Category Archives: Emissions

Oceanic carbon uptake could falter

What does oceanic carbon uptake achieve? Greenhouse gas that sinks below the waves slows global warming a little and makes the water more acidic.

LONDON, 20 March, 2019 − Scientists can now put a measure to the role of the waves as a climate shock absorber: they estimate that oceanic carbon uptake by the deep blue seas has consumed 34 billion tonnes of man-made carbon from the atmosphere between the years 1994 and 2007.

This is just about 31% of all the carbon emitted in that time by car exhausts, power station chimneys, aircraft, ships, tractors and scorched forest, as human economies expand and ever more fossil fuel is consumed.

This confident figure is based on a global survey of the chemistry and other physical properties of the ocean by scientists from seven nations on more than 50 research cruises, taking measurements of the ocean from the surface to a depth of six kilometres.

The researchers report in the journal Science that they already had the results of a global carbon survey of the oceans conducted at the close of the last century, and had calculated that from the dawn of the Industrial Revolution – when humans started using coal, and then oil and gas – to 1994, the oceans had already absorbed 118 billion tonnes.

“The marine sink does not just respond to the increase in atmospheric CO2. Its substantial sensitivity to climate variations suggests a significant potential for feedbacks”

For the latest exercise, they developed a statistical tool that helped them make the distinction between the man-made and the natural atmospheric carbon dioxide always found dissolved in water.

The good news is that the ocean remains for the moment a stable component of the planet’s carbon budget: overall, as more man-made carbon is emitted from exhausts and chimneys, the ocean takes up proportionally more.

The bad news is that this may not go on for ever. At some point, the planet’s seas could become saturated with carbon, leaving ever more in the atmosphere to accelerate global warming to ever more alarming temperatures.

And there is a second unhappy consequence: the more carbon dioxide absorbed by the oceans, the more the sea shifts towards a weak solution of carbonic acid, with potentially calamitous consequences both for marine life and for commercial fisheries.

Research like this is essentially of academic interest: it adds precision to the big picture of a vast ocean that absorbs carbon dioxide, and overturning currents that take it to great depths, and out of atmospheric circulation.

An active moderator

But it is also a reminder that the ocean plays an active role in moderating planetary temperatures, absorbing ever greater quantities of heat and responding with fiercer levels of energy.

It also confirms that although, on average, the high seas are responding to atmospheric change as expected, different ocean basins can vary: the North Atlantic actually absorbed 20% less CO2 than expected between 1994 and 2007, probably thanks to the slowing of the North Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation at the time.

And, the researchers say, the acidification of the oceans is on the increase, to depths of 3000 metres. The next step is to understand a little better the interplay between ocean, atmosphere and human emissions of greenhouse gases.

“We learned that the marine sink does not just respond to the increase in atmospheric CO2,” said Nicolas Gruber of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, always known as ETH Zurich, who led the study.

“Its substantial sensitivity to climate variations suggests a significant potential for feedbacks with the ongoing change in climate.” − Climate News Network

What does oceanic carbon uptake achieve? Greenhouse gas that sinks below the waves slows global warming a little and makes the water more acidic.

LONDON, 20 March, 2019 − Scientists can now put a measure to the role of the waves as a climate shock absorber: they estimate that oceanic carbon uptake by the deep blue seas has consumed 34 billion tonnes of man-made carbon from the atmosphere between the years 1994 and 2007.

This is just about 31% of all the carbon emitted in that time by car exhausts, power station chimneys, aircraft, ships, tractors and scorched forest, as human economies expand and ever more fossil fuel is consumed.

This confident figure is based on a global survey of the chemistry and other physical properties of the ocean by scientists from seven nations on more than 50 research cruises, taking measurements of the ocean from the surface to a depth of six kilometres.

The researchers report in the journal Science that they already had the results of a global carbon survey of the oceans conducted at the close of the last century, and had calculated that from the dawn of the Industrial Revolution – when humans started using coal, and then oil and gas – to 1994, the oceans had already absorbed 118 billion tonnes.

“The marine sink does not just respond to the increase in atmospheric CO2. Its substantial sensitivity to climate variations suggests a significant potential for feedbacks”

For the latest exercise, they developed a statistical tool that helped them make the distinction between the man-made and the natural atmospheric carbon dioxide always found dissolved in water.

The good news is that the ocean remains for the moment a stable component of the planet’s carbon budget: overall, as more man-made carbon is emitted from exhausts and chimneys, the ocean takes up proportionally more.

The bad news is that this may not go on for ever. At some point, the planet’s seas could become saturated with carbon, leaving ever more in the atmosphere to accelerate global warming to ever more alarming temperatures.

And there is a second unhappy consequence: the more carbon dioxide absorbed by the oceans, the more the sea shifts towards a weak solution of carbonic acid, with potentially calamitous consequences both for marine life and for commercial fisheries.

Research like this is essentially of academic interest: it adds precision to the big picture of a vast ocean that absorbs carbon dioxide, and overturning currents that take it to great depths, and out of atmospheric circulation.

An active moderator

But it is also a reminder that the ocean plays an active role in moderating planetary temperatures, absorbing ever greater quantities of heat and responding with fiercer levels of energy.

It also confirms that although, on average, the high seas are responding to atmospheric change as expected, different ocean basins can vary: the North Atlantic actually absorbed 20% less CO2 than expected between 1994 and 2007, probably thanks to the slowing of the North Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation at the time.

And, the researchers say, the acidification of the oceans is on the increase, to depths of 3000 metres. The next step is to understand a little better the interplay between ocean, atmosphere and human emissions of greenhouse gases.

“We learned that the marine sink does not just respond to the increase in atmospheric CO2,” said Nicolas Gruber of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, always known as ETH Zurich, who led the study.

“Its substantial sensitivity to climate variations suggests a significant potential for feedbacks with the ongoing change in climate.” − Climate News Network

Green New Deal aims for triple payback

Support is growing for a plan to tackle climate change, our economic crisis and deepening social divisions together − the Green New Deal.

LONDON, 18 March, 2019 − If you haven’t yet heard of the Green New Deal, chances are that you soon will. To its growing band of supporters, it looks like an idea whose time has come.

Just suppose we could see a  way to transform the global economy, society and even the environment so that they met real needs, and promised to go on doing so far into the future. Well, we can. And it’s growing simpler all the time, futurologists say.

The bad news? Inertia and resistance. Too few of us think we really need a transformation. Too many are actively trying to prevent one. No change there then − except that the balance may be starting to shift, thanks largely to science and money − and ordinary people who are refusing to go on as we are.

Supporters of the Green New Deal say we don’t have to look very far ahead for results − no further than about mid-century.

By then, some of them told The New Yorker magazine, much of the world should be able to achieve the goal of zero carbon emissions, a goal for which they say the world already has about 90-95% of the technology it needs.

Technological gallop

One problem often raised is the need to store the power produced by wind and solar power, which may be inconveniently unavailable just when it’s needed. But even here there are hopeful signs that the galloping pace of technological advance may soon have an answer in the form of greatly improved batteries.

The Deal’s supporters are not the first to claim we’re most of the way towards a carbon-free future in 30 years, and possibly well before that. But this Deal, itself a reminder of US President Franklin D Roosevelt’s 1933 New Deal, explores more ambitious territory still, with the prospect of also ensuring a living wage job for everyone who wants one and reducing racial, regional and gender-based inequalities in income and wealth.

To make any headway the new Deal will need strong political backing. Here it’s had a stroke of luck, being identified with the arrival in Washington DC of the politician Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the youngest woman ever elected to the US Congress.

There are signs across the Atlantic of mounting involvement in the ideas spelt out in the Green New Deal, incorporating lessons learned from France, for instance, and the experience of Germany.

“Any Green New Deal worthy of the name creates millions of ‘green collar’ jobs … The opportunities are immediate, needed and everywhere”

In Britain a rising star of the parliamentary opposition, Clive Lewis, the shadow sustainable economy minister, told a recent meeting: “The green economy will simply be ‘the economy’ under the next Labour government”.

The British economist Ann Pettifor, a fellow of the New Economics Foundation, describes the Green New Deal as “incredibly ambitious . . . a huge advance for green campaigners and, hopefully, for our threatened species.”  Pettifor was co-author of the original Green New Deal Report, published in the UK in 2008, which in many ways prefigured the present US initiative.

Her fellow co-author was Andrew Simms, now co-ordinator of the Rapid Transition Alliance (RTA), an enthusiastic backer of Ocasio-Cortez’ vision.

The RTA says: “Like the UK proposal, [the Deal] seeks to tackle the climate and economic crisis simultaneously and looks at job creation, decarbonising electricity, renovating buildings for energy efficiency and much more.

