“Stabilizing climate requires near-zero emissions”

[RedEarth]

Avoiding climate catastrophe will probably require going to near-zero net emissions of greenhouse gases this century. That is the conclusion of a new paper in Geophysical Research Letters (subs. req’d) co-authored by one of my favorite climate scientists, Ken Caldeira, whose papers always merit attention. Here is the abstract:

Current international climate mitigation efforts aim to stabilize levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. However, human-induced climate warming will continue for many centuries, even after atmospheric CO2 levels are stabilized. In this paper, we assess the CO2 emissions requirements for global temperature stabilization within the next several centuries, using an Earth system model of intermediate complexity. We show first that a single pulse of carbon released into the atmosphere increases globally averaged surface temperature by an amount that remains approximately constant for several centuries, even in the absence of additional emissions. We then show that to hold climate constant at a given global temperature requires near-zero future carbon emissions. Our results suggest that future anthropogenic emissions would need to be eliminated in order to stabilize global-mean temperatures. As a consequence, any future anthropogenic emissions will commit the climate system to warming that is essentially irreversible on centennial timescales.

Since the rest of the article is behind a firewall, let me extract a couple of key findings:


… our results suggest that if emissions were eliminated entirely, radiative forcing from atmospheric CO2 would decrease at a rate closely matched by declining ocean heat uptake, with the result that while future warming commitment may be negligible, atmospheric temperatures may not decrease appreciably for at least 500 years.

In short, the time for dramatic action is upon us. The study concludes:

In the absence of human intervention to actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere, each unit of CO2 emissions must be viewed as leading to quantifiable and essentially permanent climate change on centennial timescales. We emphasize that a stable global climate is not synonymous with stable radiative forcing, but rather requires decreasing greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere. We have shown here that stable global temperatures within the next several centuries can be achieved if CO2 emissions are reduced to nearly zero. This means that avoiding future human-induced climate warming may require policies that seek not only to decrease CO2 emissions, but to eliminate them entirely.

Bottom line: Stopping global warming is very hard — easily the greatest challenge the human race has ever faced. The best we can hope for at this point is to limit warming to below the threshold where the carbon-cycle feedbacks kick into overdrive, bringing about catastrophe (80 feet of sea level rise, widespread desertification, >50% species loss).

http://climateprogress.org/2008/02/28/stabilizing-climate-requires-near-zero-emissions/

.......study.....

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2008/2007GL032388.shtml

[mike_c]

1. the time for action is NOW, folks....

eom

[Lorien]

3. Tell tghat to HRC and Obama

Their "bold plans" call for only CAPPING emissions by 2030.

Globally the lack of leadership and interest in this issue is costing all of us any hope for a future. :-(

[mike_c]

4. yes, but my god how the money rolls in....

:sarcasm:

There won't be any solution to global warming until political leadership-- which is owned by economic interests-- puts the environment before economic interests and keeps it there for a few hundred years.

Yeah, I think cynicism is in order.

[mihalevich]

2. watch this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkEys3PeseA

[Carmenzabono]

5. A Republican won't achieve this goal

They deny global warming.

[cloudythescribbler]

6. As you know, climate expert Jim Hansen says we need NET NEGATIVE emissions LONG before the MIDDLE ..

of the century. Norway is planning for zero net emissions by 2030, but that's probably still not going far enough, FOR WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AT THE GLOBAL LEVEL IS GREATER & FASTER.