Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumGlobal Carbon Emissions up 2.5% During 2011 - 34 Billion Metric Tons New Record High
(Reuters) - Global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in 2011 rose 2.5 percent to 34 billion metric tons (37.48 billion tons) , a new record, Germany's renewable energy institute said on Tuesday.
The IWR, which advises German ministries, cited recovered industrial activity after the end of the global economic crisis of recent years.
"If the current trend is sustained, worldwide CO2 emissions will go up by another 20 percent to over 40 billion metric tons by 2020," IWR director Norbert Allnoch said.
China led the table of emitters in 2011 with 8.9 billion metric tons, up from 8.3 billion a year earlier. Its CO2 output was 50 percent more than the 6 billion metric tons in the United States. India was third, ahead of Russia, Japan and Germany. In May the International Energy Agency said that global CO2 emissions rose 3.2 percent last year to 31.6 billion metric tons, led by China.
EDIT
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/13/entertainment-us-carbon-emissions-study-idUSBRE8AC0J320121113
ffr
(23,393 posts)Just about anyway. Now that frost is finally showing up here, a month late, people are all surprised by it, but clueless that average temps should be more like a deep freeze.
And, AND, the average temps already factor in all the previous years, including the last three decades of rising temps AND STILL the morning lows are higher. We're phucked. Not as a nation, as an intelligent species and we're going to take all the rest, less the insects with us.
See if your location has the same excessively high low temperatures.
1) Goto Intellicast.com
2) Pick or type in your city or a nearby city/town. Like Denver, CO for instance <example here>
3) Next, observe the forecast low daily temps for the coming week: 33, 35, 35, 37, 37, 37, 37, 36, 36*
4) Select the 'Historic Averages' in the upper right portion of the same screen and look at how far off the average low temps are: 23, 23, ,23, 23, 22, 22, 22, 21, 21, 21.
See that? The temps aren't 1.5 or 2 or 4 degrees above normal. They're 10* to 15* above normal
Temps should be: 23, 23, ,23, 23, 22, 22, 22, 21, 21, 21
Temps actually R: 33, 35, 35, 37, 37, 37, 37, 37, 36, 36*
Difference ??????: 10, 12, 12, 14, 15, 15, 15, 16, 15, 15
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)Just remember, though, keep one thing in mind: Weather isn't climate.
We're phucked. Not as a nation, as an intelligent species and we're going to take all the rest, less the insects with us.
Not really necessary, btw. Just saying.
ffr
(23,393 posts)joshcryer
(62,536 posts)Increased records, over time, is an indicator of climate change.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)joshcryer
(62,536 posts)Fact.
hatrack
(64,831 posts)AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)I'm a weather watcher of sorts and this is the only year I can recall that average low temps have been this significantly above average, with this much consistence.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)No, sorry, but that's simply not true.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)You really need to start paying attention.
What I said, pretty clearly, is that this is the only year that I can recall, going back some time, in fact, that low temperatures have consistently been 7, 8, 9, 10+ degrees above the average for several months, or at least several(6+ in this case) weeks, on end. Even in 2011, this wasn't the case, with the exception of the heat wave that year.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)I should also note that this year also saw one of the strongest La Nina winters and springs around. That might really help explain why this winter was so warm this year.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)It's been an unusual lull between the cycles so far.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2012/20121018_winteroutlook.html
hatrack
(64,831 posts)And the leaves on the apple trees in the backyard haven't even turned yet.
It was like this last year, too, though not quite so late.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)And to think, their citizens only consume 1/4 of the energy, per capita, of a US Citizen. But hey, they are doing their best to catch up.
The good news here is that we can all quit our shitty day jobs sooner than later. The bad news is that we likely wont be around to cash in that retirement plan.
pscot
(21,044 posts)so China can contonue to grow.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2012/11//502497.mp3
It's more than passing strange how much honest science resembles the views of us doomers.
From the PDF, regarding the delusional nature of most of the current authoritative projections about carbon:
Recent historical emissions sometimes mistaken or massaged
Short-term emission growth seriously down played
Peak year choice Machiavellian & dangerously misleading
Reduction rate universally dictated by economists
Geoengineering widespread in low carbon scenarios
Annex 1/non-Annex 1 emissions split neglected or hidden
Assumptions about Big technology naively optimistic
(Net Costs meaningless with non-marginal mitigation & adaptation)
Collectively they have a magicians view of time & a linear view of problems ?
Again from Anderson's talk:
5°C - 6°C global land mean
& increase °C on the hottest days of:
6°C - 8°C in China
8°C - 10°C in Central Europe
10°C -12°C in New York
In low latitudes 4°C gives
up to 40% reduction in maize & rice
as population heads towards 9 billion by 2050
And this is from Fatih Birol (chief economist of the IEA):
When I look at this data, the trend is perfectly in line with a temperature increase of 6 degrees Celsius, which would have devastating consequences for the planet.
Read the Powerpoint, listen to the mp3, and then tell me we're going to make it...
Nihil
(13,508 posts)CRH
(1,553 posts)is absolutely chilling, and impossible to call a crank.
4*C is only survivable for a while, and is only a transitory location to an inevitable 6*C rice by the end of century. Then its pretty much lights out the party is over, for all but the few who might find a little more time, in underground high tech solutions yet to be invented.
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)You can listen to the lecture as you go through the PPT. (Some of the graphs are screwed up due to the PDF export though.)
The lecture has a lot more in it than the PPT gets across (as tends to be the case with slides).
Kevin Anderson makes a very convincing argument as to why we're not getting our shit together and even the magic solutions like Thorium aren't going to help (we need a massive mind boggling WWII level buildout).
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)*proud alarmist going on 5+ years now*
phantom power
(25,966 posts)GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)Last edited Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:02 PM - Edit history (1)
The IPCC says this:
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/spmsspm-projections-of.html
Now a reduction of 315 GtC doesn't sound undoable, does it? The problem is, the 1415 number is apparently the average of all the IPCC models, and only one of them (the Big Kahuna, A1FI) bears any resemblance to what's actually happening outside your house. Even under generous assumptions, we're on track to put out almost twice that much - 2500 GtC - over the 21st century. That's definitely a PETM-class event - PETM may have been triggered by a release of ~3000 GtC.
In fact, if we stay on our current trend (which matches or exceeds the IPCC A1FI scenario) we'll have blown our entire 1100 GtC budget in another 40-50 years.
And of course, that's just to keep the atmosphere down to 1000 ppm in 2100. If we burn everything it looks like we will on the current trend, that would mean soaring past 1500 ppm. That's well into PETM territory.
Can we stop using virtually all carbon-based fuels by 2050? No? Well, the price is PETM II.
This is worth reading, both on the subject of PETM and also why the climate feedback from CO2 is likely understated by a factor of 2 in the current IPCC documents:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/08/petm-weirdness/
hatrack
(64,831 posts)GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)CRH
(1,553 posts)but beyond my pay grade to comment. Have any idea who anonymous poster 'Gavin' might be?
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)CRH
(1,553 posts)and that was the only gavin I came across. I was yet to find his creds. Thanks again.
Livluvgrow
(380 posts)is that we are beyond the tipping point. Just think emissions are accelerating even with a large expansion of alternatives still accelerating