Affordable

“A Green New Deal today would cost no more than [Roosevelt’s] New Deal, less than the 2008 bailouts, and see off the worst effects of the climate crisis.”

Simms told the Climate News Network: “What does it actually look like to start transforming our economies to prevent climate breakdown and meet the internationally agreed climate targets?

“Practically it looks like a Green New Deal − a programme that meets our economic, social and environmental needs at the same time − a ‘win, win, win’ package of measures.

“Any Green New Deal worthy of the name creates millions of ‘green collar’ jobs by building the low-carbon infrastructures which respect environmental limits and are vital to modern economies − renewable energy, zero carbon homes, efficient and clean mass transport systems delivered by switching investments from old, dirty ways of doing things and with innovative financial mechanisms. The opportunities are immediate, needed and everywhere.”

Obstacles remain

Perhaps an idea which puts the environment, the economy and social justice together can hope to mobilise mass support in a way the three distinct groups have so far not managed to achieve − especially when it exploits the potential of new technology and falling costs. But there’s still political inertia to reckon with, and financial self-interest.

Even there, change may be afoot. A British group of scientists, activists and one former archbishop of Canterbury, ExtinctionRebellion, has been staging audacious public protests in the UK for four months now, and started a spring uprising on 16 March, giving no sign yet of succumbing to inertia.

And resistance to the very idea that the world needs an energy transformation? A brief online search for the way parts of the fossil fuel industry continue to challenge and decry climate science suggests change could be coming there too. One example from the US site Inside Climate News shows the deniers are facing challenges of their own.

Change on the scale envisaged by the Green New Deal is certainly demanding, but it will be far less so than refusing to change. − Climate News Network

* * *

The Rapid Transition Alliance is coordinated by the New Weather Institute, the STEPS Centre at the Institute of  Development Studies, and the School of Global Studies at the University of Sussex, UK. The Climate News Network is partnering with and supported by the Rapid Transition Alliance, and will be reporting regularly on its work. If you would like to see more stories of evidence-based hope for rapid transition, please sign up here.

Do you know a story of rapid transition? If so, we’d like to hear from you. Please send us a brief outline on info@climatenewsnetwork.net. Thank you.

Support is growing for a plan to tackle climate change, our economic crisis and deepening social divisions together − the Green New Deal.

LONDON, 18 March, 2019 − If you haven’t yet heard of the Green New Deal, chances are that you soon will. To its growing band of supporters, it looks like an idea whose time has come.

Just suppose we could see a  way to transform the global economy, society and even the environment so that they met real needs, and promised to go on doing so far into the future. Well, we can. And it’s growing simpler all the time, futurologists say.

The bad news? Inertia and resistance. Too few of us think we really need a transformation. Too many are actively trying to prevent one. No change there then − except that the balance may be starting to shift, thanks largely to science and money − and ordinary people who are refusing to go on as we are.

Supporters of the Green New Deal say we don’t have to look very far ahead for results − no further than about mid-century.

By then, some of them told The New Yorker magazine, much of the world should be able to achieve the goal of zero carbon emissions, a goal for which they say the world already has about 90-95% of the technology it needs.

Technological gallop

One problem often raised is the need to store the power produced by wind and solar power, which may be inconveniently unavailable just when it’s needed. But even here there are hopeful signs that the galloping pace of technological advance may soon have an answer in the form of greatly improved batteries.

The Deal’s supporters are not the first to claim we’re most of the way towards a carbon-free future in 30 years, and possibly well before that. But this Deal, itself a reminder of US President Franklin D Roosevelt’s 1933 New Deal, explores more ambitious territory still, with the prospect of also ensuring a living wage job for everyone who wants one and reducing racial, regional and gender-based inequalities in income and wealth.

To make any headway the new Deal will need strong political backing. Here it’s had a stroke of luck, being identified with the arrival in Washington DC of the politician Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the youngest woman ever elected to the US Congress.

There are signs across the Atlantic of mounting involvement in the ideas spelt out in the Green New Deal, incorporating lessons learned from France, for instance, and the experience of Germany.

“Any Green New Deal worthy of the name creates millions of ‘green collar’ jobs … The opportunities are immediate, needed and everywhere”

In Britain a rising star of the parliamentary opposition, Clive Lewis, the shadow sustainable economy minister, told a recent meeting: “The green economy will simply be ‘the economy’ under the next Labour government”.

The British economist Ann Pettifor, a fellow of the New Economics Foundation, describes the Green New Deal as “incredibly ambitious . . . a huge advance for green campaigners and, hopefully, for our threatened species.”  Pettifor was co-author of the original Green New Deal Report, published in the UK in 2008, which in many ways prefigured the present US initiative.

Her fellow co-author was Andrew Simms, now co-ordinator of the Rapid Transition Alliance (RTA), an enthusiastic backer of Ocasio-Cortez’ vision.

The RTA says: “Like the UK proposal, [the Deal] seeks to tackle the climate and economic crisis simultaneously and looks at job creation, decarbonising electricity, renovating buildings for energy efficiency and much more.

Affordable

“A Green New Deal today would cost no more than [Roosevelt’s] New Deal, less than the 2008 bailouts, and see off the worst effects of the climate crisis.”

Simms told the Climate News Network: “What does it actually look like to start transforming our economies to prevent climate breakdown and meet the internationally agreed climate targets?

“Practically it looks like a Green New Deal − a programme that meets our economic, social and environmental needs at the same time − a ‘win, win, win’ package of measures.

“Any Green New Deal worthy of the name creates millions of ‘green collar’ jobs by building the low-carbon infrastructures which respect environmental limits and are vital to modern economies − renewable energy, zero carbon homes, efficient and clean mass transport systems delivered by switching investments from old, dirty ways of doing things and with innovative financial mechanisms. The opportunities are immediate, needed and everywhere.”

Obstacles remain

Perhaps an idea which puts the environment, the economy and social justice together can hope to mobilise mass support in a way the three distinct groups have so far not managed to achieve − especially when it exploits the potential of new technology and falling costs. But there’s still political inertia to reckon with, and financial self-interest.

Even there, change may be afoot. A British group of scientists, activists and one former archbishop of Canterbury, ExtinctionRebellion, has been staging audacious public protests in the UK for four months now, and started a spring uprising on 16 March, giving no sign yet of succumbing to inertia.

And resistance to the very idea that the world needs an energy transformation? A brief online search for the way parts of the fossil fuel industry continue to challenge and decry climate science suggests change could be coming there too. One example from the US site Inside Climate News shows the deniers are facing challenges of their own.

Change on the scale envisaged by the Green New Deal is certainly demanding, but it will be far less so than refusing to change. − Climate News Network

* * *

The Rapid Transition Alliance is coordinated by the New Weather Institute, the STEPS Centre at the Institute of  Development Studies, and the School of Global Studies at the University of Sussex, UK. The Climate News Network is partnering with and supported by the Rapid Transition Alliance, and will be reporting regularly on its work. If you would like to see more stories of evidence-based hope for rapid transition, please sign up here.

Do you know a story of rapid transition? If so, we’d like to hear from you. Please send us a brief outline on info@climatenewsnetwork.net. Thank you.

Uncertain futures warn world to act as one

Different computer simulations deliver variant and uncertain futures. One research team has studied millions. And in most cases the outlook remains ominous.

LONDON, 15 March, 2019 − US scientists have peered ahead in more than five million ways, and they do not like the uncertain futures they see there. Unless the world collectively and in concert takes drastic steps to slow or halt global warming, generations to come face an intolerable prospect.

And even if humans do switch from fossil fuels to renewable energy, economise on resources and restore the world’s forests and grasslands, there is still no guarantee that disaster will not happen.

That is because the outcome depends not just on the steps humans take now, but on one of the great, unresolved scientific questions: just how sensitive is climate to shifts in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere?

If sensitivity is low, and humankind acts effectively and immediately, the future could be tolerable. But in a total of 5,200,000 computer-generated scenarios involving population growth, economic development, the role of carbon in the economy and the levels of climate sensitivity, this happens only relatively infrequently.

“If large abatement efforts are undertaken, warming is generally limited and damages are low. However, aggressive abatement action does not guarantee a ‘tolerable’ future,” the scientists write, in the journal Nature Climate Change.

Good luck needed

“Our simple analysis shows that, to achieve a tolerable future, we must also have the good fortune of living in a world with low climate sensitivity. Failure to rapidly increase abatement all but guarantees failure over a very wide range of climate sensitivities.

“We show that our generation has an important responsibility to ensure that coming generations have a tolerable future.”

And they conclude: “It is still, however, a gamble that depends on how sensitive the climate turns out to be and how soon the promises of negative emissions materialise, but we show immediate rapid growth in abatement remains our safest course of action.”

At the heart of all such studies is the question: how much time does human society have before climate change becomes dangerous and inevitable?

