Thanks yet again Bill. I too found it interesting that The Guardian reported this extremely important story while it was hard to find in the American media🙄
If you are an advocate of personal action, perhaps you could do a special edition on topics like 'No Mow May', and other ways that individuals can help to turn the corner on CO2 levels. Give people ownership instead of despair.
We produced a short video a couple of years ago to encourage homeowners to plant clover in their lawns. The concept seems to have taken root! (pun intended)
I mow with a 90-100 year old mechanical mower that does not burn anything. And I'm also planting some clover, and letting other parts of the yard stay or go wild.
Thank you, Bill, for your great summary, as usual. A long time ago, I saw a movie called "The Day After Tomorrow". Some of it was typical Hollywood melodrama, but it made me uneasy at the time, Tomrrow is evidently. here now.
Margaret, I think American media "newspapers" are now "opinionpapers". I read 2 British media outlets pluds Heather Cox Richardson, with a small smattering of WaPo and NYT.
Mardi, I think it's a great idea to launch a push for No Mow May. I'm converting my front lawn into a pollinator garden this year.
We let most of our 'lawn' go all summer last year. In late summer the fellow who mows our fields had to come in and mow the lawn. We left the mowed grasses there to decay naturally. So interesting to see the was was left and how the ground has changed in just one year. I look forward to the riot of wild flowers that covered our property last summer.
Thank you, Bill, for the real news 📰 we must read to act. You’d think by this late date, every human being on Earth 🌍 would be on board to FIGHT for our future. It’s not as if bizarre weather patters go unnoticed; they freaking kill people every day; MANY PEOPLE. The hurricanes, cyclones, desertification, loss of drinking 💦 water, wildfires, loss of food and shelter, habitat for so many species it is heartbreaking 💔 and truly gut wrenching to observe the lack of urgency in the FIGHT TO REFORM FOSSIL FUEL USE. Appreciate so much your efforts. Keep writing, please! 😘🕊️
<<Melting ice around Antarctica will cause a rapid slowdown of a major global deep ocean current by 2050 that could alter the world’s climate for centuries and accelerate sea level rise, according to scientists behind new research.>>
Your quotes follow that with the ominous hypothetical “if” humanity fails to reduce emission, cascading oceanic dominoes will quickly wreak havoc. But, I take a contrarian view that humanity will, in time, decarbonize—given the opportunity—as determined by the temperature trajectory toward ocean-atmospheric equilibrium and the triggering of catastrophic tipping points.
The conundrum is that James Hansen et al. have updated their previous estimate of “global warming in the pipeline” from 3°C to 10°C based on a different more informed approach. The good news is we will most likely never approach that conceptual mathematical end point (asymptotic trend) because we will strive our best not to. The bad news is we are on a steeper upward temperature trajectory at this moment. Hansen concludes the rate of temperature rise during the next couple decades will be twice the rate during the past four decades (0.36°C vs 0.18°C per decade).
I was surprised& concerned by Dr. Hansen’s latest paper; he’s a great scientist but his conclusion, as i a layman understood it, is that fossil fuel aerosols are protecting us from higher temperatures due the aerosols cooling us i guess by reflection.
It worries me deeply for its forecast but also it as it dovetails with the Geo-engineering crowds (mafias) push for putting injecting massive amounts of aerosols in the stratosphere, dimming the sun essentialy and imo there’s great big money behind that as we all know since the fossil companies could keep on pumping away.
I hope frankly that my understanding, or else frankly, the paper’s conclusion is wrong or incomplete.
Or if that’s correct, that we find smart ways of quickly safely reversibly, incrementally, and massively if needed, increasing the Earth’s albedo, at apprpriate wavelengths. perhaps methds like ships vaporizing (sea )water for ocean cloud formation, as i think Australia is testing over barrier reefs. That instead of the huge stratospheric sulfate dispersions needed ad infinitum, as lobbied for relentlessly by Dr. David Keith of Harvard and many others.
Perhaps all large ocean vessels far from land can be tasked with using their exhaust waste heat which goes up the stack anyway, to boill water vapor..
Hopefully I’m totally wrong about my understanding of the paper, and my darkerfear regarding it showing some change in Dr. Hansen’s allegiance/outlook, as he has done such splendid work, for so manyy ears, against resistance and ignorance, on behalf of humanity and the entire planet. Best Regards.
The paper "Doubling Down on Our Faustian Bargain" was ;published 29 March 2013
by James Hansen, Pushker Kharecha, Makiko Sato
It begins ...
Summary. Humanity is doubling down on its Faustian climate bargain by pumping up fossil fuel particulate and nitrogen pollution. The more the Faustian debt grows, the more unmanageable the eventual consequences will be. Yet there are plans to build more than 1000 coal- fired power plants and plans to develop some of the dirtiest oil sources on the planet. These plans should be vigorously resisted. We are already in a deep hole -- it is time to stop digging.
