Climate Change

null 18° London Hi 26°C / Lo 12°C

The Earth today stands in imminent peril

...and nothing short of a planetary rescue will save it from the environmental cataclysm of dangerous climate change. Those are not the words of eco-warriors but the considered opinion of a group of eminent scientists writing in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

By Steve Connor, Science Editor

Six scientists from some of the leading scientific institutions in the United States have issued what amounts to an unambiguous warning to the world: civilisation itself is threatened by global warming.

They also implicitly criticise the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for underestimating the scale of sea-level rises this century as a result of melting glaciers and polar ice sheets.

Instead of sea levels rising by about 40 centimetres, as the IPCC predicts in one of its computer forecasts, the true rise might be as great as several metres by 2100. That is why, they say, planet Earth today is in "imminent peril".

In a densely referenced scientific paper published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A some of the world's leading climate researchers describe in detail why they believe that humanity can no longer afford to ignore the "gravest threat" of climate change.

"Recent greenhouse gas emissions place the Earth perilously close to dramatic climate change that could run out of control, with great dangers for humans and other creatures," the scientists say. Only intense efforts to curb man-made emissions of carbon dioxide emissions and other greenhouse gases can keep the climate within or near the range of the past one million years, they add.

The researchers were led by James Hansen, the director of Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who was the first scientist to warn the US Congress about global warming.

The other scientists were Makiko Sato, Pushker Kharecha and Gary Russell, also of the Goddard Institute, David Lea of the University of California, Santa Barbara, and Mark Siddall of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University in New York.

In their 29-page paper, "Climate Change and trace gases", the scientists frequently stray from the non-emotional language of science to emphasise the scale of the problems and dangers posed by climate change.

In an email to The Independent, Dr Hansen said: "In my opinion, among our papers this one probably does the best job of making clear that the Earth is getting perilously close to climate changes that could run out of our control."

The unnatural "forcing" of the climate as a result of man-made emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases threatens to generate a "flip" in the climate that could "spark a cataclysm" in the massive ice sheets of Antarctica and Greenland, the scientists write.

Dramatic flips in the climate have occurred in the past but none has happened since the development of complex human societies and civilisation, which are unlikely to survive the same sort of environmental changes if they occurred now.

"Civilisation developed, and constructed extensive infrastructure, during a period of unusual climate stability, the Holocene, now almost 12,000 years in duration. That period is about to end," the scientists warn. Humanity cannot afford to burn the Earth's remaining underground reserves of fossil fuel. "To do so would guarantee dramatic climate change, yielding a different planet from the one on which civilisation developed and for which extensive physical infrastructure has been built," they say.

Dr Hansen said we have about 10 years to put into effect the draconian measures needed to curb CO2 emissions quickly enough to avert a dangerous rise in global temperature. Otherwise, the extra heat could trigger the rapid melting of polar ice sheets, made far worse by the "albedo flip" - when the sunlight reflected by white ice is suddenly absorbed as ice melts to become the dark surface of open water.

The glaciers and ice sheets of Greenland in the northern hemisphere, and the western Antarctic ice sheet in the south, both show signs of the rapid changes predicted with rising temperatures. "

The albedo flip property of ice/water provides a trigger mechanism. If the trigger mechanism is engaged long enough, multiple dynamical feedbacks will cause ice sheet collapse," the scientists say. "We argue that the required persistence for this trigger mechanism is at most a century, probably less."

The latest assessment of the IPCC published earlier this year predicts little or no contribution to 21st century sea level from Greenland or Antarctica, but the six scientists dispute this interpretation. "The IPCC analyses and projections do not well account for the nonlinear physics of wet ice sheet disintegration, ice streams and eroding ice shelves, nor are they consistent with the palaeoclimate evidence we have presented for the absence of discernible lag between ice sheet forcing and sea-level rise," the scientists say.

Their study looked back over more than 400,000 years of climate records from deep ice cores and found evidence to suggest that rapid climate change over a period of centuries, or even decades, have in the past occurred once the world began to heat up and ice sheets started melting. It is not possible to assess the dangerous level of man-made greenhouse gases.

"However, it is much lower than has commonly been assumed. If we have not already passed the dangerous level, the energy infrastructure in place ensures that we will pass it within several decades," the scientists say in their findings.

