Professor James Lovelock is making similar warnings as those found in this blog lately, that the rate of observable global heating appears to far exceed even the most pessimistic predictions [ark | more\ark] made by the cautious, conservative and at times political IPCC climate science process. He expresses concern that the speed with which climate change [search] is progressing will lead to ecological and social crises as "6 to 8 billion people face diminishing food and water supplies in an increasingly intolerable climate". Earlier this year the IPCC concluded in their fourth assessment that the full range of projected temperature increase by the end of the century was 1.1 to 6.4 degrees Celsius, with a best estimate range of 1.8 to 4.0 degrees Celsius (linked Guardian article differs).

Yet Professor Lovelock believes even this quite substantial and dramatic rate of global warming understates the speed with which climate is changing now. IPCC predictions made earlier this year appear to be dramatically outdated already, as global heating impacts have revealed themselves in actuality rather than models. Troublingly Lovelock suggests this means that staggered, slow efforts to reduce emissions and promote sustainable development will fail due to sheer inertia and lack of time. He states "we are at war with the Earth and as in a blitzkrieg, events proceed faster than we can respond ... For this reason alone, it is probably too late for sustainable development... implementing Kyoto or some super-Kyoto is most unlikely to succeed" largely because of climatic feedbacks.

Professor Lovelock believes IPCC computer models underestimate the magnitude of climate change by failing to consider manners in which living organisms release and absorb greenhouse gases; failing to account adequately for climate impacts of deforestation, marine population reductions and ocean acidification. Further, I note IPCC predictions not only generally exclude the possibility of the most extreme abrupt and runaway climate change [search] outcomes, but they also fail to adequately take positive climate change feedbacks into account. And they only go out for 100 years, what happens after that?

The point of the matter is that there exists great uncertainty [ark] regarding the rate and scale of impacts of climate change, that may not ever be able to be predicted prior to being revealed by their occurrence. Whether or not you agree with the assessment that we are farther along towards abrupt and runaway climate change than generally acknowledged, these more pessimistic assessments need to be given more prominence, as they have been excluded as international scientists and governments seek concensus rather than truth and the full range of possibilities. It may or may not be too late to embrace emissions cuts and sustainable development of the magnitude needed in the time we have. Yet clearly we need to be speaking of emission cut goals for 2015 and not 2050; and outlawing known climate culprits as we purse alternatives.

Posted by Dr. Glen Barry | Permalink | Comments (15) | More on climate change abrupt runaway

"Humanity is changing Earth's climate so fast and devouring resources so voraciously that it is poised to bequeath a ravaged planet to future generations" [ark] -- so finds the fourth Global Environment Outlook (GEO-4). The report is published by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and was compiled by 390 experts using two decades of data. At over six billion, the human population is now so big that "the amount of resources needed to sustain it exceeds what is available". Regional predictions are equally grim [ark]. Another report this week published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society predicts that in coming centuries rising temperatures could wipe out more than half of the earth's species [ark].

Given "the world's scarce resources are being depleted at a wholly unsustainable rate despite urgent warnings sounded two decades ago," surely world governments will be meeting in emergency sessions throughout the night in coming weeks, I expect to hear shortly of cancelling of new carbon emitting coal plants and shutting down market in ancient forest timbers. The media almost certainly will divert resources from celebrity news and go to round the clock emergency coverage of the Earth crises. And the average citizen will embrace cutting back on babies and consumption so we can all have a future. Or perhaps this report will be ignored and garner dust on a bookshelves like legions before.

Posted by Dr. Glen Barry | Permalink | Comments (5) | More on environmental catastrophe

A new study indicates atmospheric CO2 is increasing swiftly [ark] "due to faster economic growth coupled with a halt in carbon intensity reductions [search], in addition to natural sinks [search] removing a smaller proportion of emissions from the air." This is very important and confirms the trend that climate change is happening in an abrupt [search] and potentially runaway [search] manner.

It has become abundantly clear that pledges to cut emission by x% in 2050 are pretty meaningless, and that the emphasis must be upon substantial essentially immediate emission cuts even as work for the long term goal. We at Ecological Internet would like to see an on average 20% goal for national greenhouse gas emission cuts by 2015. The focus should be upon energy conservation, efficiency and heavily subsidizing the ramping up of renewable energy systems known to work.

The findings published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the US found that “fifty years ago, for every tonne of CO2 emitted, 600kg were removed by natural sinks. In 2006 only 550kg were removed per tonne and that amount is falling. In addition to the growth of global population and wealth, we now know that significant contributions to the growth of atmospheric CO2 arise from the slow down of natural sinks and the halt to improvements in carbon intensity."

Posted by Dr. Glen Barry | Permalink | Comments (8) | More on climate change abrupt runaway

For the first time in the nation, a state regulatory agency in Kansas "has turned down a permit for a large coal-fired power plant [ark] solely because of the global warming gases it would emit." [more\ark | more2\ark2] This sets a magnificent precedent building upon sentiment nationwide [ark] regarding the absolute climate necessity to not build any further coal plants that emit their emissions into the atmosphere. The continuing use of coal, much less its expansion, is the greatest destroyer of the Earth's climate [search], and it is leading to human caused climate disasters.

Avoiding and limiting damages such as massive droughts devastating the Southeastern and Western United States [ark], including the possible complete collapse of Atlanta's water supply [ark] in 80 days, must be linked to decisions such as whether to build more coal plants, the type of car you drive and frequency of use, and whether to allow logging and buying of ancient forest timbers. Certainly these droughts are also caused by poorly planned over-development, over-population and water over-use. However, we are way past the point where energy, resource use and personal consumption decisions can be separated from climate change induced droughts, floods, melting, sea rise and general lack of seasonality. It is good to see Kansas leading in linking coal to climate change -- now if they just start accepting the science of evolution...

Posted by Dr. Glen Barry | Permalink | Comments (3) | More on coal climate drought

Al Gore and the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have won the Nobel Peace Prize [ark]! It was awarded "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change." This is absolutely fantastic and well-deserved news. Mr. Gore has been a friend of the environment for decades, has tremendously increased awareness regarding climate change [search], and had the Presidential election not been stolen, would have been the greenest President ever. He has gone from a voice in the wilderness, mocked as the ozone man, to a reasoned green international stateman. And the IPCC [search] has done a fantastic job achieving and disseminating the most current global scientific consensus on climate change.

This award is a validation of climate science and the climate change movement. The committee has boldly acknowledged that global warming poses an immense threat to global peace and security [search]. My hope is that this award enables both Mr. Gore and the IPCC to speak truthfully, proposing and achieving bold and adequate policies that will save the Planet. And perhaps this will allow them to address root, controversial themes, such as over-population and the need for personal sacrifice. I and others are waiting to be led. Today I am proud to be a climate change activist of long standing, and you should be too.

Posted by Dr. Glen Barry | Permalink | Comments (7) | More on Gore climate change nobel

UPDATE: RealClimate is at odds with Flannery's findings that in terms of carbon equivalency we are past 450ppm. The main thrust of my comments stand: we are perilously close if not past dangerous levels of emissions now, and clearly warming is occurring more rapidly than generally predicted.

"Strong worldwide economic growth has accelerated the level of greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere to a dangerous threshold [ark] scientists had not expected for another decade... the level of climate-changing gases in the atmosphere has already reached critical levels." I would like to formally congratulate the fossil fuel industries, their "skeptic" apologists, President Bush and the rest of the ruling oil oligarchy, and every opulent consumer gorging themselves upon natural resources accessed by liquidating the habitat they depend upon for life. Because of our unfailing defense of wasteful, excessive energy use; and refusal to change personally and societally, the Earth is now guaranteed to undergo deadly climate change [ark | more/ark].

By the reckoning of acclaimed author and scientist Tim Flannery, human greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have now passed 455 parts per million in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent [search] (based upon warming potential of 30 greenhouse gases). This exceeds the generally accepted level of GHGs where deadly climate change [search] is assured. The resulting two degrees celsius of warming is widely considered the point where ecosystem collapse, agricultural failure and extreme weather become inevitable, permanent and deadly.

Anyone with ecological intuition knows this to be true As I sit here in Northern Wisconsin, the last few days have been nearly 90 degrees F (32 C) -- some 30 degrees F above average. There has been much coverage today regarding how climate change induced lack of seasonality will result in changes in clothing fashion [ark]. Perhaps we should also think how an absence of seasonal regularity will impact our ability to grow food, have dependable but not excessive water supplies, and impact other aspects of ecosystem functionality.

Humanity is in for a nasty ride as the ecological fabric of being is deeply frayed. Yet the Earth and her humanity possess amazing regenerative and adaptive capabilities. We must trust in our ability to define and implement sufficient policies to pull back from the brink of destruction; starting with rigorous policies to reduce human population, end use of coal and other fossil fuels, preserve and restore ancient terrestrial ecosystems, and return to the land for a life of rich voluntary simplicity.

