The world’s top climate scientist, James Hansen, led a new study that makes it very clear: whether your economy likes it or not, you have ten years to get rid of business as usual carbon emissions. The new study makes the point that even a bit more of BAU will push the climate system towards an imbalance that will probably lead to massive changes, like the dieback of the Amazon and the disintegration of the Greenland ice sheet.
At the Hadley Center in the UK, scientists put the numbers like this: the current CO2 equivalent concentration is 450ppm. This includes methane, nitrous oxides, and the others. Don’t get scared yet. Aerosols due to sulfur emissions in the developing world mask a lot of this, so in reality the concentration is about 380 CO2 equivalents. To have a 50% chance of avoiding the 2C threshold, the world needs to cut emissions 60% below current levels by 2030. For the US, that’s a 94% cut to get to 0.33 tons per capita by 2030. It’s 90% for the UK.
Hansen’s study, which was actually co-authored by dozens of scientists if you check out the article, is a sign that scientists should not stay shut anymore. Hansen himself put out a paper about “scientific reticence,” and another about Greenland looking like it began to disintegrate, both very recently. This new study is a signal about the reality of the atmosphere. We can compromise all we want on land, but when concentrations are reached beyond a point where the climate can remain stable, there won’t be a compromise. Both Dems and Reps ought to look at the boldness of the youth climate movement, which is calling for climate neutrality ASAP. Doing anything less for political reasons risks sinking us into big trouble.
You what scares me? We are the last generation who are going to be able to do anything to stop climate change getting to these dangerous levels. And by the time we’re in our thirties, we will know if what we are doing now is enough. If the decisions made today were adequate. Clearly, the ones our politicians are making currently aren’t. I think we are reaching a tipping point on public concern but sometimes I don’t know if I’m just making that up to keep hope. I am so terrified by that level of responsibility, but it seriously is up to us..
People say that becoming a parent makes you so scared about the hurt that your child can go through, and you are always scared that something bad will happen to your kid and it’ll be your fault.. in a strange way I think that’s also how I’m starting to feel about our climate/ the next generation. Like if it all keeps going pear-shaped, I will have failed to protect the thing that is most important.
Anyway.. I’m supposed to be writing a speech that I’m delivering next week at a forum with the Dalai Lama in front of 17,000 people and as usual thinking about the enormity of the whole problem makes me all freaked out. And what do I say to these people next week? Are words going to be enough to change this?
You’re right – this looks really bad. We need to get individual cities working on emissions-reduction, as well as our universities. Could we start some kind of nation-wide Adopt-a-Mayor program, to get people involved in making their cities take action? I’m not thinking just make the cities sign onto the Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, though that’s a good start; we also need to make sure the signatory cities actually follow through with their commitment – something that has deffinitely been neglected in some areas. I’m trying to start an Adopt-a-Mayor program in Oregon, though it’s slow going. My website is http://www.localsustainability.blogspot.com. Is there any way we can expand this sort of thing?
Certainly best wishes with your speech. If I would offer anything, it would be to articulate where you believe we should end up and how we could get there. I think most of us have heard about the problem and its enormity, hearing that it can be solved (although it will not be easy) may stir your audience. Good luck this week.