[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *********************************************** > CLIMATE CHANGE NEWS TODAY > Civilization's Last Chance: Major Greenhouse Gas Emission > Cuts (and Even Removals) Needed Immediately > *********************************************** > Climate Ark a project of Ecological Internet, Inc. > http://www.climateark.org/ -- Climate Change Portal > > May 11, 2008 > OVERVIEW & COMMENTARY by Dr. Glen Barry, Ecological Internet > > Bill McKibben writes in "Civilization's last chance" (below) > the best summing up of the known threats facing humanity now > from climate change if major emission cuts are not pursued > immediately. His latest campaign efforts highlight the number > 350, which he calls "the most important number on Earth" > because of scientific understanding that if carbon emissions > are not stabilized at 350 ppm, it will not be possible "to > preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization > developed." > > It has been noted here that at 383 ppm we are already well > past this threshold, and thus achieving 350 ppm will require > gargantuan efforts if we are to survive much less prosper > ( > http://www.climateark.org/blog/2007/12/have_we_gone_to_far_re_dangero.asp > ). > The McKibben piece is a clarion call that long predicted limits > to growth have arrived and the fate of civilization depends > upon urgent massive emission cuts now, tomorrow, next year and > certainly for the years and decades well before 2050 as is > being proposed. > g.b. > > To comment: > http://www.climateark.org/blog/2008/05/major_ghg_emission_cuts_needed.asp > ******************************* > RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE: > > ITEM #1 > Title: Civilization's last chance > The planet is nearing a tipping point on climate change, and > it gets much worse, fast. > Source: Copyright 2008, LA Times > Date: May 11, 2008 > Byline: Bill McKibben > http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-op-mckibben11-2008may11,0,2392815.story > > Even for Americans -- who are constitutionally convinced that > there will always be a second act, and a third, and a do-over > after that, and, if necessary, a little public repentance and > forgiveness and a Brand New Start -- even for us, the world > looks a little terminal right now. > > It's not just the economy: We've gone through swoons before. > It's that gas at $4 a gallon means we're running out, at least > of the cheap stuff that built our sprawling society. It's that > when we try to turn corn into gas, it helps send the price of > a loaf of bread shooting upward and helps ignite food riots on > three continents. It's that everything is so tied together. > It's that, all of a sudden, those grim Club of Rome types who, > way back in the 1970s, went on and on about the "limits to > growth" suddenly seem ... how best to put it, right. > > All of a sudden it isn't morning in America, it's dusk on > planet Earth. > > There's a number -- a new number -- that makes this point most > powerfully. It may now be the most important number on Earth: > 350. As in parts per million of carbon dioxide in the > atmosphere. > > A few weeks ago, NASA's chief climatologist, James Hansen, > submitted a paper to Science magazine with several coauthors. > The abstract attached to it argued -- and I have never read > stronger language in a scientific paper -- that "if humanity > wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which > civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, > paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that > CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at > most 350 ppm." > > Hansen cites six irreversible tipping points -- massive sea > level rise and huge changes in rainfall patterns, among them - > - that we'll pass if we don't get back down to 350 soon; and > the first of them, judging by last summer's insane melt of > Arctic ice, may already be behind us. > > So it's a tough diagnosis. It's like the doctor telling you > that your cholesterol is way too high and, if you don't bring > it down right away, you're going to have a stroke. So you take > the pill, you swear off the cheese, and, if you're lucky, you > get back into the safety zone before the coronary. It's like > watching the tachometer edge into the red zone and knowing > that you need to take your foot off the gas before you hear > that clunk up front. > > In this case, though, it's worse than that because we're not > taking the pill and we are stomping on the gas -- hard. > Instead of slowing down, we're pouring on the coal, quite > literally. Two weeks ago came the news that atmospheric carbon > dioxide had jumped 2.4 parts per million last year -- two > decades ago, it was going up barely half that fast. > > And suddenly the news arrives that the amount of methane, > another potent greenhouse gas accumulating in the atmosphere, > has unexpectedly begun to soar as well. It appears that we've > managed to warm the far north enough to start melting huge > patches of permafrost, and massive quantities of methane > trapped beneath it have begun to bubble forth. > > And don't forget: China is building more power plants; India > is pioneering the $2,500 car; and Americans are buying TVs the > size of windshields, which suck juice ever faster. > > Here's the thing. Hansen didn't just say that if we didn't > act, there was trouble coming. He didn't just say that if we > didn't yet know what was best for us, we'd certainly be better > off below 350 ppm of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. > > His phrase was: "if we wish to preserve a planet similar to > that on which civilization developed." A planet with billions > of people living near those oh-so-floodable coastlines. A > planet with ever-more vulnerable forests. (A beetle, > encouraged by warmer temperatures, has already managed to kill > 10 times more trees than in any previous infestation across > the northern reaches of Canada this year. This means far more > carbon heading for the atmosphere and apparently dooms > Canada's efforts to comply with the Kyoto protocol, which was > already in doubt because of its decision to start producing > oil for the U.S. from Alberta's tar sands.) > > We're the ones who kicked the warming off; now the planet is > starting to take over the job. Melt all that Arctic ice, for > instance, and suddenly the nice white shield that reflected > 80% of incoming solar radiation back into space has turned to > blue water that absorbs 80% of the sun's heat. Such feedbacks > are beyond history, though not in the sense that Francis > Fukuyama had in mind. > > And we have, at best, a few years to short-circuit them -- to > reverse course. Here's the Indian scientist and economist > Rajendra Pachauri, who accepted the Nobel Prize on behalf of > the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change last year (and, > by the way, got his job when the Bush