Yes, deadly climate change is now inevitable. No, we must not give up. There is still hope however slim that complex life and society can survive. Good luck weathering the storm.

Posted by Dr. Glen Barry | Permalink | Comments (35) | More on deadly climate change inevitable

The global campaign to ensure biofuels are not produced at the expense of ancient rainforests appears to be yielding positive results, as these efforts are costing oil palm market share in Europe. Ecological Internet's work has been instrumental to this success, as we were the first environmental organization to raise concerns regarding rainforest destruction and biofuel production [search]. Our latest efforts highlight murderous biofuel production in Colombia [alert]. It is nonsensical to grow a crop for its purported benefits in addressing climate change by clearing ancient rainforests thus releasing their carbon. Within an ever growing coalition, we have worked long and hard to raise awareness and build the campaign. Quite simply, there is not enough arable land, water or surplus food supplies to grow an appreciable share of the world's energy needs from biofuels; and by trying both climate and rainforests will be irrevocably destroyed.

Posted by Dr. Glen Barry | Permalink | Comments (3) | More on oil palm biofuel campaign

We are assured by Florida's Governor Crist that the American lifestyle is not incompatible with the need to address climate change [search] and reduce fossil fuel consumption. As paraphrased by Reuters, "Americans do not need to pare back their lifestyles to help protect the global environment but may need to use sugar or orange peel to power their energy-guzzling Hummers and Cigarette boats. " It was awfully decent of Mr. Crist, a Republican, to unlike his compatriots, even acknowledge global heating is occurring, and introduce very modest efforts in Florida to reduce emissions. Yet he is dead wrong about what will be required to address climate change.

The crazily consumptive, super size, sexily scintillating, over the top American lifestyle is precisely the reason global climate is changing and the Earth's ecosystems collapsing. In a bit over two centuries a largely intact ecological continent has been over-populated, its forest liquidated, its waters abused, and oceans over-harvested. While lagging behind Europe and Asia in terms of degree of decimation of regional ecosystems, it is only because they have had longer. There has never been a resource consumption binge like the American century, and there never will be one again, because we have wastefully used most of the world's resources.

The American lifestyle is deeply, profoundly unsustainable. The gravest political peril in achieving global ecological sustainability is lack of politically skilled and viable leaders willing to tell the truth regarding the shape and scope of personal and societal change necessary to save the Earth and humankind. Shared sacrifice, living more simply yet fully, and reducing our family size, consumption, emissions and general ecological footprint; are all vital components of addressing climate change. As much of the world seeks to emulate our opulent, self-indulgent ways; the use of the Earth's resources has clearly moved beyond what it can sustainably provide.

We could have all the geo-engineering, certified forestry, coal sequestration and nuclear development in the world; and without greater conservation and efficiency we are only buying a bit of time There are not enough orange peels to fuel Hummers and Cigarette boats for any but the super rich. Yet these types of biofuels may well keep the lights on in a new frugal economy in touch with the Earth's needs and constraints. Shame on you Mr. Crist and all duplicitous political and economic powers that falsely and without merit suggest we can burn the Earth and sustain her too.

Climate policy can only be effective if based upon ecological truths. And one such truth is that going green DOES mean sacrificing the American lifestyle. And it is deeply wasteful of time and resources necessary to solve global ecological crises to suggest otherwise.

Posted by Dr. Glen Barry | Permalink | Comments (9) | More on climate change over consumption

Australia, already suffering some of the most evident impacts of climate change anywhere [search] and ravaged by a monumental climate change enhanced drought [search], has this week been further buffeted by scientific predictions regarding climate change [more | more2 | news search] from its own government scientists that border upon apocalyptic. The first comprehensive climate projections since 2001 from the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Australia's national science agency, presented dire new evidence that Australia faces a sharp rise in temperatures, danger from bushfires, and severe drought if greenhouse gas emissions are not curbed.

Sydney's temperature is predicted to rise by an average 4.3C by 2070, drought months are expected to increase by 20% nationwide, and a nationwide increase of temperature of 1.0C by 2030 is now considered unavoidable. Sadly, the nation is failing miserably to mobilize to reduce energy use and emissions, continues to clearcut its native forests, and refuses to participate in good faith with international cooperation on establishment of mandatory emission cut targets. Australia teeters upon continental scale ecological collapse, yet parties on like there is no tomorrow, ensuring this may indeed be the case

Posted by Dr. Glen Barry | Permalink | Comments (1) | More on Australia climate change