The scientists defined “tolerable” as a future in which global warming stopped, by 2100, at 2°C or less above historic levels, a future 195 nations have already agreed to work for in Paris in 2015.

“Uncertainty is sometimes interpreted as an excuse for delaying action. Our research shows that uncertainty can be a solid reason to take immediate action”

To achieve this tolerable future, the scientists reasoned that the cost of abatement should be no more than 3% of the gross world product, and the damage wrought by climate change no more than 2%. Then they considered 24 levels of uncertainty in what they call the “human-Earth system” and generated their vast number of possible outcomes.

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have already soared from around 280 parts per million to more than 400 ppm, and global average temperatures have soared with them, to around 1°C above the average for most of human history.

Climate scientists have already identified the costs of “intolerable” climate change. They warn that as the thermometer rises, so does the threat of devastating famine. Extremes of heat become increasingly lethal. Floods could become more devastating and sea levels rise  dangerously. Drought, rising temperatures and food shortages are likely to create the conditions for  dangerous conflict.

But in 2019 greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels  are likely to be higher than ever. The world is already midway through the hottest decade since records began. And the planet could tip the 1.5°C global average temperature rise – the target proposed in Paris – in the next decade.

No reassurance

The consequences of accelerated global warming could be calamitous, but there is still argument about the rate of change, the role of the natural cycles in atmosphere and ocean that influence climate, the scale of hazard to human civilisation and the nature of the steps vital to contain warming.

So the US researchers decided to look at the whole range of possible future outcomes. Their answers are not reassuring.

The message is that either global economies react now – at considerable cost and for no immediate reward – or that future generations must pay what could be a wretched price for present inaction.

“Despite massive uncertainties in a multitude of sectors, human actions are still the driving factor in determining the long-term climate,” said Jonathan Lamontagne, a civil engineer at Tufts University in Massachusetts, who led the study.

“Uncertainty is sometimes interpreted as an excuse for delaying action. Our research shows that uncertainty can be a solid reason to take immediate action.” − Climate News Network

Different computer simulations deliver variant and uncertain futures. One research team has studied millions. And in most cases the outlook remains ominous.

LONDON, 15 March, 2019 − US scientists have peered ahead in more than five million ways, and they do not like the uncertain futures they see there. Unless the world collectively and in concert takes drastic steps to slow or halt global warming, generations to come face an intolerable prospect.

And even if humans do switch from fossil fuels to renewable energy, economise on resources and restore the world’s forests and grasslands, there is still no guarantee that disaster will not happen.

That is because the outcome depends not just on the steps humans take now, but on one of the great, unresolved scientific questions: just how sensitive is climate to shifts in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere?

If sensitivity is low, and humankind acts effectively and immediately, the future could be tolerable. But in a total of 5,200,000 computer-generated scenarios involving population growth, economic development, the role of carbon in the economy and the levels of climate sensitivity, this happens only relatively infrequently.

“If large abatement efforts are undertaken, warming is generally limited and damages are low. However, aggressive abatement action does not guarantee a ‘tolerable’ future,” the scientists write, in the journal Nature Climate Change.

Good luck needed

“Our simple analysis shows that, to achieve a tolerable future, we must also have the good fortune of living in a world with low climate sensitivity. Failure to rapidly increase abatement all but guarantees failure over a very wide range of climate sensitivities.

“We show that our generation has an important responsibility to ensure that coming generations have a tolerable future.”

And they conclude: “It is still, however, a gamble that depends on how sensitive the climate turns out to be and how soon the promises of negative emissions materialise, but we show immediate rapid growth in abatement remains our safest course of action.”

At the heart of all such studies is the question: how much time does human society have before climate change becomes dangerous and inevitable?

The scientists defined “tolerable” as a future in which global warming stopped, by 2100, at 2°C or less above historic levels, a future 195 nations have already agreed to work for in Paris in 2015.

“Uncertainty is sometimes interpreted as an excuse for delaying action. Our research shows that uncertainty can be a solid reason to take immediate action”

To achieve this tolerable future, the scientists reasoned that the cost of abatement should be no more than 3% of the gross world product, and the damage wrought by climate change no more than 2%. Then they considered 24 levels of uncertainty in what they call the “human-Earth system” and generated their vast number of possible outcomes.

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have already soared from around 280 parts per million to more than 400 ppm, and global average temperatures have soared with them, to around 1°C above the average for most of human history.

Climate scientists have already identified the costs of “intolerable” climate change. They warn that as the thermometer rises, so does the threat of devastating famine. Extremes of heat become increasingly lethal. Floods could become more devastating and sea levels rise  dangerously. Drought, rising temperatures and food shortages are likely to create the conditions for  dangerous conflict.

But in 2019 greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels  are likely to be higher than ever. The world is already midway through the hottest decade since records began. And the planet could tip the 1.5°C global average temperature rise – the target proposed in Paris – in the next decade.

No reassurance

The consequences of accelerated global warming could be calamitous, but there is still argument about the rate of change, the role of the natural cycles in atmosphere and ocean that influence climate, the scale of hazard to human civilisation and the nature of the steps vital to contain warming.

So the US researchers decided to look at the whole range of possible future outcomes. Their answers are not reassuring.

The message is that either global economies react now – at considerable cost and for no immediate reward – or that future generations must pay what could be a wretched price for present inaction.

“Despite massive uncertainties in a multitude of sectors, human actions are still the driving factor in determining the long-term climate,” said Jonathan Lamontagne, a civil engineer at Tufts University in Massachusetts, who led the study.

“Uncertainty is sometimes interpreted as an excuse for delaying action. Our research shows that uncertainty can be a solid reason to take immediate action.” − Climate News Network

Paris climate pledge would help world fishing

Honouring the Paris climate pledge would provide a fair catch for the world’s fishing fleets. Warm up the oceans, though, and everyone loses.

LONDON, 12 March, 2019 – Canadian scientists have worked out the way to make the most of the world’s fish stocks: by honouring the Paris climate pledge.

Seagoing nations could raise revenues for their fishing fleets, put more seafood on the table and protect the most valuable commercial fish stocks simply by doing what they had promised in 2015 to do anyway.

The key is the historic agreement reached then in Paris by 195 nations, to take steps to limit average global warming to “well below” a total of 2°C above the long-term average for most of human history, and to do this by 2100.

In the last century or so the global temperature has already risen by around 1°C, as a consequence of ever-increasing combustion of fossil fuels that emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

“The largest gains will occur in developing country waters … which are at the greatest risk due to warming temperatures”

But although the world agreed its ideal target, the action so far leaves it on course for a potentially catastrophic rise of 3.5°C by the end of the century.

“Achieving the Agreement’s target could increase global fisheries revenues by $4.6 billion annually, seafood workers’ income by $3.7 bn and reduce household seafood expenditures by $5.4 bn,” said Rashid Sumaila, of the University of British Columbia’s Institute for Oceans and Fisheries.

“The largest gains will occur in developing country waters, such as Kiribati, the Maldives and Indonesia, which are at the greatest risk due to warming temperatures and rely the most on fish for food security, incomes and employment.”

What the researchers did – they explain their approach in the journal Science Advances – was to match what the computer forecasts said the Paris target would deliver, with what might happen if the world went on burning oil, coal and gas under the notorious business-as-usual scenario.

Impacts on ecosystems

They looked at the impact of less or more warming on 381 marine species, including the 10 that generate the most money, and they included ecosystem consequences as well as the economic payoff promised by the Paris target.

Their conclusion is that three-fourths of maritime countries would benefit, with the largest gains to be made by the developing nations.

Under the Paris scenario, the total mass of the fish species that generate the highest revenues would increase globally by 6.5%, with an 8.4% increase in the waters of developing countries. Overall, developed countries would see a marginal fall of 0.4%.

The Paris option would see an additional 3.3 million tonnes landed sustainably every year, compared with the business-as-usual scenario.

Conservation also needed

The British Columbia scientists are not the first to make the case for Paris in terms of fishery revenues: US and Japanese scientists looked at the same problem last year and concluded that the Paris option – matched by careful conservation approaches – could yield more fish for the hungry, and more revenues for the fishermen, if the ocean temperatures were kept from rising too dangerously.

But all the signals so far are ominous. A warmer world means a stormier one and greater danger for fishing fleets. More carbon dioxide in the atmosphere means ever more acidic seas, which seems to affect fish behaviour and threaten marine habitats such as coral reefs and kelp forests.

The same rise in carbon dioxide will warm the oceans and drive fish to migrate. Overall, humans have already left the seas diminished, and worse could be on the way. Fishing and seafood support an estimated 260 million full-time and part-time jobs worldwide.

Many to benefit

The Science Advances study is a reminder that while change is inexorable, the worst need not be inevitable. All continents except Europe would benefit from implementation of the Paris Agreement.

But as fish move towards the poles, countries in northern Europe might benefit from greater choice in their waters, and losses in the overall catch might be buffered by hjgher prices for those fish actually landed.

Russia could see catches reduced by as much as 25% under the 1.5°C target rather than the 3.5°C forecast. “However a projected 19% increase in fish prices, known as the price effect, should result in a negligible loss of less than 2% in fisheries revenues in Russia,” said William Cheung, one of the co-authors, of the University of British Columbia.

“Conversely, for the US fishing revenues are expected to decrease by 8% due to price effects but will be offset by a 21% increase in catch potential.” – Climate News Network

Honouring the Paris climate pledge would provide a fair catch for the world’s fishing fleets. Warm up the oceans, though, and everyone loses.

LONDON, 12 March, 2019 – Canadian scientists have worked out the way to make the most of the world’s fish stocks: by honouring the Paris climate pledge.

Seagoing nations could raise revenues for their fishing fleets, put more seafood on the table and protect the most valuable commercial fish stocks simply by doing what they had promised in 2015 to do anyway.

The key is the historic agreement reached then in Paris by 195 nations, to take steps to limit average global warming to “well below” a total of 2°C above the long-term average for most of human history, and to do this by 2100.

In the last century or so the global temperature has already risen by around 1°C, as a consequence of ever-increasing combustion of fossil fuels that emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

“The largest gains will occur in developing country waters … which are at the greatest risk due to warming temperatures”

But although the world agreed its ideal target, the action so far leaves it on course for a potentially catastrophic rise of 3.5°C by the end of the century.

“Achieving the Agreement’s target could increase global fisheries revenues by $4.6 billion annually, seafood workers’ income by $3.7 bn and reduce household seafood expenditures by $5.4 bn,” said Rashid Sumaila, of the University of British Columbia’s Institute for Oceans and Fisheries.

“The largest gains will occur in developing country waters, such as Kiribati, the Maldives and Indonesia, which are at the greatest risk due to warming temperatures and rely the most on fish for food security, incomes and employment.”

What the researchers did – they explain their approach in the journal Science Advances – was to match what the computer forecasts said the Paris target would deliver, with what might happen if the world went on burning oil, coal and gas under the notorious business-as-usual scenario.

Impacts on ecosystems

They looked at the impact of less or more warming on 381 marine species, including the 10 that generate the most money, and they included ecosystem consequences as well as the economic payoff promised by the Paris target.

Their conclusion is that three-fourths of maritime countries would benefit, with the largest gains to be made by the developing nations.

Under the Paris scenario, the total mass of the fish species that generate the highest revenues would increase globally by 6.5%, with an 8.4% increase in the waters of developing countries. Overall, developed countries would see a marginal fall of 0.4%.

The Paris option would see an additional 3.3 million tonnes landed sustainably every year, compared with the business-as-usual scenario.

Conservation also needed

The British Columbia scientists are not the first to make the case for Paris in terms of fishery revenues: US and Japanese scientists looked at the same problem last year and concluded that the Paris option – matched by careful conservation approaches – could yield more fish for the hungry, and more revenues for the fishermen, if the ocean temperatures were kept from rising too dangerously.

But all the signals so far are ominous. A warmer world means a stormier one and greater danger for fishing fleets. More carbon dioxide in the atmosphere means ever more acidic seas, which seems to affect fish behaviour and threaten marine habitats such as coral reefs and kelp forests.

The same rise in carbon dioxide will warm the oceans and drive fish to migrate. Overall, humans have already left the seas diminished, and worse could be on the way. Fishing and seafood support an estimated 260 million full-time and part-time jobs worldwide.

Many to benefit

The Science Advances study is a reminder that while change is inexorable, the worst need not be inevitable. All continents except Europe would benefit from implementation of the Paris Agreement.

But as fish move towards the poles, countries in northern Europe might benefit from greater choice in their waters, and losses in the overall catch might be buffered by hjgher prices for those fish actually landed.

Russia could see catches reduced by as much as 25% under the 1.5°C target rather than the 3.5°C forecast. “However a projected 19% increase in fish prices, known as the price effect, should result in a negligible loss of less than 2% in fisheries revenues in Russia,” said William Cheung, one of the co-authors, of the University of British Columbia.

“Conversely, for the US fishing revenues are expected to decrease by 8% due to price effects but will be offset by a 21% increase in catch potential.” – Climate News Network

Young forests use carbon most effectively

As greenhouse gas consumers, young forests use carbon more industriously in the temperate and cool zones than older forests.

LONDON, 28 February, 2019 − For forests, it really does help to be young. British scientists who have identified the vital factor that shows what makes a forest a good carbon sink say young forests use carbon best and absorb it most efficiently.

A new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences seems on the face of it to settle an old puzzle with an unsurprising answer. New and young forests make the most efficient and effective carbon sinks.

Humans burn fossil fuels and emit vast quantities of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The felling, burning and clearing of natural forest releases ever more carbon.

But green plants absorb CO2 to make tissue and turn the gas into root and branch, leaf and bark, trunk and fruit. So scientists, led by Tom Pugh of the University of Birmingham in England, addressed the question: what kind of forest is best as a carbon sink?

“Ultimately reforestation programmes will only be effective if we simultaneously work to reduce our emissions”

They gathered data about forest age, devised computer models and looked at the estimates of carbon intake between 2001 and 2010 in old, long-established areas of forest. Then they looked at the data from younger stands of timber that had colonised areas once logged, or damaged by forest fire, or farmed and then abandoned.

They identified an age effect in stands of timber less than 140 years old: big enough to account for 25% of forest carbon uptake from the atmosphere.

And although the great tropical rainforests are regarded as the “lungs” of the planet, and invaluable resources and homes for biodiversity, in fact the most efficient carbon dioxide consumers were forests in the middle and high latitudes: these included areas of land once farmed in the US eastern states, and then left to become part of the US National Forest, and farmland abandoned during the worldwide economic depression of the 1930s.

The finding seems reasonable, if only because the carbon appetite that turns a sapling into a full-grown tree would seem to be more demanding than that of mature or very old trees. But nothing about the notorious “carbon budget problem” is simple.

Uncertain response

It is an axiom of global response to climate change that forests should be protected and restored. But the nature and the mechanisms of forest carbon uptake can be difficult to establish.

In theory forests may absorb around a third of all carbon emissions, but the way trees could respond to the extra carbon dioxide available is still not certain.

As carbon dioxide ratios in the atmosphere increase, the planet warms and climates change: it could be possible for some forests, some of the time, to actually release more carbon than they absorb.

And while it might seem obvious that young trees would be greedier than old ones, precise measurement of the forest giants doesn’t necessarily tell the same story. Although the importance of forests is not in question, researchers keep making the point that forests are not enough.

Drastic cuts needed

Humans must still find ways to drastically cut fossil fuel use, and greenhouse gas emissions. But as of 2019, there is no sign that this is happening.

But the latest research confirms the value of some investments. It suggests that the vast reforestation programmes launched in China, and the huge boreal forests of Canada, Russia and Europe, are playing an important role in climate management.

“It’s important to get a clear sense of where and why this carbon uptake is happening, because it helps us make targeted and informed decisions about forest management,” Dr Pugh said.

“The amount of CO2 that can be taken up by forests is a finite amount; ultimately reforestation programmes will only be effective if we simultaneously work to reduce our emissions.” − Climate News Network

As greenhouse gas consumers, young forests use carbon more industriously in the temperate and cool zones than older forests.

LONDON, 28 February, 2019 − For forests, it really does help to be young. British scientists who have identified the vital factor that shows what makes a forest a good carbon sink say young forests use carbon best and absorb it most efficiently.

A new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences seems on the face of it to settle an old puzzle with an unsurprising answer. New and young forests make the most efficient and effective carbon sinks.

Humans burn fossil fuels and emit vast quantities of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The felling, burning and clearing of natural forest releases ever more carbon.

But green plants absorb CO2 to make tissue and turn the gas into root and branch, leaf and bark, trunk and fruit. So scientists, led by Tom Pugh of the University of Birmingham in England, addressed the question: what kind of forest is best as a carbon sink?

“Ultimately reforestation programmes will only be effective if we simultaneously work to reduce our emissions”

They gathered data about forest age, devised computer models and looked at the estimates of carbon intake between 2001 and 2010 in old, long-established areas of forest. Then they looked at the data from younger stands of timber that had colonised areas once logged, or damaged by forest fire, or farmed and then abandoned.

They identified an age effect in stands of timber less than 140 years old: big enough to account for 25% of forest carbon uptake from the atmosphere.

