27/09/2016

Scientists “Too Frightened” To Tell Truth On Climate Impacts

Climate HomePaul Brown

Professor Peter Wadhams says peers are failing in their duty through timidity, and warns China is planning huge land grabs as warming hits crop production
Scientists "know" dangerous levels of climate change is happening, but they do not want to alarm people, says Wadhams. "It is bordering on the dishonest" (Pic: Pixabay)
China is protecting itself against future food supply problems caused by climate change by buying or leasing large tracts of land in Africa and South America, a leading UK climate scientist says.
Professor Peter Wadhams, an expert on the disappearing Arctic ice, says that while countries in North America and Europe are ignoring the threat that changing weather patterns are causing to the world food supply, China is taking "self-protective action".
He says that changes in the jet stream caused by the melting of the ice in the Arctic are threatening the most productive agricultural areas on the planet.
"The impact of extreme, often violent weather on crops in a world where the population continues to increase rapidly can only be disastrous," he warns.
"Sooner or later, there will be an unbridgeable gulf between global food needs and our capacity to grow food in an unstable climate. Inevitably, starvation will reduce the world's population."
Professor Wadhams, former head of the Polar Ocean Physics Group at the University of Cambridge, says China has already realised this is a threat to its future stability and has been taking over large areas of land in other countries to grow crops to protect its food supply.
The drawback, he says, is that the Chinese are introducing industrial agricultural practices that damage the soil, the water supply and the rivers.
"But China is positioning itself for the struggle to come − the struggle to find enough to eat," he says. "By controlling land in other countries, they will control those countries' food supply."
Professor Wadhams, who is a former director of the Scott Polar Research Institute in Cambridge, is the UK's most experienced sea ice expert.
In his new book, A Farewell to Ice, he describes a number of serious threats to the planet resulting from the loss of Arctic ice. These include much greater sea level rise than estimated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), resulting in the flooding of cities and of low-lying deltas where much of the world's food is grown.
He says China has seen the unrest in parts of the world caused by food price increases in 2011 during the Arab Spring, and has sought to guard against similar problems at home by buying land across the globe.
His warnings are echoed in Brazil, where there are concerns about Chinese plans to build a 3,300-mile (5,000km) railway to get soya, grain and timber to the coast to supply China's needs.
But fears over land grabs by China are only a small part of the changing world that will be created by the loss of ice in the Arctic discussed by Wadhams in his book.
He attacks the last four British prime ministers − John Major, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron − for talking about climate change and doing little. And he says his fellow scientists on the IPCC are failing in their duty to speak out about the full dangers of climate change.
Professor Wadhams told Climate News Network that colleagues "were too frightened of their jobs or losing their grants to spell out what was really happening". He said it makes him very angry that they are failing in their duty through timidity.
Based on his own measurements and calculations, he believes that summer ice in the Arctic will disappear before 2020 – which is 30 years before the IPCC estimate.
He also believes that sea level rise has been badly underestimated because the loss of ice from Greenland and the Antarctic was not included in the IPCC's estimates.
"My estimates are based on real measurements of the ice in the Arctic – the IPCC rely on computer simulations. I know which I believe."
He is also concerned about the large escapes of methane from the Arctic tundra and the shallow seas north of Siberia – again, something that has not been fully taken into account in the IPCC's calculations on the speed of warming.

Bordering on dishonest
"They know it is happening, but they do not want to frighten the horses [alarm people]. It is bordering on the dishonest," he says.
Professor Wadhams has concluded that there is now so much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that dangerous warming is inevitable unless more drastic action is taken. He says reducing emissions will help, along with planting forests, but it will never be enough.
"What is needed is something that has not been invented yet − a large-scale method of passing air through a machine and taking out the carbon dioxide," he says.
"In the long run, only by taking carbon out of the air can we hope to get the concentrations down enough to save us from dangerous climate change.
"It is a tall order, but if we spend enough money on research we can find a way. Our future depends on it."

Links

US Emissions Set To Miss 2025 Target In Paris Climate Change Deal, Research Finds

The Guardian

Even if US implements emissions-cutting proposals it could still overshoot target by nearly 1bn tonnes of greenhouse gases, according to scientific study
A coal-fired power station on the Ohio river near Shippingport, Pennsylvania. Photograph: Alamy
The US is on course to miss its emissions reduction target agreed in the Paris climate accord nine months ago, with new research finding that the world's largest historical emitter doesn't currently have the policies in place to meet its pledge.
Even if the US implements a range of emissions-slashing proposals that have yet to be introduced, the nation could still overshoot its 2025 target by nearly 1bn tonnes of greenhouse gases. This failure would have profound consequences for the US's position as a climate leader, as well for the global effort to stave off the dangerous heatwaves, sea level rise and extreme weather associated with climate change.
"If the policies were locked today, there would be a low likelihood of meeting the target," said Jeffery Greenblatt, scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and lead author of the study, published in Nature.
"I wouldn't disparage the US's efforts so far, but we need to do more as a nation and globally to reduce emissions. However we splice it, that's hard to do. We can't make small alterations to our economy – we need fundamental changes in how we get and use energy."
The US pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 26% to 28% by 2025, based in 2005 levels, at last year's landmark Paris climate deal. At the time, Barack Obama hailed the US as "the global leader in fighting climate change".
Notes: Lighter colored bars indicate the full uncertainty ranges. *Starred items are proposed
Source: "Assessment of the climate commitments and additional mitigation policies of the United States," Jeffery B. Greenblatt and MaxWei | Graphic: Jan Diehm/The Guardian
But the new study used previous government projections combined with updated emissions data to forecast that even if the president's centerpiece Clean Power Plan was to go ahead, the US would fall short of its target by 551m to 1.8bn tonnes of greenhouse gases. Adding in all proposed reforms, to areas such as building codes, emissions standards for trucks and fertilizers, would still see a shortfall of 356m to 924m tonnes by 2025.
While the US still has time to close this gap, the study warns that additional measures will probably be required at a time when action on climate change is anathema to Republicans whose presidential candidate, Donald Trump, has called global warming a "hoax" and "bullshit".
Greenblatt said: "It's good to set ambitious targets, it pushes us to be creative and find ways to meet them. We won't get there with existing policies but it doesn't mean we are doomed. This is a call to action to ensure we close the remaining gap."
The US has been overtaken by China in recent years as the world's largest emitter but still expels more than 6.8bn tonnes of greenhouse gases a year from energy, transportation and agriculture. While US emissions have edged downwards over the past decade, Obama's linchpin climate policy, the Clean Power Plan, has been enmeshed in a legal battle waged by leaders of 27 American states. Court hearings over the legality of plan, which would place emissions limits upon each state, begin on Tuesday.
The Paris climate deal, which Trump has said the US will exit should he win the presidency, calls for emissions reductions from 195 signatory countries in order to prevent global temperatures rising more than 2C above pre-industrial levels.
However, a string of record-breaking months of heat in 2016 has raised concerns that a more aspirational target of a 1.5C limit is already out of reach. Soberingly, the 2C guardrail is also in jeopardy, with several analyses showing that nations' emissions reduction pledges are insufficient.
Calculations released this month by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that proposed emissions cuts would lead to a 3.5C increase in average global temperatures by 2100. This warming would probably trigger a range of dangerous environmental changes for humans and other species.
John Sterman, director of the MIT Sloan Sustainability Initiative, said the new emissions projection study, which he wasn't involved in, was "sound" in its conclusions.
"The target is absolutely not beyond our reach, it's just not likely with current policy," he said. "We have the technology to dramatically cut emissions and economically we know it's affordable.
"The problem is a political problem and an implementation problem. The US, and the world, needs deeper and sooner cuts."
Sterman said cheap gasoline and natural gas prices in the US have led to overconsumption of fossil fuels and slowed efforts to improve energy efficiency. He added that putting a price on carbon, which has been done in California but fiercely resisted by Republicans nationally, would provide the largest single shove towards meeting the 2025 target.
"If you had to take one policy to a desert island, it would be a price on carbon," Sterman said. "But it's not the only one. There's no silver bullet to dealing with climate change, there's silver buckshot."