Humanity's Faustian climate bargain is well known.1,2 Humans have been pumping both greenhouse gases (mainly CO2) and aerosols (fine particles) into the atmosphere for more than a century. The CO2 accumulates steadily, staying in the climate system for millennia, with a continuously increasing warming effect. Aerosols have a cooling effect (by reducing solar heating of the ground) that depends on the rate that we pump aerosols into the air, because they fall out after about five days.
Aerosol cooling probably reduced global warming by about half over the past century3, but the amount is uncertain because global aerosols and their effect on clouds are not measured accurately. Aerosols increased rapidly after World War II as fossil fuel use increased ~5%/year with little pollution control (Fig. 1). Aerosol growth slowed in the 1970s with pollution controls in the U.S. and Europe, but accelerated again after ~2000.
From your quote from The Guardian, "If greenhouse gas emissions continue"
If the climate conversation is to have any hope of breaking out of its current infinite loop of promises made and promises broken, social activism needs to lean to think less like politicians, and more like engineers.
Where do greenhouse gas emissions come from? They come from the combustion of hydrocarbons. That is the root cause of the climate problem. That is where we have to look for solutions.
When we do, we find that energy extraction from hydrocarbons is really a kind of energy theft from Nature, because that energy already has a job that Nature has given it. It is not just sitting around waiting for us clever people to figure out how to use it.
The job Nature has for the energy in hydrocarbons is keeping the habitats on earth within ranges within which modern human can keep ourselves ongoing. By taking energy away from that job, we are also take away the habitats in which we can keep ourselves ongoing.
To preserve our own habitats, we also have to preserve energy in hydrocarbons.
Which means we have to replace energy extraction from hydrocarbons with new energy technologies. That will cost money. Money with the mission, the duty and the scale to be there in the future in a future that will be worth being there in. Fiduciary Money. Pensions and Endowment money.
And that money can't be spent in protest. It has to be spent on action, organizing and underwriting a global replace-to-retire, commission-to-decommission strategy for rapidly redesigning and reconstructing the global energy economy.
Thanks yet again Bill. I too found it interesting that The Guardian reported this extremely important story while it was hard to find in the American media🙄
Hi Bill,
If you are an advocate of personal action, perhaps you could do a special edition on topics like 'No Mow May', and other ways that individuals can help to turn the corner on CO2 levels. Give people ownership instead of despair.
We produced a short video a couple of years ago to encourage homeowners to plant clover in their lawns. The concept seems to have taken root! (pun intended)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xla2w0f3YdE
Thank you for continuing to focus and write. Your voice is needed.
I mow with a 90-100 year old mechanical mower that does not burn anything. And I'm also planting some clover, and letting other parts of the yard stay or go wild.
Thank you, Bill, for your great summary, as usual. A long time ago, I saw a movie called "The Day After Tomorrow". Some of it was typical Hollywood melodrama, but it made me uneasy at the time, Tomrrow is evidently. here now.
Margaret, I think American media "newspapers" are now "opinionpapers". I read 2 British media outlets pluds Heather Cox Richardson, with a small smattering of WaPo and NYT.
Mardi, I think it's a great idea to launch a push for No Mow May. I'm converting my front lawn into a pollinator garden this year.
We let most of our 'lawn' go all summer last year. In late summer the fellow who mows our fields had to come in and mow the lawn. We left the mowed grasses there to decay naturally. So interesting to see the was was left and how the ground has changed in just one year. I look forward to the riot of wild flowers that covered our property last summer.
Thank you, Bill, for the real news 📰 we must read to act. You’d think by this late date, every human being on Earth 🌍 would be on board to FIGHT for our future. It’s not as if bizarre weather patters go unnoticed; they freaking kill people every day; MANY PEOPLE. The hurricanes, cyclones, desertification, loss of drinking 💦 water, wildfires, loss of food and shelter, habitat for so many species it is heartbreaking 💔 and truly gut wrenching to observe the lack of urgency in the FIGHT TO REFORM FOSSIL FUEL USE. Appreciate so much your efforts. Keep writing, please! 😘🕊️
Bill, you're prolific, indefatigable, perspicacious and relentless! Thank you
Great. An important post.
Bill,
Graham Readfearn begins with this:
<<Melting ice around Antarctica will cause a rapid slowdown of a major global deep ocean current by 2050 that could alter the world’s climate for centuries and accelerate sea level rise, according to scientists behind new research.>>
Your quotes follow that with the ominous hypothetical “if” humanity fails to reduce emission, cascading oceanic dominoes will quickly wreak havoc. But, I take a contrarian view that humanity will, in time, decarbonize—given the opportunity—as determined by the temperature trajectory toward ocean-atmospheric equilibrium and the triggering of catastrophic tipping points.