And although the great tropical rainforests are regarded as the “lungs” of the planet, and invaluable resources and homes for biodiversity, in fact the most efficient carbon dioxide consumers were forests in the middle and high latitudes: these included areas of land once farmed in the US eastern states, and then left to become part of the US National Forest, and farmland abandoned during the worldwide economic depression of the 1930s.

The finding seems reasonable, if only because the carbon appetite that turns a sapling into a full-grown tree would seem to be more demanding than that of mature or very old trees. But nothing about the notorious “carbon budget problem” is simple.

Uncertain response

It is an axiom of global response to climate change that forests should be protected and restored. But the nature and the mechanisms of forest carbon uptake can be difficult to establish.

In theory forests may absorb around a third of all carbon emissions, but the way trees could respond to the extra carbon dioxide available is still not certain.

As carbon dioxide ratios in the atmosphere increase, the planet warms and climates change: it could be possible for some forests, some of the time, to actually release more carbon than they absorb.

And while it might seem obvious that young trees would be greedier than old ones, precise measurement of the forest giants doesn’t necessarily tell the same story. Although the importance of forests is not in question, researchers keep making the point that forests are not enough.

Drastic cuts needed

Humans must still find ways to drastically cut fossil fuel use, and greenhouse gas emissions. But as of 2019, there is no sign that this is happening.

But the latest research confirms the value of some investments. It suggests that the vast reforestation programmes launched in China, and the huge boreal forests of Canada, Russia and Europe, are playing an important role in climate management.

“It’s important to get a clear sense of where and why this carbon uptake is happening, because it helps us make targeted and informed decisions about forest management,” Dr Pugh said.

“The amount of CO2 that can be taken up by forests is a finite amount; ultimately reforestation programmes will only be effective if we simultaneously work to reduce our emissions.” − Climate News Network

Carbon rise could cause cloud tipping point

The planet’s temperature could zoom in an ever more greenhouse world, as researchers identify a dangerous possible cloud tipping point.

LONDON, 27 February, 2019 − Climate scientists have confirmed a high-level hazard, a cloud tipping point, that could send global warming into a dramatic upwards spiral.

If carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere become high enough, the clouds that shade and cool some of the tropical and subtropical oceans could become unstable and disperse. More radiation would slam into the ocean and the coasts, and surface temperatures could soar as high as 8°C above the levels for most of human history.

And this dramatic spike would be independent of any warming directly linked to the steady rise in carbon dioxide concentrations themselves, the scientists warn.

In Paris in 2015, a total of 195 nations vowed to take steps to contain global warming to “well below” a maximum of 2°C above the average before the start of the Industrial Revolution, powered by the exploitation of fossil fuels.

In the last 200 years, levels of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have increased from 288 parts per million to around 410 ppm and the average global temperature has already increased by about 1°C.

“Our results show that there are dangerous climate change thresholds that we have been unaware of”

Researchers have repeatedly warned that the Paris promises have yet to be turned into coherent and consistent action, and that if the world goes on burning coal, oil and natural gas on a “business as usual” scenario, catastrophic consequences could follow.

Now US researchers warn in the journal Nature Geoscience that they know a bit more about the climate mechanisms by which global warming could accelerate.

If carbon dioxide ratios climb to 1,200 ppm – and without drastic action this could happen in the next century – then the Earth could reach a tipping point, and the marine stratus clouds that shade one-fifth of the low-latitude oceans and reflect between 30% and 60% of shortwave radiation back into space could break up and scatter.

The sunlight they normally block would slam into the deep blue sea, to warm the planet even faster.

Avoidance possible

“I think and hope that technological changes will slow carbon emissions so that we do not actually reach such high CO2 concentrations,” said Tapio Schneider, an environmental scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, the research centre managed for the US space agency NASA by the California Institute of Technology.

“But our results show that there are dangerous climate change thresholds that we have been unaware of.”

The role of clouds in the intricate interplay of sunlight, forests, oceans, rocks and atmosphere that controls the planet’s climate has been the subject of argument. Do clouds really slow warming? And if so, by how much, and under what conditions?

There may not be a simple answer, although researchers are fairly confident that the thinning of clouds over the California coasts may have made calamitous wildfires in the state more probable.

So to resolve what Professor Schneider calls “a blind spot” in climate modelling, he and his colleagues worked on a small-scale computer simulation of one representative section of the atmosphere above the subtropical ocean, and then used supercomputers to model the clouds and their turbulent movement over a mathematical representation of the sea. And then they started to tune up the atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide.

Carbon threshold

They found that, once CO2 levels reached 1,200 ppm, the decks of stratocumulus cloud vanished, and did not reappear until CO2 levels dropped to well below this dangerous threshold.

If – and this has yet to happen – other researchers use different approaches to confirm the result, then the US scientists will have established a better understanding of one component of natural climate control.

The research may also illuminate a puzzle of climate history: 50 million or more years ago, during a geological epoch called the Eocene, the Arctic ice cap melted. Climate models have shown that, for this to happen, atmospheric carbon ratios would need to rise to 4,000 ppm.

These, the Caltech team, suggests, would be “implausibly high” CO2 levels. The latest study suggests this might be an overestimate: a mere 1,200 ppm would be enough to set the planetary thermometer soaring. − Climate News Network

The planet’s temperature could zoom in an ever more greenhouse world, as researchers identify a dangerous possible cloud tipping point.

LONDON, 27 February, 2019 − Climate scientists have confirmed a high-level hazard, a cloud tipping point, that could send global warming into a dramatic upwards spiral.

If carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere become high enough, the clouds that shade and cool some of the tropical and subtropical oceans could become unstable and disperse. More radiation would slam into the ocean and the coasts, and surface temperatures could soar as high as 8°C above the levels for most of human history.

And this dramatic spike would be independent of any warming directly linked to the steady rise in carbon dioxide concentrations themselves, the scientists warn.

In Paris in 2015, a total of 195 nations vowed to take steps to contain global warming to “well below” a maximum of 2°C above the average before the start of the Industrial Revolution, powered by the exploitation of fossil fuels.

In the last 200 years, levels of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have increased from 288 parts per million to around 410 ppm and the average global temperature has already increased by about 1°C.

“Our results show that there are dangerous climate change thresholds that we have been unaware of”

Researchers have repeatedly warned that the Paris promises have yet to be turned into coherent and consistent action, and that if the world goes on burning coal, oil and natural gas on a “business as usual” scenario, catastrophic consequences could follow.

Now US researchers warn in the journal Nature Geoscience that they know a bit more about the climate mechanisms by which global warming could accelerate.

If carbon dioxide ratios climb to 1,200 ppm – and without drastic action this could happen in the next century – then the Earth could reach a tipping point, and the marine stratus clouds that shade one-fifth of the low-latitude oceans and reflect between 30% and 60% of shortwave radiation back into space could break up and scatter.

The sunlight they normally block would slam into the deep blue sea, to warm the planet even faster.

Avoidance possible

“I think and hope that technological changes will slow carbon emissions so that we do not actually reach such high CO2 concentrations,” said Tapio Schneider, an environmental scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, the research centre managed for the US space agency NASA by the California Institute of Technology.

“But our results show that there are dangerous climate change thresholds that we have been unaware of.”

The role of clouds in the intricate interplay of sunlight, forests, oceans, rocks and atmosphere that controls the planet’s climate has been the subject of argument. Do clouds really slow warming? And if so, by how much, and under what conditions?

There may not be a simple answer, although researchers are fairly confident that the thinning of clouds over the California coasts may have made calamitous wildfires in the state more probable.

So to resolve what Professor Schneider calls “a blind spot” in climate modelling, he and his colleagues worked on a small-scale computer simulation of one representative section of the atmosphere above the subtropical ocean, and then used supercomputers to model the clouds and their turbulent movement over a mathematical representation of the sea. And then they started to tune up the atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide.

Carbon threshold

They found that, once CO2 levels reached 1,200 ppm, the decks of stratocumulus cloud vanished, and did not reappear until CO2 levels dropped to well below this dangerous threshold.

If – and this has yet to happen – other researchers use different approaches to confirm the result, then the US scientists will have established a better understanding of one component of natural climate control.

The research may also illuminate a puzzle of climate history: 50 million or more years ago, during a geological epoch called the Eocene, the Arctic ice cap melted. Climate models have shown that, for this to happen, atmospheric carbon ratios would need to rise to 4,000 ppm.

These, the Caltech team, suggests, would be “implausibly high” CO2 levels. The latest study suggests this might be an overestimate: a mere 1,200 ppm would be enough to set the planetary thermometer soaring. − Climate News Network

World may hit 56m year carbon level by 2159

Long ago the polar ice vanished and tropical animals swam the Arctic. Greenhouse gases could reach that 56m year carbon level again in 140 years.

