Ten Reasons Why Climate Change May Be More Severe than Projected

.......was asked to post this here in GD too, so here we go.........

Australian climate scientist Barry Pittock gave a terrific and terrifying talk at the 20th Anniversary of the Climate Insitute last week. He made the case that the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the key international process for determining the “consensus” view on climate, is systematically underestimating the future impacts of climate change. Since Pittock was a major contributor to the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report (2001) and since their Fourth Assessment is due out next year, we should pay attention to what he says.

1. “The climate sensitivity, or global warming after a doubling of the pre-industrial carbon dioxide concentration, is probably in the range of 2º–6°C rather than the 2001 IPCC estimate of 1.5º–4.5ºC. This suggests a more than 50% chance of that global warming by 2100 will be 3ºC or more, a level that many consider dangerous.”

3. “Permafrost melting is widespread,” which “leads to emissions of carbon dioxide and methane,” a dangerous vicious climate cycle that CP has written about.

7. & 8. “Rapid changes in Antarctica” and “Rapid melting and faster outlet glaciers in Greenland,” which combine to threaten far faster and greater sea level rise than climate models have been predicting.

I found his talk very compelling as it matched what I’ve been hearing from a number of climate scientists I interviewed for my book, including James Hansen. Pittock concludes:

The above lines of evidence (supported by well over 100 recent scientific papers), while not definitive and in some cases controversial, suggest that the balance of evidence may be swinging toward a more extreme outcome. While some of the observations may be due merely to natural fluctuations, their conjunction and, in several cases, amplifying effects are causes for concern. They suggest that critical levels of global warming may occur at even lower greenhouse gas concentrations and emissions than was considered justified in the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report issued in 2001.

In short, the time for inaction has run out.

http://climateprogress.org/2006/09/25/ten-reasons-why-climate-change-may-be-more-severe-than-projected/

.........and Dr. A. Barrie Pittock........

Scientific Symposium Presentation Abstracts
September 19
Dr. A. Barrie Pittock: Ten Reasons Why Climate Change May Be More Severe than Projected*
Uncertainties in climate change science are inevitably large, due both to inadequate scientific understanding and to uncertainties in future human behavior. Policies therefore must be based on risk management, that is, on consideration of the probability times the magnitude of any deleterious outcomes for different scenarios of human behavior. In this talk I want to focus on observations and modeling studies in the last year or two in ten areas of concern, which when taken together strongly suggest that the risk of more serious outcomes is greater than was understood previously.

1. The climate sensitivity, or global warming after a doubling of the pre-industrial carbon dioxide concentration, is probably in the range of 2º–6°C rather than the 2001 IPCC estimate of 1.5º–4.5ºC. This suggests a more than 50% chance of that global warming by 2100 will be 3ºC or more, a level that many consider dangerous.

2. Global dimming is large but decreasing. Reductions of sunlight at the Earth’s surface by atmospheric pollution particles are diminishing as particulate emissions are brought more under control, thus decreasing their cooling effect and making the warming effect of greenhouse gases more evident.

3. Permafrost melting is widespread. Observations show rapid melting of permafrost (i.e., frozen ground). This tends to reduce the reflectivity of the surface to sunlight and, as vegetable matter in the soil starts to decay, leads to emissions of carbon dioxide and methane. These changes will enhance global warming.

http://washington_summit.climate.org/abstracts/pittock_tenreasons.html

K & R!

for two decades.

as well as the first 20 feet or so of all the other coastal cities and areas.

greenland IS going to go- and probably much faster/sooner than has been previously predicted.

Because he has filled in a marsh land area on his dairy farm to raise organic vegetables

I want to keep telling them both - "Stop the bickering. You live so close to the California Coast that BOTH your pieces of property will be underwater in twelve years or sooner"

I have gotten so depresed over climate change I am now punch dunk with glee - We could all be dead
in ten years so let's rock the house with a couple more good parties before the lights go out.

and by then, it's going to be waaaaaay too late. (as opposed to the waaay too late that we're currently living in)

I'm just wondering what the problem with that is? Just kidding. I do think people ought to think twice about acquiring that oceanfront property any time soon. Poseiden will be coming to reclaim it soon.

I'm actually wondering how much of this endpoint we can stave off. In other words, if we fixed absolutely everything about our contribution to global climate change, how much of it is already on auto-pilot or past the tipping point? I'm not sure much research has been done on that and frankly I would prefer that the research be done on what we can do.

In three weeks, I'm getting a Prius to replace my 12 year old Maxima. When the plug in option becomes available, I will add that post market.

enough people to make a difference, that is.

my personal/gut feeling is that it's already too late- and if it's inevitable, i hope it happens asap.

It's a great decision for your pocketbook; a total design coup.

Just be careful the first week - they are a bit hard to adjust to driving (I was lent one by a friend who was off in Hawaii and had to call him to figure out where the key goes!)

And who knows - maybe my pessism is not well foudned. Maybe all the little acts of kindness will save the planet.

