|
AdAward Winning Home Loan – www.loans.com.au – From 4.54% (4.56% Comparison Rate) Offer Ends Soon! Apply Online Now.
|
Falling Apart – monbiot.com
|
||||||||||||||
|
AdAward Winning Home Loan – www.loans.com.au – From 4.54% (4.56% Comparison Rate) Offer Ends Soon! Apply Online Now.
|
Falling Apart – monbiot.com
|
||||||||||||||
|
AdHome Loan Pre Approval – www.loans.com.au – 3 Month Home Loan Pre Approval. Takes Just 2 Minutes! Apply Now.
|
Daily update: The guerilla tactics allowing solar to beat utilities
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
AdI want to retire abroad – www.escapologist.com.au – Now you can live in luxury for less These 3 countries are safe & cheap
|
A turning point?
Dear Sydney friend, This week, I’ve seen two confronting sides of the coin that is climate change. Last Friday, as thirty young Pacific Islanders arrived on our shores to stand up to the fossil fuel industry driving the destruction of their homes, I received an email from the President of The Marshall Islands College, asking for assistance in divesting his university from fossil fuels. Attached were thirteen photos of the frightening floods that have just hit the Islands and are evermore frequently scourging his home. I sat, speechless. Here was a people suffering the worst impacts of climate change yet who had done nothing to cause the problem – offering to help, not just their country, but all countries, by standing up to the fossil fuel industry and divesting from climate disruption. This fighting, hopeful spirit of the Pacific brought tears to my eyes. Meanwhile, back home, an announcement from Australia’s National University that they will divest* from two fossil fuel companies has prompted our Federal Treasurer to lambast ANU’s Vice Chancellor and our Financial Press to wage a condemnatory campaign, now into its eleventh day. It has even compelled our Prime Minister to exclaim, in his wisdom, that “Coal is Good for Humanity.” The contrast couldn’t be more stark. But, albeit confronting, these events, I believe, are a major turning point for Australia. They are laying bare the degree to which our politicians and our press are wedded to an industry whose activities will tank the planet. But more importantly, they’re highlighting the inexorable courage of our Pacific neighbours to tackle the heart of this problem and inspire all Australians to do the same. And this gives me great hope as we move into times that will be more difficult and confronting than humanity has ever faced. With the world’s largest coal port to blockade and millions more dollars to shift out of fossil fuels, the next fortnight will be 350.org Australia’s biggest and most challenging yet. We hope you will join us where and when you can by:
Because, to change everything, we need everyone. Yours, with hope for the massive times ahead, Charlie |
|||||||||||
Leaves absorb significantly more CO2 that climate models have estimatedGlobal climate models have underestimated the amount of CO2 being absorbed by plants, according to new research.
Scientists say that between 1901 and 2010, living things absorbed 16% more of the gas than previously thought.
The authors say it explains why models consistently overestimated the growth rate of carbon in the atmosphere.
But experts believe the new calculation is unlikely to make a difference to global warming predictions.
The research has been published in the journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Working out the amount of carbon dioxide that lingers in the atmosphere is critical to estimating the future impacts of global warming on temperatures.
About half the CO2 that’s produced ends up in the oceans or is absorbed by living things.
But modelling the exact impacts on a global scale is a fiendishly complicated business.
In this new study, a team of scientists looked again at the way trees and plants absorb carbon.
By analysing how CO2 spreads slowly inside leaves, a process called mesophyll diffusion, the authors conclude that more of the gas is absorbed than previously thought.
Between 1901 and 2100 the researchers believe that their new work increases the amount of carbon taken up through fertilisation from 915 billion tonnes to 1,057 billion, a 16% increase.
“There is a time lag between scientists who study fundamental processes and modellers who model those processes in large scale model,” explained one of the authors, Dr Lianhong Gu at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the US.
“It takes time for the the two groups to understand each other.”
Scientists monitor carbon dioxide levels near trees to work out how much is absorbedThe researchers believe that Earth systems models have over estimated the amount of carbon in the atmosphere by about 17%, and think their new evaluation of plant absorption explains the gap.
“The atmospheric CO2 concentration only started to accelerate rapidly after 1950,” said Dr Gu.
“So the 17% bias was achieved during a period of about 50 years. If we are going to predict future CO2 concentration increases for hundreds of years, how big would that bias be?”
Model revampOther researchers believe the new work could help clarify our models but it may not mean any great delay in global warming as a result of increased concentrations of the gas.
“The paper provides great new insights into how the very intricacies of leaf structure and function can have a planetary scale impact,” said Dr Pep Canadell from the Global Carbon Project at CSIRO Australia.
“It provides a potential explanation for why global earth system models cannot fully reproduce the observed atmospheric CO2 growth over the past 100 years and suggests that vegetation might be able to uptake more carbon dioxide in the future than is currently modelled.
“Having more carbon taken up by plants would slow down climate change but there are many other processes which lay in between this work and the ultimate capacity of terrestrial ecosystems to remove carbon dioxide and store it for long enough to make a difference to atmospheric CO2 trends.”