LONDON, 26 February, 2019 – Humankind could be about to open the throttle on greenhouse gas emissions and revert to a 56m year carbon level – to a world with a global temperature marked by ice-free poles and crocodiles in the waters of the Arctic.

And it could happen by the year 2159 – just five human generations or 140 years from now.

By then, if humans go on burning ever-greater quantities of fossil fuels to underwrite ever-accelerating destruction of forests, wetlands and savannahs, they will have pumped into the atmosphere about as much carbon as accumulated during a geological period called the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), a dramatic global warming event that reached its peak 56 million years ago.

The long-ago warming event occurred naturally, and the build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere happened over a timespan of between 3,000 and 20,000 years.

The present sprint from a cool to an uncomfortably warm state will have happened in fewer than 300 years, because greenhouse gases from coal, oil and natural gas fumes are building up in the atmosphere nine or 10 times faster than in the PETM, according to a new study in the American Geophysical Union journal Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology.

“You and I won’t be here in 2159, but that’s only about four generations away,” said Philip Gingerich, of the University of Michigan and author of the new study. “When you start to think about your children and your grandchildren, and your great-grandchildren, you’re about there.”

“To me, it really brought home how rapidly and how great the consequences are of the carbon we’re producing”

About 10 million years after the extinction of the dinosaurs, some natural event began to release ever-greater ratios of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The sediments and fossilised fragments of the Palaeocene-Eocene period tell the story.

Temperatures rose and settled at a global average of up to 7°C higher than today. Deep in the polar permafrost right now are fragments of tropical trees that flourished in the once-balmy polar regions: the event was accompanied by the most dramatic extinction of marine life for more than 90 million years, the tropic seas reached almost to human body temperature and land animals dwindled in size and migrated towards the poles as they evolved in response to the air temperatures.

Climate scientists now know, with a great deal of precision, how much carbon has been released into the atmosphere since 1959.

“One way to appreciate the rates and risks of present-day carbon release to the earth’s atmosphere and oceans is to compare current emissions to those in earth history,” writes Professor Gingerich.

“The PETM raised global temperatures by 5-8°C, to the warmest temperatures since the extinction of the dinosaurs 66 million years ago. The PETM altered the earth’s carbon cycle, climate, ocean chemistry and marine and continental ecosystems.”

Half-way there

In the 3,000-year run-up to this maximum, carbon concentrations in the atmosphere built up to at the very lowest estimate 3,000 billion metric tons. As of 2016, humans have emitted around 1,500 billion tons since the start of the Industrial Revolution early in the 19th century.

Under the business-as-usual scenario in which humans go on and on burning fossil fuels, humans could hit the 3,000 billion ton mark by 2159, Professor Gingerich calculates.

His warning is dramatic, but not new. Other researchers have prefigured his conclusions. At intervals over the last six years, researchers have unearthed evidence in the Eocene period of rapid climate change. They have identified it as an era of massive extinction of many species and dwarfism among the survivors.

In hotter conditions smaller creatures have an advantage because they shed heat more quickly: this could, researchers warned in 2013, happen again.

Since then, other teams have warned of marine devastation as well as confirming the evidence of mammalian dwarfism. They have repeatedly presented this long-ago event as an indicator of things to come and confirmed that the long, slow cooling of the globe since the maximum has now been reversed.

So the latest study is yet another reminder that conditions that have no precedent in human history are in train. “To me, it really brought home how rapidly and how great the consequences are of the carbon we’re producing as people,” Professor Gingerich said. – Climate News Network

Long ago the polar ice vanished and tropical animals swam the Arctic. Greenhouse gases could reach that 56m year carbon level again in 140 years.

LONDON, 26 February, 2019 – Humankind could be about to open the throttle on greenhouse gas emissions and revert to a 56m year carbon level – to a world with a global temperature marked by ice-free poles and crocodiles in the waters of the Arctic.

And it could happen by the year 2159 – just five human generations or 140 years from now.

By then, if humans go on burning ever-greater quantities of fossil fuels to underwrite ever-accelerating destruction of forests, wetlands and savannahs, they will have pumped into the atmosphere about as much carbon as accumulated during a geological period called the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), a dramatic global warming event that reached its peak 56 million years ago.

The long-ago warming event occurred naturally, and the build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere happened over a timespan of between 3,000 and 20,000 years.

The present sprint from a cool to an uncomfortably warm state will have happened in fewer than 300 years, because greenhouse gases from coal, oil and natural gas fumes are building up in the atmosphere nine or 10 times faster than in the PETM, according to a new study in the American Geophysical Union journal Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology.

“You and I won’t be here in 2159, but that’s only about four generations away,” said Philip Gingerich, of the University of Michigan and author of the new study. “When you start to think about your children and your grandchildren, and your great-grandchildren, you’re about there.”

“To me, it really brought home how rapidly and how great the consequences are of the carbon we’re producing”

About 10 million years after the extinction of the dinosaurs, some natural event began to release ever-greater ratios of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The sediments and fossilised fragments of the Palaeocene-Eocene period tell the story.

Temperatures rose and settled at a global average of up to 7°C higher than today. Deep in the polar permafrost right now are fragments of tropical trees that flourished in the once-balmy polar regions: the event was accompanied by the most dramatic extinction of marine life for more than 90 million years, the tropic seas reached almost to human body temperature and land animals dwindled in size and migrated towards the poles as they evolved in response to the air temperatures.

Climate scientists now know, with a great deal of precision, how much carbon has been released into the atmosphere since 1959.

“One way to appreciate the rates and risks of present-day carbon release to the earth’s atmosphere and oceans is to compare current emissions to those in earth history,” writes Professor Gingerich.

“The PETM raised global temperatures by 5-8°C, to the warmest temperatures since the extinction of the dinosaurs 66 million years ago. The PETM altered the earth’s carbon cycle, climate, ocean chemistry and marine and continental ecosystems.”

Half-way there

In the 3,000-year run-up to this maximum, carbon concentrations in the atmosphere built up to at the very lowest estimate 3,000 billion metric tons. As of 2016, humans have emitted around 1,500 billion tons since the start of the Industrial Revolution early in the 19th century.

Under the business-as-usual scenario in which humans go on and on burning fossil fuels, humans could hit the 3,000 billion ton mark by 2159, Professor Gingerich calculates.

His warning is dramatic, but not new. Other researchers have prefigured his conclusions. At intervals over the last six years, researchers have unearthed evidence in the Eocene period of rapid climate change. They have identified it as an era of massive extinction of many species and dwarfism among the survivors.

In hotter conditions smaller creatures have an advantage because they shed heat more quickly: this could, researchers warned in 2013, happen again.

Since then, other teams have warned of marine devastation as well as confirming the evidence of mammalian dwarfism. They have repeatedly presented this long-ago event as an indicator of things to come and confirmed that the long, slow cooling of the globe since the maximum has now been reversed.

So the latest study is yet another reminder that conditions that have no precedent in human history are in train. “To me, it really brought home how rapidly and how great the consequences are of the carbon we’re producing as people,” Professor Gingerich said. – Climate News Network

Climate change stokes mayhem in several ways

Three outcomes could follow if climate change stokes mayhem, conflict and violence. It might be helpful to think about the strains to come.

LONDON, 22 February, 2019 − Stand by for long hot summers marked by riot and racial tension. As climate change stokes mayhem, global warming is likely to see a direct rise in human irritability.

Climate change accompanied by natural disaster such as flood or drought could lead to harvest failure and food and water shortages for which people must compete.

And the same natural disasters could lead to a generation of babies, children and adolescents more likely, because of disadvantage and deprivation, to become more prone to violence in adulthood.

Researchers in the US have been thinking carefully about the links between climate change and conflict. This, they write in Current Climate Change Reports, has a long history, and a huge range of studies have addressed the hazard.

And they see more civic strife and conflict on the way. Some of it is likely to involve climate refugees, or ecological migrants: persons driven from their homes by climate change. The steady rise in global temperatures could also help incubate the conditions for global terrorism.

“Syria offers us a glimpse of what the future might look like as the climate continues to change rapidly”

“This is a global issue with very serious consequences. We need to plan for ways to reduce the negative consequences,” said Craig Anderson, a psychologist at Iowa State University in the US.

“An inadequate food supply and economic disparity make it difficult to raise healthy and productive citizens, which is one way to reduce long-term violence. We also need to plan for and devote resources to aid eco-migrants in their relocation to new lands and countries.”

The Iowa scholars are not alone. Other research teams have linked rising urban temperatures and conflict; and even self-harm.

Some have identified direct links between protracted drought, conflict and the floods of climate refugees, and other groups have repeatedly warned that the numbers driven from their homes by drought, flood, fire, sea level rise and devastating hurricanes is likely to rise steeply within a generation.

Direct link

Professor Anderson and his co-author took a long cool look at the literature of heat and violence. They found direct connections between ambient temperature and hostility.

