or mediation?

 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
14. I already meditate. It doesn't seem to help this character flaw.
Tue May 15, 2012, 10:19 AM
May 2012

See below for what amounts to a polite restatement of my original slur on faith.

ETA: If you had looked at the edits you'd have deduced that I first added a helpful comment, then decided it needed its own post. The "pee in the wheaties" comment stayed because I don't see what there is to get as fussed about as you did.

 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
12. There is a serious point underlying my mischievous wording about solar
Tue May 15, 2012, 07:15 AM
May 2012

Given the current penetration of solar PV into the global energy mix, the negligible impact it's going to have on the world's CO2 emissions within the next couple of decades, and the continuing climb in those emissions, anyone who is concerned about AGW should be putting their efforts into avenues that have already been shown to be helpful. There is only one of those: economic contraction.

The good news is that each of us can help that process along a bit simply by spending less money and buying less stuff - especially oil, natural gas and electricity. That's going to have far more impact than putting up a few solar panels.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
5. The headline you used is only one way to see the results.
Mon May 14, 2012, 03:15 PM
May 2012

Let's say we have a massive effort to deploy a renewable grid and, as predicted by economists, that results in significantly improved economic health lasting more than 3 decades.

Since it has been conservatively calculated that less than 1/2 of one years worth of carbon consumption would be enough to completely fuel this change ...

Conclusion
We submit that the models provided here present a compel- ling case that the road to a sustainable future lies in concerted efforts to move from fossil fuels to renewable wind and solar energy sources. This transition can occur in two or three decades and requires very little fossil fuel (on the order of one half of a year’s present global consumption) and no revolutionary technological innovations. Since our model uses conservative estimates, the true renewable potential that is available to our society may be even more optimistic than we show. The primary anticipated obstacles to implementing this transition are non-technical, including lack of political will and economic prioritization. Nevertheless, this transition in the time scale of a few decades is imperative for global climate security.

http://iprd.org.uk/?p=6877

A  Solar  Transition  is  Possible
By  Peter  D.  Schwartzman  &  David  W.  Schwartzman
March  2011

FogerRox

(13,211 posts)
15. I see economic contraction as only one way
Tue May 15, 2012, 05:09 PM
May 2012

An extremely painful one. And in a worse case scenario precludes humans from ever getting out into the solar system.

Large scale deployment of renewables shifts emphasis away from crude oil and could make liquid fuels niche compared to today.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»University of Michigan St...