* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download 30 Oct 2004
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Kyoto Protocol wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
Fred Singer wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup
Economics of climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Low-carbon economy wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Global warming controversy wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Instrumental temperature record wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Canada wikipedia , lookup
Carbon governance in England wikipedia , lookup
2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the Arctic wikipedia , lookup
Views on the Kyoto Protocol wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on Australia wikipedia , lookup
Global warming hiatus wikipedia , lookup
Mitigation of global warming in Australia wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on oceans wikipedia , lookup
Future sea level wikipedia , lookup
Global warming wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
MODERN TIMES by Art Hobson [email protected] Ice Sheets, Kyoto, And Global Warming A lot has happened on the global warming front since my last report on 20 March (http://physics.uark.edu/hobson/ ). The list of possible disasters has just become more dangerous. That list includes shutting off the oceanic "pump" that keeps the Gulfstream and other global ocean currents circulating; a sudden release of deposits of methane--a potent global warming gas--from the ocean floor; melting of the entire Arctic ice cap within a few decades; and breakup of the mile-thick West Antarctic Ice Sheet. There are recent reports that this last disaster, the breakup of the WAIS, may be already beginning. Although it would take thousands of years for global warming to directly melt the entire WAIS, there are subtle ways to destabilize it. This huge ice sheet has always slid slowly downhill toward the sea, with a rough balance between the amount of ice disappearing into the water each year and the amount added from snowfall. Since 1990, parts of the WAIS have begun sliding much faster, carrying two or three times as much ice into the sea as is replaced by snowfall. Glacier specialists aren't sure why this is happening, but they believe that warmer ocean waters are eating away at the underside of the large ice shelf where it is first "grounded" on the land, and this loosens the ocean end of the WAIS, causing it to slip toward the sea. As the ocean-end slides downhill, it appears to drag the entire WAIS--three times the size of Texas--along with it. The WAIS actually comprises six separate glaciers, and only one of the smaller ones is increasing its seaward flow. But because they don't entirely understand the process, experts can't say whether the WAIS's two largest ice shelves--each of them the size of Texas--could also begin sliding downhill. The entire WAIS could gradually slide into the sea during the next few centuries, raising global sea levels by a disastrous 16 feet, or a few feet every century. This sliding process, once it has gotten very far along, could be impossible to stop. A rise of a few feet in the next 100 years would be disastrous. Sea levels have risen by 4 to 10 inches during the past century, and coastal nations such as Bangladesh are already feeling the pain. On the positive side, and little-noted by our environmentally-negligent press, Russian President Vladimir Putin has approved the Kyoto treaty on climate change and it will soon be ratified by the Russian parliament. The treaty, drawn up in 1997 at an international meeting in Kyoto, Japan, sets limits for emissions of the gases that cause global warming. However, the treaty will not actually be legally binding until it has been ratified by nations representing 55 percent of the world's industrial carbon emissions. Once it becomes legally binding, the treaty will require the ratifying nations to obey the limits set by the treaty. Although 124 nations have ratified the treaty, the USA is not among them. Ever since 2001, when President Bush reversed President Clinton's pro-Kyoto stance and rejected the treaty, the USA has been the main holdout nation preventing the treaty from entering into force. Because the USA alone emits over 25 percent of the world's total, it's been hard achieve the 55 percent figure. Ratification by Russia, which accounts for 17 percent of global emissions, will put the ratifying nations above 55 percent and bring the treaty into force. A lot will change once the treaty is in force. Signatory industrialized nations must then reduce their emissions by 5 percent below 1990 levels, by 2012. To achieve this at the least possible cost, these nations will establish a "carbon trading system" under which they will receive "carbon emission permits" allowing each nation to emit a prescribed amount of carbon each year. The permits will be tradeable: Nations having more permits than they need can sell them to other nations, putting an economic premium on reducing carbon emissions. The USA will be left out of the commerce engendered by this trading system. We will fall increasingly behind the world in constraining carbon emissions, and carbonemitting US goods will be shunned by the rest of the world. This is happening as the scientific establishment expresses concern about the Bush administration subjecting scientific issues such as global warming to political tests. After a four-year history of rejecting the science of climate change, our president has grudgingly accepted the reality of global warming. However he has refused to recommend any remedy stronger than voluntary business measures, and research toward a distant hydrogen economy. If the president is seriously interested in action on global warming and energy issues, solutions are close at hand. A 50-cent gasoline tax, with the proceeds perhaps distributed back as income tax relief, would reduce foreign oil imports, would ultimately save money for consumers, and would reduce carbon emissions. Raising gasoline efficiency standards to a realistic and achievable 40 mpg would accomplish much more than Bush's tenuous hydrogen initiative. It's depressing that the press and the presidential candidates have been so negligent about environmental matters in general and global warming in particular. Let's hope that we don't need a real disaster, such as the WAIS sliding into the sea, to wake us up. Besides being our wake-up call, it could be civilization's death knell.