In one experiment, police officers in overheated conditions were found to be more likely to respond to suspected burglary by drawing a gun and opening fire. Another study compared temperature with levels of violence in 60 different countries and found that for every one degree Celsius rise in temperatures due to climate change, homicide rates could rise by 6%.

A match of crime reports over 59 years with weather data confirmed that violent crime rates rose in the hotter years in 53 out of 55 instances for which seasonal data were available.

They also found that food insecurity and poor nutrition before and after birth could be linked to violent and aggressive behaviour in later years. And they noted the dangers of clashes when migrants were driven across borders and displaced people were attacked by the locals.

Worst for poorest

“Syria offers us a glimpse of what the future might look like as the climate continues to change rapidly: weather becomes more severe, and countries begin falling into economic and civil distress,” they write.

And the already disadvantaged will experience what they call a disproportionate amount of the harmful effects of rapid climate change, which will “likely produce breeding grounds for new terrorist (or gang) activity, a global strain on available resources and the involvement of the developed countries in small-scale wars breaking out across the globe.”

But developed countries can help: this would require, above all, some sharp changes in response to the refugee crisis.

“The view that citizens of wealthy countries often have about refugees needs to change,” Professor Anderson said, “from seeing them as a threat to a view that emphasises humanitarian values and the benefits refugees bring when they are welcomed into the community.” − Climate News Network

Three outcomes could follow if climate change stokes mayhem, conflict and violence. It might be helpful to think about the strains to come.

LONDON, 22 February, 2019 − Stand by for long hot summers marked by riot and racial tension. As climate change stokes mayhem, global warming is likely to see a direct rise in human irritability.

Climate change accompanied by natural disaster such as flood or drought could lead to harvest failure and food and water shortages for which people must compete.

And the same natural disasters could lead to a generation of babies, children and adolescents more likely, because of disadvantage and deprivation, to become more prone to violence in adulthood.

Researchers in the US have been thinking carefully about the links between climate change and conflict. This, they write in Current Climate Change Reports, has a long history, and a huge range of studies have addressed the hazard.

And they see more civic strife and conflict on the way. Some of it is likely to involve climate refugees, or ecological migrants: persons driven from their homes by climate change. The steady rise in global temperatures could also help incubate the conditions for global terrorism.

“Syria offers us a glimpse of what the future might look like as the climate continues to change rapidly”

“This is a global issue with very serious consequences. We need to plan for ways to reduce the negative consequences,” said Craig Anderson, a psychologist at Iowa State University in the US.

“An inadequate food supply and economic disparity make it difficult to raise healthy and productive citizens, which is one way to reduce long-term violence. We also need to plan for and devote resources to aid eco-migrants in their relocation to new lands and countries.”

The Iowa scholars are not alone. Other research teams have linked rising urban temperatures and conflict; and even self-harm.

Some have identified direct links between protracted drought, conflict and the floods of climate refugees, and other groups have repeatedly warned that the numbers driven from their homes by drought, flood, fire, sea level rise and devastating hurricanes is likely to rise steeply within a generation.

Direct link

Professor Anderson and his co-author took a long cool look at the literature of heat and violence. They found direct connections between ambient temperature and hostility.

In one experiment, police officers in overheated conditions were found to be more likely to respond to suspected burglary by drawing a gun and opening fire. Another study compared temperature with levels of violence in 60 different countries and found that for every one degree Celsius rise in temperatures due to climate change, homicide rates could rise by 6%.

A match of crime reports over 59 years with weather data confirmed that violent crime rates rose in the hotter years in 53 out of 55 instances for which seasonal data were available.

They also found that food insecurity and poor nutrition before and after birth could be linked to violent and aggressive behaviour in later years. And they noted the dangers of clashes when migrants were driven across borders and displaced people were attacked by the locals.

Worst for poorest

“Syria offers us a glimpse of what the future might look like as the climate continues to change rapidly: weather becomes more severe, and countries begin falling into economic and civil distress,” they write.

And the already disadvantaged will experience what they call a disproportionate amount of the harmful effects of rapid climate change, which will “likely produce breeding grounds for new terrorist (or gang) activity, a global strain on available resources and the involvement of the developed countries in small-scale wars breaking out across the globe.”

But developed countries can help: this would require, above all, some sharp changes in response to the refugee crisis.

“The view that citizens of wealthy countries often have about refugees needs to change,” Professor Anderson said, “from seeing them as a threat to a view that emphasises humanitarian values and the benefits refugees bring when they are welcomed into the community.” − Climate News Network

Southward shift faces US climate by 2100

Climate change means a big shift for city dwellers worldwide. Americans can look ahead to very different cities as the US climate heads south.

LONDON, 21 February, 2019 − If the world continues to burn ever-increasing levels of fossil fuels, then life will change predictably for millions of American city dwellers as the US climate heats up. They will find conditions that will make it seem as if they have shifted south by as much as 850 kilometres.

New Yorkers will find themselves experiencing temperature and rainfall conditions appropriate to a small town in Arkansas. People from Los Angeles will discover what it is like to live, right now, on the southernmost tip of the Baja peninsula, Mexico. People in Abilene, Texas will find that it is as if they had crossed their own frontier, deep into Salinas, Mexico.

The lawmakers in Washington will have consigned themselves to conditions appropriate to Greenwood, Mississippi. Columbus, Ohio, will enjoy the climate of Jonesboro, Arkansas. Folk of Anchorage, Alaska, will find out what it feels like to live on Vancouver Sound. People of Vancouver, meanwhile, will feel as if they had crossed the border into Seattle, Washington.

This exercise in precision forecasting, published in the journal Nature Communications, has been tested in computer simulations for approximately 250 million US and Canadian citizens in 540 cities.

That is, around three quarters of all the population of the United States, and half of all Canadians, can now check the rainfall and temperature changes they can expect in one human lifetime, somewhere between 2070 and 2099.

“It is my hope that people have that ‘wow’ moment, and it sinks in for the first time the scale of the changes we’re expecting in a single generation”

There are a number of possible climate shifts, depending on whether or not 195 nations fulfil the vow made in Paris in 2015 to work to keep the average rise in global temperatures to “well below” 2°C by 2100.

In fact, President Trump has announced a US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, and many of the nations that stand by the promise have yet to commit to convincing action.

So researchers continue to incorporate the notorious “business-as-usual” scenario in their simulations. So far, these have already predicted a sweltering future for many US cities, with devastating consequences for electrical power supplies and ever more destructive superstorms, megadroughts and floods, with huge economic costs for American government, business and taxpayers.

And, other researchers have found, climate change may already be at work: there is evidence that the division between the more arid American West and the more fertile eastern states has begun to shift significantly.

Long trip south

So the latest research could prove another way of bringing home to US citizens some of the challenges ahead.

“Under current high emissions, the average urban dweller is going to have to drive more than 500 miles (850 kms) to the south to find a climate like that expected in their home city by 2080. Not only is climate changing, but climates that don’t presently exist in North America will be prevalent in a lot of urban areas,” said Matt Fitzpatrick, of the University of Maryland, who led the study.

“Within the lifetime of children living today, the climate of many regions is projected to change from the familiar to conditions unlike those experienced in the same place by their parents, grandparents or perhaps any generation in millennia,” he said.

“It is my hope that people have that ‘wow’ moment, and it sinks in for the first time the scale of the changes we’re expecting in a single generation.” − Climate News Network

Climate change means a big shift for city dwellers worldwide. Americans can look ahead to very different cities as the US climate heads south.

LONDON, 21 February, 2019 − If the world continues to burn ever-increasing levels of fossil fuels, then life will change predictably for millions of American city dwellers as the US climate heats up. They will find conditions that will make it seem as if they have shifted south by as much as 850 kilometres.

New Yorkers will find themselves experiencing temperature and rainfall conditions appropriate to a small town in Arkansas. People from Los Angeles will discover what it is like to live, right now, on the southernmost tip of the Baja peninsula, Mexico. People in Abilene, Texas will find that it is as if they had crossed their own frontier, deep into Salinas, Mexico.

The lawmakers in Washington will have consigned themselves to conditions appropriate to Greenwood, Mississippi. Columbus, Ohio, will enjoy the climate of Jonesboro, Arkansas. Folk of Anchorage, Alaska, will find out what it feels like to live on Vancouver Sound. People of Vancouver, meanwhile, will feel as if they had crossed the border into Seattle, Washington.

This exercise in precision forecasting, published in the journal Nature Communications, has been tested in computer simulations for approximately 250 million US and Canadian citizens in 540 cities.

That is, around three quarters of all the population of the United States, and half of all Canadians, can now check the rainfall and temperature changes they can expect in one human lifetime, somewhere between 2070 and 2099.

