Stabilizing climate change more daunting than thought

Nov 24, 2005

If the world is serious about halting global warming then it will have to reduce carbon emissions over the next century by as much as 230 billion tonnes more than previously thought, according to new research from the University of Calgary.

This means that industrialized nations will have to cut back even further their use of fossil fuels, which are the main sources for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

“We know that we have to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide dramatically, in order to stabilize CO2 in the atmosphere,” says Dr. Damon Matthews, a post-doctoral fellow in the University of Calgary’s Department of Geography. “The question is, by how much? And what information do we need in order to set appropriate emissions targets?”

Matthews’ research shows how much future emissions need to be reduced so as to allow for the possibility of adverse effects of climate changes on natural carbon sinks. His paper, ‘Decrease of emissions required to stabilize atmospheric CO2 due to positive carbon cycle-climate feedbacks,’ appears in a forthcoming issue of Geophysical Research Letters, a leading journal for short communications in the field of climate science.

His research comes out on the eve of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Montreal, Nov. 28-Dec. 9, which close to 10,000 people are expected to attend. It is the largest intergovernmental climate conference since the Kyoto Protocol was adopted in 1997.

Matthews’ research paper is one of the first to look at how carbon cycle feedback loops could affect efforts to stabilize CO2. “It frames the scientific questions in a policy relevant way,” he says. “If we want stabilization, what do we have to do?”

A carbon cycle feedback to climate works like this: increasing CO2 emissions contribute to climate change; climate change reduces the effectiveness of naturally occurring carbon sinks, such as oceans and forests, which remove significant amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere; weakened carbon sinks are unable to remove as much CO2, meaning more remains in the atmosphere; atmospheric CO2 growth and consequent climate changes are amplified.

This positive carbon cycle feedback to climate will require lower emissions to meet the same stabilization goal. “If we want to achieve stabilization at all, we need to move our economic decisions in that direction and reduce carbon emissions substantially. We’ll have to reduce emissions even more to account for carbon cycle feedbacks.”

Matthews says that policy discussions in North America quickly need to move beyond the question of whether or not climate change is real. “There are certain things in climate science that are very well established. One of them is that climate change is happening and that it’s because of human intervention in the climate system. That’s not a subject for debate anymore.”

What is up for discussion are questions such as, How much will climate change over the next century? Is there a “safe” amount of climate change? How much do we need to limit emissions so as to avoid dangerous climate impacts?

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has predicted an average global rise in temperature of 1.4°C to 5.8°C between 1990 and 2100. Some current estimates indicate that even if successfully and completely implemented, the Kyoto Protocol will reduce that increase by somewhere between only 0.02°C and 0.28°C by the year 2050.

“Kyoto was never intended to be the final say on emissions control. This is a first step, and clearly much more is needed,” Matthews says. Kyoto requires industrialized countries to reduce emissions to (on average) 5.5% below 1990 levels by 2012. According to Matthews’ research, a comparable reduction in emissions will be required simply to keep pace with changes in the carbon cycle, with much lower emissions required to actually reduce future climate changes.

Source: University of Calgary

Explore further: Sandblasting winds shift Mars' landscape

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

How carbon budgets can change climate negotiations

Sep 25, 2014

(Phys.org) —This week in New York, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki Moon is hosting a Climate Summit. The Summit aims to 'catalyse action' on climate change among the 120 or so Heads of State in ...

Climate: Now to turn summit prose into action

Sep 25, 2014

Having renewed their commitment to saving Earth's climate, governments face daunting challenges in the coming months to draft a global pact and set targets for slashing carbon emissions, analysts said Wednesday.

NASA, partners target megacities carbon emissions

Sep 24, 2014

Driving down busy Interstate 5 in Los Angeles in a nondescript blue Toyota Prius, Riley Duren of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California, is a man on a mission as he surveys the vast urban ...

Recommended for you

The wake-up call that sent hearts racing

1 hour ago

"But as the minutes ticked by, the relaxed attitude of many of us began to dissolve into apprehension. Our levels of adrenaline and worry began to rise."

US-India to collaborate on Mars exploration

11 hours ago

The United States and India, fresh from sending their own respective spacecraft into Mars' orbit earlier this month, on Tuesday agreed to cooperate on future exploration of the Red Planet.

Swift mission observes mega flares from a mini star

11 hours ago

On April 23, NASA's Swift satellite detected the strongest, hottest, and longest-lasting sequence of stellar flares ever seen from a nearby red dwarf star. The initial blast from this record-setting series ...

Sandblasting winds shift Mars' landscape

16 hours ago

High winds are a near-daily force on the surface of Mars, carving out a landscape of shifting dunes and posing a challenge to exploration, scientists said Tuesday.

PanSTARRS K1, the comet that keeps going

18 hours ago

Thank you K1 PanSTARRS for hanging in there! Some comets crumble and fade away. Others linger a few months and move on. But after looping across the night sky for more than a year, this one is nowhere near ...

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Arkaleus
not rated yet Jul 07, 2009
Mr. Matthews needs to be reminded that there is no "North American" policy because there is no North American Union, except in the fantasies of globalist provocateurs.

For this agent of ideology to deny the independent reality of the United States is to confirm the obvious feature of greens worldwide: Their agenda is a planned social and economic system where the delusional worker's paradise of Marx is replaced by the arbitrary plutocracy of a scientific dictatorship. Social engineering has reached a point of refinement where mass control of a modern democracy is possible, managed through a consolidated media and enforced by paramilitary surveillance and law enforcement.

Debate is far from over Mr. Matthews, and your arrogant boasts of certainty are laughable. We in the United States owe no allegiance to Canada, Europe, the IPCC, the UN, or any other ideological saboteur that appears on our boarder.

Greenism functions as a theocratic movement, and would interface with society in the same capacity as a religion. It evangelizes, prophecies, and raises a fervor for "salvation" among the uneducated with the nebulous threats of a great doom unless its tenants are obeyed. It gains proceeds by the issuance of indulgences, defines moral standards and condemns behaviors by shame and legal conventions, and subsists in the fringes of the unproven and speculative.

Nation-States infiltrated by Greenism will find themselves in the same tangle as Europe and the Roman church. Dissent from Green dogma would not be tolerated because it would be an apparatus of state authority.

Greenism is a subversive ideology which threatens to overthrow the entire progress of the Rational Revolution. It seeks to destroy human liberty from the Earth except for the rich and ruling few, dismantle free states and individual prerogative, and replace it with statist authoritarianism.

Greenism is a threat to the United States of America - it is a Trojan horse of hostile foreign ideologies. Foolish and naive persons are seduced by it, but the wise and prosperous will understand it and repulse it from our shores.