Many experts agree that the effect is interesting and may require a recalibration of models – but it doesn’t change the need for long-term emissions cuts to limit the impact of carbon dioxide.
“This new research implies it will be slightly easier to fulfil the target of keeping global warming below two degrees – but with a big emphasis on ‘slightly’,” said Dr Chris Huntingford, a climate modeller at the UK’s Centre for Ecology and Hydrology.
“Overall, the cuts in CO2 emissions over the next few decades will still have to be very large if we want to keep warming below two degrees.”
Follow Matt on Twitter @mattmcgrathbbc.
13 October 2014
The climate is getting warmer, the ice sheets are melting and sea levels are rising – but how much? The report of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2013 was based on the best available estimates of future sea levels, but the panel was not able to come up with an upper limit for sea level rise within this century. Now researchers from the Niels Bohr Institute and their colleagues have calculated the risk for a worst-case scenario. The results indicate that at worst, the sea level would rise a maximum of 1.8 meters. The results are published in the scientific journal Environmental Research Letters.
The storm surge of Hurricane Sandy reached 2.8 m above mean high tide in New York. In the future less severe storms will cause comparable surge levels due rising sea level. The unlikely worst case scenario for sea level rise this century is estimated to be 1.8 m, which would translate into approximately 20 times more frequent Sandy level surges. (Photo credit: David Shankbone, CC-BY-3.0)
What causes the sea to rise is when all the water that is now frozen as ice and lies on land melts and flows into the sea. It is first and foremost about the two large, kilometer-thick ice sheets on Greenland and Antarctica, but also mountain glaciers.
In addition, large amounts of groundwater is pumped for both drinking water and agricultural use in many parts of the world and more groundwater is pumped than seeps back down into the ground, so this water also ends up in the oceans.
Finally, what happens is that when the climate gets warmer, the oceans also get warmer and hot water expands and takes up more space. But how much do the experts expect the sea levels to rise during this century at the maximum?
“We wanted to try to calculate an upper limit for the rise in sea level and the biggest question is the melting of the ice sheets and how quickly this will happen. The IPCC restricted their projektions to only using results based on models of each process that contributes to sea level. But the greatest uncertainty in assessing the evolution of sea levels is that ice sheet models have only a limited ability to capture the key driving forces in the dynamics of the ice sheets in relation to climatic impact,” Aslak Grinsted, Associate Professor at the Centre for Ice and Climate at the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen
The worst-case sea level projections is shown in red. There is 95% certainty that sea level will not rise faster than this upper-limit. Purple shows the likely range of sea level rise as projected in the IPCC fifth assessment report under a scenario with rising emissions throughout the 21st century (RCP8.5). (Credit: Aslak Grinsted, NBI)
Aslak Grinsted has therefore, in collaboration with researchers from England and China, worked out new calculations. The researchers have combined the IPCC numbers with published data about the expectations within the ice-sheet expert community for the evolution, including the risk for the collapse of parts of Antarctica and how quickly such a collapse would take place.
“We have created a picture of the propable limits for how much global sea levels will rise in this century. Our calculations show that the seas will likely rise around 80 cm. An increase of more than 180 cm has a likelihood of less than 5 percent. We find that a rise in sea levels of more than 2 meters is improbable,” Aslak Grinsted, but points that the results only concern this century and the sea levels will continue to rise for centuries to come
|
The recent announcement by the heirs to the Rockefeller oil fortune, philanthropists and other high net worth individuals that they will divest $50 billion from fossil fuel investments represents a significant behavioural shift, demonstrating that environmental sustainability is becoming increasingly important for investors when evaluating options and selecting where they will invest. Stanford, one of the world’s most well known and respected universities made a similar announcement that they would not invest any of their $18.7 billion endowment fund in coal mining companies in May this year, and the Australian National University (ANU), one of Australia’s most well known and highly ranked universities announced earlier this month that it will divest funds in seven resource and mining companies following an independent review.
On October 6, the Anglican Diocese of Perth announced that they will divest their fossil fuel investments and invest in renewables as part of their responsibility to act on climate change. During the announcement Father Evan Pederick from the Diocese stated that it was up to private enterprise and/or individuals to show the way in the absence of effective Government action. The Diocese of Perth’s action follows on from the Anglican Church in Australia’s announcement in August 2014. Several Anglican Dioceses in New Zealand have also made similar commitments, along with the cities of Dunedin and Brisbane and a number of foundations. See a list of divestment commitments here The divestment momentum is becoming harder and harder to ignore, however it would be naive to think that it is just about reallocating funds. Corporate social and environmental responsibility are now commonly front of mind in many organisations across a range of sectors globally. Company boards and management are now more cognisant of the reality that these responsibilities go beyond the mere reporting of performance in order to tick a regulator’s box or answer a query from a shareholder (of course this is still important). They realise that the positions they take will need to be justified as part of transactional negotiations, and that as National Governments begin to mandate environmental requirements more and more, their customers and trading partners who operate in jurisdictions under these mandates will also be subject to them. They are also aware of the reality that using social media and other platforms, individual shareholders can very quickly find others that are of a similar viewpoint to them, and form groups that give them far more of a say than they would have on their own. |