The conundrum is that James Hansen et al. have updated their previous estimate of “global warming in the pipeline” from 3°C to 10°C based on a different more informed approach. The good news is we will most likely never approach that conceptual mathematical end point (asymptotic trend) because we will strive our best not to. The bad news is we are on a steeper upward temperature trajectory at this moment. Hansen concludes the rate of temperature rise during the next couple decades will be twice the rate during the past four decades (0.36°C vs 0.18°C per decade).
(continued ...)
I was surprised& concerned by Dr. Hansen’s latest paper; he’s a great scientist but his conclusion, as i a layman understood it, is that fossil fuel aerosols are protecting us from higher temperatures due the aerosols cooling us i guess by reflection.
It worries me deeply for its forecast but also it as it dovetails with the Geo-engineering crowds (mafias) push for putting injecting massive amounts of aerosols in the stratosphere, dimming the sun essentialy and imo there’s great big money behind that as we all know since the fossil companies could keep on pumping away.
I hope frankly that my understanding, or else frankly, the paper’s conclusion is wrong or incomplete.
Or if that’s correct, that we find smart ways of quickly safely reversibly, incrementally, and massively if needed, increasing the Earth’s albedo, at apprpriate wavelengths. perhaps methds like ships vaporizing (sea )water for ocean cloud formation, as i think Australia is testing over barrier reefs. That instead of the huge stratospheric sulfate dispersions needed ad infinitum, as lobbied for relentlessly by Dr. David Keith of Harvard and many others.
Perhaps all large ocean vessels far from land can be tasked with using their exhaust waste heat which goes up the stack anyway, to boill water vapor..
Hopefully I’m totally wrong about my understanding of the paper, and my darkerfear regarding it showing some change in Dr. Hansen’s allegiance/outlook, as he has done such splendid work, for so manyy ears, against resistance and ignorance, on behalf of humanity and the entire planet. Best Regards.
The paper "Doubling Down on Our Faustian Bargain" was ;published 29 March 2013
by James Hansen, Pushker Kharecha, Makiko Sato
It begins ...
Summary. Humanity is doubling down on its Faustian climate bargain by pumping up fossil fuel particulate and nitrogen pollution. The more the Faustian debt grows, the more unmanageable the eventual consequences will be. Yet there are plans to build more than 1000 coal- fired power plants and plans to develop some of the dirtiest oil sources on the planet. These plans should be vigorously resisted. We are already in a deep hole -- it is time to stop digging.
Humanity's Faustian climate bargain is well known.1,2 Humans have been pumping both greenhouse gases (mainly CO2) and aerosols (fine particles) into the atmosphere for more than a century. The CO2 accumulates steadily, staying in the climate system for millennia, with a continuously increasing warming effect. Aerosols have a cooling effect (by reducing solar heating of the ground) that depends on the rate that we pump aerosols into the air, because they fall out after about five days.
Aerosol cooling probably reduced global warming by about half over the past century3, but the amount is uncertain because global aerosols and their effect on clouds are not measured accurately. Aerosols increased rapidly after World War II as fossil fuel use increased ~5%/year with little pollution control (Fig. 1). Aerosol growth slowed in the 1970s with pollution controls in the U.S. and Europe, but accelerated again after ~2000.
PDF https://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2013/20130329_FaustianBargain.pdf
thanks will go look. bestregards
Excellent! How can this be moved into the letters to PA legislators and administrators?
I'll copy the substack url and hope that connects.
From your quote from The Guardian, "If greenhouse gas emissions continue"
If the climate conversation is to have any hope of breaking out of its current infinite loop of promises made and promises broken, social activism needs to lean to think less like politicians, and more like engineers.
Where do greenhouse gas emissions come from? They come from the combustion of hydrocarbons. That is the root cause of the climate problem. That is where we have to look for solutions.
When we do, we find that energy extraction from hydrocarbons is really a kind of energy theft from Nature, because that energy already has a job that Nature has given it. It is not just sitting around waiting for us clever people to figure out how to use it.
The job Nature has for the energy in hydrocarbons is keeping the habitats on earth within ranges within which modern human can keep ourselves ongoing. By taking energy away from that job, we are also take away the habitats in which we can keep ourselves ongoing.
To preserve our own habitats, we also have to preserve energy in hydrocarbons.
Which means we have to replace energy extraction from hydrocarbons with new energy technologies. That will cost money. Money with the mission, the duty and the scale to be there in the future in a future that will be worth being there in. Fiduciary Money. Pensions and Endowment money.
And that money can't be spent in protest. It has to be spent on action, organizing and underwriting a global replace-to-retire, commission-to-decommission strategy for rapidly redesigning and reconstructing the global energy economy.
Money for action is what we need.