About these ads

Global warming: Natural cycles ‘overwhelmed’

NASA scientist Hansen warns that capping temperature increases at 2 degrees Celsius may not be enough to avoid massive impacts

A 2-degree Celsius rise in global temperatures could lead to a major meltdown of ice caps.

By Summit Voice

SUMMIT COUNTY — Even as world leaders struggled to find some mechanism to curb greenhouse gas emissions, new research by NASA scientist James Hansen suggests that the Earth’s climate may be more sensitive than previously believed.

“Limiting human-caused warming to 2 degrees is not sufficient,” Hansen said. “It would be a prescription for disaster … Humans have overwhelmed the natural, slow changes that occur on geologic timescales,” Hansen said.

Hansen, along with co-author Makiko Sato, studied how Earth’s climate responded to past natural changes to try and answer one of the fundamental climate science questions: “What is the dangerous level of global warming?”

Some international leaders have suggested a goal of limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial times in order to avert catastrophic change. But Hansen said at a Dec. 6 press briefing that warming of 2 degrees Celsius would lead to drastic changes, such as significant ice sheet loss in Greenland and Antarctica.

“We don’t have a substantial cushion between today’s climate and dangerous warming,” Hansen said. “Earth is poised to experience strong amplifying feedbacks in response to moderate additional global warming.”

Based on Hansen’s temperature analysis work at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, the Earth’s average global surface temperature has already risen .8 degrees Celsius since 1880, and is now warming at a rate of more than .1 degree Celsius every decade. This warming is largely driven by increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, particularly carbon dioxide, emitted by the burning of fossil fuels at power plants, in cars and in industry.

At the current rate of fossil fuel burning, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will have doubled from pre-industrial times by the middle of this century. A doubling of carbon dioxide would cause an eventual warming of several degrees, Hansen said.

Hansen and Sato compared the climate of today, the Holocene, with previous similar “interglacial” epochs – periods when polar ice caps existed but the world was not dominated by glaciers. Studying cores drilled from both ice sheets and deep ocean sediments, Hansen found that global mean temperatures during the Eemian period, which began about 130,000 years ago and lasted about 15,000 years, were less than 1 degree Celsius warmer than today. If temperatures were to rise 2 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial times, global mean temperature would far exceed that of the Eemian, when sea level was four to six meters higher than today, Hansen said.

Hansen focused much of his new work on how the polar regions and in particular the ice sheets of Antarctica and Greenland will react to a warming world.

Two degrees Celsius of warming would make Earth much warmer than during the Eemian, and would move Earth closer to Pliocene-like conditions, when sea level was in the range of 25 meters higher than today, Hansen said. In using Earth’s climate history to learn more about the level of sensitivity that governs our planet’s response to warming today,

Hansen said the paleoclimate record suggests that every degree Celsius of global temperature rise will ultimately equate to 20 meters of sea level rise. However, that sea level increase due to ice sheet loss would be expected to occur over centuries, and large uncertainties remain in predicting how that ice loss would unfold.

Ice and ocean sediment cores from the polar regions indicate that temperatures at the poles during previous epochs – when sea level was tens of meters higher – is not too far removed from the temperatures Earth could reach this century on a “business as usual” trajectory.

Detailed considerations of a new warming target and how to get there are beyond the scope of this research, Hansen said. But this research is consistent with Hansen’s earlier findings that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would need to be rolled back from about 390 parts per million in the atmosphere today to 350 parts per million in order to stabilize the climate in the long term. While leaders continue to discuss a framework for reducing emissions, global carbon dioxide emissions have remained stable or increased in recent years.

Hansen and others noted that while the paleoclimate evidence paints a clear picture of what Earth’s earlier climate looked like, but that using it to predict precisely how the climate might change on much smaller timescales in response to human-induced rather than natural climate change remains difficult. But, Hansen noted, the Earth system is already showing signs of responding, even in the cases of “slow feedbacks” such as ice sheet changes.

The human-caused release of increased carbon dioxide into the atmosphere also presents climate scientists with something they’ve never seen in the 65 million year record of carbon dioxide levels – a drastic rate of increase that makes it difficult to predict how rapidly the Earth will respond. In periods when carbon dioxide has increased due to natural causes, the rate of increase averaged about .0001 parts per million per year – in other words, one hundred parts per million every million years. Fossil fuel burning is now causing carbon dioxide concentrations to increase at two parts per million per year.

 

About these ads

4 Responses

  1. And some will cling to their beliefs until their death, instead of admitting that indeed, change[s] are taking place.

  2. Anjali Appadurai (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Ko3e6G_7GY4) has it right in her speech concluding the Durban talks with her reiteration of the warning of the International Climate Change Agency that we have a mere 5 (FIVE) years before planetary climate change becomes intractable. She admonishes that asking for 10 years, i.e., to postpone any necessary IMMEDIATE action, is a death sentence for our planet, our people and the younger generation. She blames our ‘ambition’ for the ‘betrayal of responsibility’ that underlies the encroaching collapse of our civilization and our planet. She urges the use of science, reason and common compassion to encourage us to work together NOW to make the needed changes to right the wrongs of our ‘narrow self-interest.’ James Hansen obviously concurs — with all the data we need to bring an urgent message to the world — IF YOU VALUE THE SURVIVAL OF OUR PLANET AND YOUR LIFE, START MAKING THE CHANGES NEEDED NOW TO DRASTICALLY DECREASE FOSSIL FUEL CONSUMPTION!

  3. You know what this means….we are cooked….time is NOT on our side!

  4. I remember way back in the late 1980’s and doing so door knocking for Greenpeace and hearing about Global Warming. I was a young guy and thinking it wouldn’t be much a concern of mine because it would take hundreds of years for us to feel the change.Boy, was I WRONG!
    We can’t say we weren’t warned and it is our OWN FAULT that we did not act. I do not want to hear the BS from the Politicians or business Leaders the science was “unsettled”. NO WAY, the Scientists were very straight foward about it, but the “American Way of life” took center stage. Wow, what a bummer to hear we really screwed up.
    Sorry, kids.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 7,858 other followers

%d bloggers like this: