carbon budgets

Geology, Geophysics, Oceanography, Meteorology etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

carbon budgets

#1  Postby BWE » Sep 27, 2016 10:40 pm

ripped this straight off from TR:
[quote author=osmanthus link=msg=23732 date=1474585270]
Interesting new report just out. It's by a bunch calling themselves "Oil Change International', who I hadn't heard of before and AFAIK have no great standing. OTOH they have a good argument, which is what matters.

What they've done is to take standard IPCC assessments of carbon budgets, fossil fuel assets, and emissions pathway to point out something pretty relevant: namely that the oil fields, gas fields and coal mines currently in production will, if exploited fully on the basis of what's currently economic, release enough CO2 to totally blow any reasonable carbon budget.

IOW, we are already at the point where there are only two reasons for further development and/or exploration of fossil fuel reserves. These reasons are:

1/ We fully intend to blow the carbon budget for 2 degrees C, meaning that nobody who signed up to the Paris deal really believes it, or

2/ we intend that any new developments will be shut down prematurely, thus stiffing the investors and the workforce.

Neither of these make sense. Both are stupid.

Greg Laden has a brief blurb on it here: http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2016/ ... te_change/

DeSmog is on on the act: http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/09/21/na ... -its-goals

The actual report is here: http://priceofoil.org/2016/09/22/the-skys-limit-report/

PS: And no, I don't give a fuck what FX thinks.

ETA: Oh and New Scientist has picked up on it, so I assume they think the report's conclusions are solid: https://www.newscientist.com/article/21 ... past-1-5c/
[/quote]
User avatar
BWE
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 2498

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: carbon budgets

#2  Postby Macdoc » May 12, 2018 4:35 pm

No one I am aware thinks that 2C is achievable without active removal of carbon.


GLOBAL TEMPERATURE 3 August 2015 17:05
Two degree climate target not possible without ‘negative emissions’, scientists warn

All of our options for keeping warming below 2C above pre-industrial temperatures now involve capturing carbon dioxide and storing it underground – a technology that doesn’t yet exist on a large scale, according to new research.

The study , published today in Nature Communications, argues that ‘negative emissions’ alone, in the absence of conventional mitigation, are unlikely to achieve the 2C goal.


https://www.carbonbrief.org/two-degree- ... tists-warn

that was a while ago....
Travel photos > https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries
EO Wilson in On Human Nature wrote:
We are not compelled to believe in biological uniformity in order to affirm human freedom and dignity.
User avatar
Macdoc
 
Posts: 17156
Age: 73
Male

Country: Canada/Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post


Return to Earth Sciences

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest