Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
30. I know that's the renewable dream, and that RMI are the head dreamers.
Sat Oct 12, 2013, 01:25 AM
Oct 2013

One scenario (not the only one, just a representative one) that I find more believable goes like this:

Assumptions:

  • Oil supply peaks in 15 years, and over the next 30 years oil consumption is approximately flat at today's value.
  • The shortfall in oil supply of about 30% by 2040 is filled by electric cars.
  • Gas and coal consumption rise due to increasing wealth (GDP/capita) and population growth.
  • Coal use is suppressed by about 15% globally due to wind and solar coming on line. .
  • Gas consumption continues its current straight-line growth, rising by 50% by 2040.
  • Coal use increases on an approximately straight line, but at a lower slope than today, rising by 35%.
Results:
  • Carbon emissions rise by 25% from 34 mt/yr today to 42 mt/yr in 2040, driving CO2 levels to about 475 ppm.
  • Methane feedbacks kick in seriously in about 10 years, raising the CO2e to 525 ppm in 2040, just short of the IPCC RCP8.5 value.
  • Rising CO2e gives a global average surface warming of about 1.5C in 2040
  • That temperature rise begins to break down tropical and sub-tropical societies as their large cities lose social cohesion.
  • Global carbon emissions level out by 2050 due to social breakdown
  • We hit 2100 just short of the RCP8.5 value, at about +4C.
  • Global civilization loses its cohesion and begins to fragment under multiple stresses around 2075.
  • The fragmentation of global civilization is complete by 2100.
  • Despite that fragmentation, CO2e and temperature continue to rise due to the methane feedbacks that were triggered over 50 years before.
  • Humanity enters a Toba-style bottleneck some time in the first half of the 22nd century.
Again, this is not the only possible scenario, but is representative of my thinking. IMO this scenario is somewhat conservative, depending on the strength of the CH4 feedbacks. It is one realistic possibility, that is in line with IPCC projections.

I simply don't believe the RMI fantasies.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Looks to me like madokie Oct 2013 #1
It doesn't have to be a problem for future generations... PamW Oct 2013 #2
Wonder why Japan didn't follow that path? kristopher Oct 2013 #10
Why didn't Japan build their own airliners instead of buying from Boeing / Airbus? PamW Oct 2013 #12
The question was why hasn't ANYONE pursued the IFR if it is so superior? kristopher Oct 2013 #13
The name is Pam!! PamW Oct 2013 #17
Nope kristopher Oct 2013 #18
WRONG! PamW Oct 2013 #19
I value the most effective means of reducing carbon emissions. kristopher Oct 2013 #20
WRONG, as per usual PamW Oct 2013 #21
No, Greg, you are wrong - again. kristopher Oct 2013 #22
WRONG!!! WRONG!!! WRONG!!! 100% WRONG!!! both the name and substance PamW Oct 2013 #33
This message was self-deleted by its author PamW Oct 2013 #3
In a world with static or declining energy demand this might be true GliderGuider Oct 2013 #4
Lets not get too carried away here madokie Oct 2013 #5
Agreed. I just wanted to get the idea out there, and this was as good a place as any. GliderGuider Oct 2013 #6
happy to be able to oblige madokie Oct 2013 #7
More of your hypothetical bullpucky kristopher Oct 2013 #8
I used 30 year averages to ensure that I wasn't mistaking noise for trend. GliderGuider Oct 2013 #9
No, you used 30 years to fudge the numbers kristopher Oct 2013 #11
Actually, I didn't. Here's the graphic proof of what I'm saying GliderGuider Oct 2013 #14
The picture has already changed. kristopher Oct 2013 #15
Not according to the data I have GliderGuider Oct 2013 #16
You're pointing your camera in the wrong direction kristopher Oct 2013 #23
At least you've stopped trying to beat us to death with Mark Z. Jacobsen... GliderGuider Oct 2013 #24
You stopped making the specific claims that Jacobson refuted. kristopher Oct 2013 #25
You can attribute whatever you wish. It's your belief system. GliderGuider Oct 2013 #26
Memo to sceptics of a low-carbon world – 'it's happening' kristopher Oct 2013 #27
What do Portugal's cars run on? What heats their homes? GliderGuider Oct 2013 #28
Tougher nuts to crack? kristopher Oct 2013 #29
I know that's the renewable dream, and that RMI are the head dreamers. GliderGuider Oct 2013 #30
It was abundantly clear you haven't got a clue... kristopher Oct 2013 #31
I call it "refining my understanding of the situation" GliderGuider Oct 2013 #32
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»The Viability of Germany’...»Reply #30