administration, at the > behest of Exxon Mobil, forced out his predecessor): "If > there's no action before 2012, that's too late. What we do in > the next two to three years will determine our future. This is > the defining moment." > > In the next two or three years, the nations of the world are > supposed to be negotiating a successor treaty to the Kyoto > accord (which, for the record, has never been approved by the > United States -- the only industrial nation that has failed to > do so). When December 2009 rolls around, heads of state are > supposed to converge on Copenhagen to sign a treaty -- a > treaty that would go into effect at the last plausible moment > to heed the most basic and crucial of limits on atmospheric > CO2. > > If we did everything right, Hansen says, we could see carbon > emissions start to fall fairly rapidly and the oceans begin to > pull some of that CO2 out of the atmosphere. Before the > century was out, we might even be on track back to 350. We > might stop just short of some of those tipping points, like > the Road Runner screeching to a halt at the very edge of the > cliff. > > More likely, though, we're the coyote -- because "doing > everything right" means that political systems around the > world would have to take enormous and painful steps right > away. It means no more new coal-fired power plants anywhere, > and plans to quickly close the ones already in operation. > (Coal-fired power plants operating the way they're supposed to > are, in global warming terms, as dangerous as nuclear plants > melting down.) It means making car factories turn out > efficient hybrids next year, just the way U.S. automakers made > them turn out tanks in six months at the start of World War > II. It means making trains an absolute priority and planes a > taboo. > > It means making every decision wisely because we have so > little time and so little money, at least relative to the task > at hand. And hardest of all, it means the rich countries of > the world sharing resources and technology freely with the > poorest ones so that they can develop dignified lives without > burning their cheap coal. > > It's possible. The United States launched a Marshall Plan > once, and could do it again, this time in relation to carbon. > But at a time when the president has, once more, urged > drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, it seems > unlikely. At a time when the alluring phrase "gas tax holiday" > -- which would actually encourage more driving and more energy > consumption -- has danced into our vocabulary, it's hard to > see. And if it's hard to imagine sacrifice here, imagine > China, where people produce a quarter as much carbon apiece as > Americans do. > > Still, as long as it's not impossible, we've got a duty to try > to push those post-Kyoto negotiations in the direction of > reality. In fact, it's about the most obvious duty humans have > ever faced. > > After all, those talks are our last chance; you just can't do > this one lightbulb at a time. > > We do have one thing going for us -- the Web -- which at least > allows you to imagine something like a grass-roots global > effort. If the Internet was built for anything, it was built > for sharing this number, for making people understand that > "350" stands for a kind of safety, a kind of possibility, a > kind of future. > > Hansen's words were well-chosen: "a planet similar to that on > which civilization developed." People will doubtless survive > on a non-350 planet, but those who do will be so preoccupied, > coping with the endless unintended consequences of an > overheated planet, that civilization may not. > > Civilization is what grows up in the margins of leisure and > security provided by a workable relationship with the natural > world. That margin won't exist, at least not for long, as long > as we remain on the wrong side of 350. That's the limit we > face. > > Bill McKibben, a scholar in residence at Middlebury College > and the author, most recently, of "The Bill McKibben Reader," > is the co-founder of Project 350 ( www.350.org), devoted to > reducing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to 350 parts per > million. > > > ITEM #2 > Japan: Govt to seek 'up to 80%' emissions cut by 2050 > Source: Copyright 2008, Daily Yomiuri > Date: May 12, 2008 > http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20080512TDY01305.htm > > In its measures against global warming, which are expected to > be unveiled in June, the government may call for a 60-percent > to 80-percent cut in domestic greenhouse gas emissions from > current levels by 2050, The Yomiuri Shimbun learned Sunday. > > Four Cabinet ministers, including Chief Cabinet Secretary > Nobutaka Machimura and Environment Minister Ichiro Kamoshita, > are among those discussing the issue. They will start > coordinating opinions over the measure this week, although > Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda will make the final decision. > > The European Union says major countries should reduce > greenhouse gas emissions by 60 percent to 80 percent by 2050 > from 1990 levels. > > Japan has been discussing its own emissions target, taking > into account the EU's position. > > Some government officials insist Japan's greenhouse gas > emissions target should be a 70-percent cut by 2050, as the > National Institute for Environmental Studies reported in > February 2007 that the nation could cut emissions by 70 > percent from its 1990 levels by 2050. > > In 2007, the administration of former Prime Minister Shinzo > Abe called for a 50-percent cut in global greenhouse gas > emissions by 2050 in its basic strategy for measures against > global warming. > > But Fukuda has decided that as a major industrialized nation > Japan should take a leading role and set stricter targets than > developing countries by establishing an emissions target above > the one Abe proposed. > > The government wants to promote the development of new energy > sources and the practical application of new technologies to > achieve this goal. It also will consider the introduction of > an emissions quota trading scheme along the lines of the > system already introduced in Europe. > > The EU began emissions trading in 2005, mainly for companies > based inside the regional bloc. > > --- > You are subscribed to ecological_internet as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Before unsubscribing, please consider modifying your list profile at: > http://www.ecoearth.info/subscribe/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To unsubscribe, send a blank email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Or click here: > http://email.ecoearth.info/u?id=66562M&n=T&c=F&l=ecological_internet > > To subscribe, send a blank email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Or visit here: > http://www.ecoearth.info/subscribe/ > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.11 - Release Date: 5/8/2008 > 12:00 AM > >