"We conclude that a feasible strategy for planetary rescue almost surely requires a means of extracting [greenhouse gases] from the air."

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Why this is happening
[info]yak0178 wrote:
Monday, 11 May 2009 at 01:31 am (UTC)
This is a collective result of everyone inhabiting the planet. We all play a role in the conditions of the planet, whether big or small. The problem is that in order for things to change for the better, certain people will have to temporarily lose profits. The big factories, oil companies, developers, etc. all have a vested interest in keeping things the way they are in order to continue making profits. This is a mechanism of fear for it keeps things paralyzed from moving forward (or at least moving as quickly as it could) due to a fear of loss of money. If well being was more important than money, I bet half the world's problems would be solved within months. However, we shouldn't be quick to point fingers at the "money grubbers" for it is purely due to ignorance. Many are concerned with their own personal benefit (due to fear) that they lose sight of things on a grander scale. If conditions became better and we worked together in harmony for the good of the planet, then more jobs would open and the economy would thrive which would benefit everyone in the long run. So the benefit of everyone would be more personally beneficial as well. Really think about that point for a moment. Even though we are the most "intelligent" beings on the planet, that doesn't mean we are more important than all life forms. Everything is interdependent with each other and is of equal importance. Trees, the atmosphere, air, water, humans, animals, plants, etc. all depend on each other for their own survival, and each play a significant role to the planet. The goal is to realize this and to appreciate that which is life giving and not continue to abuse it. For in putting different aspects of our planet in jeopardy, we put ourselves in jeopardy as well. More of us are aware of this so there are rays of sunlight on the horizon. If we could collectively produce the results that we have already produced, then we could collectively make conditions better for mother earth and all her inhabitants. All it takes is knowledge and a willingness to make it happen.
Re: Why this is happening
[info]global_changes wrote:
Monday, 11 May 2009 at 02:55 pm (UTC)
Spot on mate. Fathoming a cure for climate change is one problem, convincing humanity to change is a far bigger one.
[info]clothcap wrote:
Wednesday, 13 May 2009 at 10:53 pm (UTC)
Steve, science and the climate has moved on since the article linked to (2007). Only BSers and rent seekers these days say without hesitation that human emissions have a significant effect on climate. The more we learn, the more we learn how much we don't know. We certainly don't know temperatures for the last 5,000 years yet alone millions due to a shortage of thermometers. CO2 has become a 3 legged donkey in a formula one race as far as climate actors are concerned. We don't even know the levels/effects of IR emissions throughout the atmosphere, water vapour volume or aerosol effects of different sizes, composition, densities at different heights, locations, temperatures, cloud effects, and so it goes. The best indicator we have is that the expected GHG signature never materialized. The implication of that is that all GHG variations have a small effect on climate.
The funniest BS I ever read was that the greening of deserts due to ACO2 was causing lower dust levels that was starving the oceans of nutrients. I lost the link, it may have been a spoof but it sure looked the part. Volcanoes issue aerosols, nearly one a day erupting.
Arctic warming was the IPCC's Alamo. Aerosols (reduced sulphates, increased dark) responsible for as much as 45% of warming, dark aerosols and changed, possibly cyclic ocean and air currents responsible for most if not all sea ice melt, slowed glacier outflow, Arctic sea ice recovering. Wipeout.
All that remains is the ghost of hypotheses past. And addiction to futile meetings in exotic locations at our expense.
The media should get behind public opinion that is rapidly warming to disbelief that ACO2 affects climate and dissuade governments from ripping us off any more.
I think the biggest deception in all this, after AGW by CO2, is that global average temperature has any meaning.

yak0178 Show me empirical evidence that ACO2 is significant to climate. Scientists can't. I see only money going from business and our wallets, jobless increasing, GDP falling, national debt growing and bureaucratic staff numbers and power increasing. Spain showed greenness means growing dole q's. Denmark and Germany showed wind power is useless, costly double coverage. Stopping coal would kill Australia's economy. Stopping oil from Canadian sands would damage Canada's economy. A cooling climate means less wind.
Philosophy is pointless although it is all this farce seems to produce. Something useful to do is plant a tree. Forest destruction and increased corn/wheat and soya crops for biofuel may have something to do with cooling by albedo.
Support nuclear, give the grand children a real problem.

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date