“It is my hope that people have that ‘wow’ moment, and it sinks in for the first time the scale of the changes we’re expecting in a single generation”

There are a number of possible climate shifts, depending on whether or not 195 nations fulfil the vow made in Paris in 2015 to work to keep the average rise in global temperatures to “well below” 2°C by 2100.

In fact, President Trump has announced a US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, and many of the nations that stand by the promise have yet to commit to convincing action.

So researchers continue to incorporate the notorious “business-as-usual” scenario in their simulations. So far, these have already predicted a sweltering future for many US cities, with devastating consequences for electrical power supplies and ever more destructive superstorms, megadroughts and floods, with huge economic costs for American government, business and taxpayers.

And, other researchers have found, climate change may already be at work: there is evidence that the division between the more arid American West and the more fertile eastern states has begun to shift significantly.

Long trip south

So the latest research could prove another way of bringing home to US citizens some of the challenges ahead.

“Under current high emissions, the average urban dweller is going to have to drive more than 500 miles (850 kms) to the south to find a climate like that expected in their home city by 2080. Not only is climate changing, but climates that don’t presently exist in North America will be prevalent in a lot of urban areas,” said Matt Fitzpatrick, of the University of Maryland, who led the study.

“Within the lifetime of children living today, the climate of many regions is projected to change from the familiar to conditions unlike those experienced in the same place by their parents, grandparents or perhaps any generation in millennia,” he said.

“It is my hope that people have that ‘wow’ moment, and it sinks in for the first time the scale of the changes we’re expecting in a single generation.” − Climate News Network

Early rain as Arctic warms means more methane

As spring advances, so does the rain to warm the permafrost. It means more methane can get into the atmosphere to accelerate global warming.

LONDON, 18 February, 2019 − As the global temperature steadily rises, it ensures that levels of one of the most potent greenhouse gases are increasing in a way new to science: the planet will have to reckon with more methane than expected.

Researchers who monitored one bog for three years in the Alaskan permafrost have identified yet another instance of what engineers call positive feedback. They found that global warming meant earlier springs and with that, earlier spring rains.

And as a consequence, the influx of warm water on what had previously been frozen ground triggered a biological frenzy that sent methane emissions soaring.

One stretch of wetland in a forest of black spruce in the Alaskan interior stepped up its emissions of natural gas (another name for methane) by 30%. Methane is a greenhouse gas at least 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide.

“The microbes in this bog on some level are like ‘Oh man, we’re stuck making methane because that’s all this bog is allowing us to do’”

As a consequence, climate scientists may have to return yet again to the vexed question of the carbon budget, in their calculations of how fast the world will warm as humans burn more fossil fuels, to set up ever more rapid global warming and climate change, which will in turn accelerate the thawing of the permafrost.

The evidence so far comes from a detailed study of water, energy and carbon traffic from just one wetland. But other teams of scientists have repeatedly expressed concern about the integrity of the northern hemisphere permafrost and the vast stores of carbon preserved in the frozen soils, beneath the shallow layer that comes to life with each Arctic spring.

“We saw the plants going crazy and methane emissions going bonkers,” said Rebecca Neumann, an environmental engineer at the University of Washington in Seattle, who led the study. “2016 had above average rainfall, but so did 2014. So what was different about this year?”

What mattered was when the rain fell: it fell earlier, when the ground was still colder than the air. The warmer water saturated the frozen forest, flowed into the bog, and created a local permafrost thaw in anoxic conditions: the subterranean microbial communities responded by converting the once-frozen organic matter into a highly effective greenhouse gas.

Alarm rises

“It’d be the bottom of the barrel in terms of energy production for them,” Dr Neumann said. “The microbes in this bog on some level are like ‘Oh man, we’re stuck making methane because that’s all this bog is allowing us to do’.”

As global average temperature levels creep up, so does alarm about the state of the vast tracts of permafrost, home to huge stores of frozen carbon in the form of semi-decayed plant material that could be released into the atmosphere to fuel further global warming, with devastating consequences.

Spring has been arriving earlier everywhere in the northern hemisphere, including the Arctic, with unpredictable impacts on high latitude ecosystems.

The permafrost itself has been identified as a vulnerable region, change in which could tip the planet into a new and unpredictable climate regime, and geographers only this year have started to assess the direct hazard to the communities that live in the high latitudes as once-solid ground turns to slush under their feet.

More evaporation

Much more difficult to assess is how the steady attrition of the permafrost plays out in terms of the traffic of carbon between rocks, ocean, atmosphere and living things: researchers are still teasing out the roles of all the agencies at work, including subterranean microbes.

In a warmer world, evaporation will increase. Warmer air has a greater capacity for water vapour. In the end, it means more rain will fall. If it falls in spring or early summer, the research from one marshland in Alaska seems to suggest, more methane will escape into the atmosphere.

Right now, the rewards of the study are academic. They throw just a little more light on the subtle machinery of weather and climate. The test is whether what happens in one instance is likely to happen in other, similar terrain around the high latitudes.

“The ability of rain to transport thermal energy into soils has been under-appreciated,” Dr Neumann said. “Our study shows that by affecting soil temperature and methane emissions, rain can increase the ability of thawing permafrost to warm the climate.” − Climate News Network

As spring advances, so does the rain to warm the permafrost. It means more methane can get into the atmosphere to accelerate global warming.

LONDON, 18 February, 2019 − As the global temperature steadily rises, it ensures that levels of one of the most potent greenhouse gases are increasing in a way new to science: the planet will have to reckon with more methane than expected.

Researchers who monitored one bog for three years in the Alaskan permafrost have identified yet another instance of what engineers call positive feedback. They found that global warming meant earlier springs and with that, earlier spring rains.

And as a consequence, the influx of warm water on what had previously been frozen ground triggered a biological frenzy that sent methane emissions soaring.

One stretch of wetland in a forest of black spruce in the Alaskan interior stepped up its emissions of natural gas (another name for methane) by 30%. Methane is a greenhouse gas at least 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide.

“The microbes in this bog on some level are like ‘Oh man, we’re stuck making methane because that’s all this bog is allowing us to do’”

As a consequence, climate scientists may have to return yet again to the vexed question of the carbon budget, in their calculations of how fast the world will warm as humans burn more fossil fuels, to set up ever more rapid global warming and climate change, which will in turn accelerate the thawing of the permafrost.

The evidence so far comes from a detailed study of water, energy and carbon traffic from just one wetland. But other teams of scientists have repeatedly expressed concern about the integrity of the northern hemisphere permafrost and the vast stores of carbon preserved in the frozen soils, beneath the shallow layer that comes to life with each Arctic spring.

“We saw the plants going crazy and methane emissions going bonkers,” said Rebecca Neumann, an environmental engineer at the University of Washington in Seattle, who led the study. “2016 had above average rainfall, but so did 2014. So what was different about this year?”

What mattered was when the rain fell: it fell earlier, when the ground was still colder than the air. The warmer water saturated the frozen forest, flowed into the bog, and created a local permafrost thaw in anoxic conditions: the subterranean microbial communities responded by converting the once-frozen organic matter into a highly effective greenhouse gas.

Alarm rises

“It’d be the bottom of the barrel in terms of energy production for them,” Dr Neumann said. “The microbes in this bog on some level are like ‘Oh man, we’re stuck making methane because that’s all this bog is allowing us to do’.”

As global average temperature levels creep up, so does alarm about the state of the vast tracts of permafrost, home to huge stores of frozen carbon in the form of semi-decayed plant material that could be released into the atmosphere to fuel further global warming, with devastating consequences.

Spring has been arriving earlier everywhere in the northern hemisphere, including the Arctic, with unpredictable impacts on high latitude ecosystems.

The permafrost itself has been identified as a vulnerable region, change in which could tip the planet into a new and unpredictable climate regime, and geographers only this year have started to assess the direct hazard to the communities that live in the high latitudes as once-solid ground turns to slush under their feet.

More evaporation

Much more difficult to assess is how the steady attrition of the permafrost plays out in terms of the traffic of carbon between rocks, ocean, atmosphere and living things: researchers are still teasing out the roles of all the agencies at work, including subterranean microbes.

In a warmer world, evaporation will increase. Warmer air has a greater capacity for water vapour. In the end, it means more rain will fall. If it falls in spring or early summer, the research from one marshland in Alaska seems to suggest, more methane will escape into the atmosphere.

Right now, the rewards of the study are academic. They throw just a little more light on the subtle machinery of weather and climate. The test is whether what happens in one instance is likely to happen in other, similar terrain around the high latitudes.

“The ability of rain to transport thermal energy into soils has been under-appreciated,” Dr Neumann said. “Our study shows that by affecting soil temperature and methane emissions, rain can increase the ability of thawing permafrost to warm the climate.” − Climate News Network