Links

Today's Greenhouse Gas Levels Could Result In Up To 7 Degrees Of Warming

Fairfax - Lucy Cormack


The longest continuous reconstruction of the Earth's surface climate suggests that current greenhouse gas levels could commit the planet to as much as 7 degrees of warming in the next 1000 years.
The study, Evolution of global temperature over the past 2 million years, was conducted by Stanford University then doctoral student Carolyn Snyder, and marks the longest continuous reconstruction of the Earth's surface climate to date.

Climate warming began 180 years ago. An international research project has found human-induced climate change is first detectable in the Arctic and tropical oceans around the 1830s, earlier than expected.

It comes as a national poll found public support for federal government-led action on climate change has bounced back, with increased support for renewable energy production.
The Climate Institute's Climate of the Nation poll found 65 per cent of Australians want their country to lead the world on climate change solutions, a marked increase since the time of divisive debates about the Gillard government's carbon tax.
Published in a report for the journal Nature, the study revealed that global temperatures were cooling until around 1.2 million years ago, before stalling until the present.
"This research was in response to a fair amount of great paleo-climate records that had been produced by a variety of researchers over long periods of time, but increasingly people were using different approximations for global temperature," she said.
"We didn't have a global temperature record that we could compare, so there seemed to be this gap."
Previously global average surface temperature has only been reconstructed for isolated periods, like the past 20,000 years.

Will Steffen, Emeritus Professor, Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University, Radio National Breakfast with Fran Kelly.
However Dr Snyder's research applied a network of more than 20,000 sea surface temperature reconstructions from 59 ocean sediment cores, in order to recreate temperatures at 1,000-year intervals for the past two million years.
"One of the mysteries in the earth's past, is what the trigger was when the earth went in and out of ice ages and warmer periods like we have today," she said.
"What we've seen in the past is that in cold periods ice sheets expanded and they had an effect on the reflectivity of the earth's surface that made the earth get colder."
In contrast, she said, warmer climate states meant "less sea ice, more ocean water and varied ocean dynamics, which would in turn cause changes in the earth's temperature, because less would be reflected off the earth's surface".
"This study is not a forecast or a prediction, but it gives a ballpark context to the relationship between greenhouse gas levels and temperatures in the past ... to give as robust a picture that we can of the earth's dynamic."
In December last year Australia was among 174 signatories to the Paris Agreement, the world's first comprehensive climate agreement, setting out a global action plan to global warming to well below 2 degrees.
The Australian government has said it would seek to ratify the Paris Agreement on climate change by the end of the year. It has set a 2030 emissions reduction target of 26 to 28 per cent below 2005 levels.
A report released by a European think tank earlier this month said Australia had "a high level of responsibility for the greenhouse gases that have caused the climate problem", but acknowledged the country's wealth and technical capabilities gave it "a level of capacity to help solve it".


Professor Eelco Rohling of the Research School of Earth Science at the Australian National University, said Dr Synder's research was valuable for being the first statistically approached temperature reconstruction over 2 million years, from multiple locations, but said the emphasis on the potential warming of the planet acted as "a bit of a red herring in the discussion".
"It takes the carbon dioxide component and compares it to climate temperature responses. As a calculation that is not wrong, but it doesn't translate to what is happening in the future, unless you make significant corrections."
"The estimate obtained is just one of a whole range of estimates ... It happens to be a higher-end estimate, and as such catches attention ... but proper, deep analysis is needed before much hay can be made of that one specific value."

Links