But we are a 4 adult family so we need more than two cars though one of us is an adament bus rider, bless his soul (we live in the boonies so riding the bus in to civilization is a major commitment). I just wonder how much my little contribution helps. Alas, I can not do otherwise and be able to be soul okay. Integrity is a bitch.

I personally like biofuels better, since they contribute *no* net carbon to the atmosphere, can be produced locally, and don't leave you with environmentally questionable batteries that will eventually require disposal.

I like the idea of plug-in hybrids, but only if the electricity isn't coming from coal, natural gas, dams, or nuclear. (Personal solar arrays, anyone?)

A plug-in diesel hybrid, fueled by biodiesel made from WVO, charged by solar, would be about as low-footprint as personal transportation could get.

And if the cost of the products we buy actually paid for the *total* cost of those products' lifecycle (i.e., big footprint = big price), it would also be the cheapest!

:rofl:

In other words, if we fixed absolutely everything about our contribution to global climate change, how much of it is already on auto-pilot or past the tipping point?

Someone else wrote on one of these threads (probably over in the Environment/Energy forum) that there's the residual effects - things are already in motion and even if we stop today, right this minute, the things that are already in motion can't be stopped. I guess that means we've reached, or are past, the tipping point.

Jared Diamond's book, Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed" talked about this greatly. Of course, he was, in my opinion, being overly, overly optimistic.

I'm sure the article is in the archives if you want to
peruse them.
He is a fantastic and under valued writer and analyst,
IMHO.

http://www.monbiot.com

climate is a complex dynamic system - dynamic systems by definition don't change states in a linear fashion.

Complexity aka Chaos Theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complexity

I pulled up the long term outlooks earlier this morning and the three month outlook was for a greater chances for warmer than normal.

It does look like the Western U.S. will be colder than normal.

:hi: from beautiful sunny Southwestern Michigan. Cloudy today though.

It's not a normal winter here, not at all. We've only had an inch or two of snow so far this winter. And since the ground wasn't frozen, it melted pretty quickly.

There are poor people all over the globe who will not just sit down and die with their children. they will move, whether they are welcome to their end-point..or not.

watch for more war..and then even more war.

People are not eager to share their resources, and will be even less eager to if their agricultural is marginal to start with.

Climate change will render lots of the usual crops ungrowable..

and with less rain in some areas, people will deplete their aquifers, wells and other water sources even faster..

I feel sad for people of the future.



(and of course for all the critters in the wild..I fear they will go first..and fast, as one after another support system cracks under the stress)

sitting on their miles wide aquifer in paraguay :grr:

uses images of the Titanic as the earth and the iceberg as GW.

Those who discount GW say that the ship is unsinkable, or that icebergs (Green House Gases) occur naturally and we've hit them before (CO2 fluctuations) with no problems.

Those of us who believe in the truth of GW, say that the ship is moving too fast (the rate of CO2 rise) and the iceberg is too big (the magnitude of the rise) and that it will sink the ship, we need to slow down (reduce emissions).

And there are those of us (including myself) who think we can no longer slow down or turn fast enough anymore and the crash is inevitable and that we need to start thinking about LIFEBOATS, with the realization that we are not going to be able to save everyone, not by half.

I'm also coming to believe that there are just too many humans on this earth, and I'm no longer sure that it is in the best interest, in regards to the long term survival of the species, that we undertake serious efforts to try and save us all.

A very cynical thought that I do not enjoy contemplating, but never-the-less find myself ruminating over.

will be interesting to see if it happens again??

less than 30 years I bet. Islands are all ready disappearing

those are some interesting countries Japan England Indonesia ... Heres a question for everybody
what do you do with Millions and Billions of refugees
do you get a boat and bring them to America when Florida is under water

Where do you put all these people???

Someday the Truth will come out Earth had to defend herself from Man

(n/t)

when they demand that their governments plan for a future in which no one is forced to drive.

Until then, they can feel good about their Priuses.

(NOTE: I am one of those people forced to drive, although I do so as little as possible, because of the wretched transit system here in the Twin Cities. When I had a good transit system available, as in Portland or Tokyo, I didn't drive at all, and I LOVED it. I'm especially nostalgic about not driving today, having just paid $341 for repairs.)

:-/

This is why this is really the nost important issue around.

so I was thrilled to see the report yesterday put out by Physicians for Social Responsibility about how EXXON has been funding front groups comprised of global warming skeptic "scientists".

They've been strategically networking with groups of willing pawns who are less motivated by the search for truth, than by ideology, political loyalties, fear, hatred, and/or economic self interest.


http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/39683/story.htm

Exxon Mobil Cultivates Global Warming Doubt
By Deborah Zabarenko
Reuters

Thursday 04 January 2007

Washington - Energy giant ExxonMobil borrowed tactics from the tobacco industry to raise doubt about climate change, spending US$16 million on groups that question global warming, a science watchdog group said on Wednesday.

Kick and recommend