When I researched Pennsylvania’s greenhouse gas emissions for the then Pennsylvania Energy Office and the US EPA in the early 1990s,* I realized that any growing economy will of necessity under current power technologies emit increasingly more carbon dioxide, methane, and other GHGs. The current measurement of carbon dioxide, according to the U.N. Environment Programme as noted in its 10th Emissions Gap Report (2019), now stands at 407.8 ppm (as of 2018).* Where do we stand today with regard to emissions? NOAA figures that total GHG emissions have risen by more than 40% since I conducted that study.
With 300 million people, USA still has the highest per capita emissions, but in absolute tonnage, the 1.5 billion people of China emit double the GHGs of the United States. And in per capita emissions, China has now surpassed the E.U. So, yes, for those concerned about per capita emissions, USA is the bad guy, but in total quantities, China is. The U.N. researchers say that the world needs to cut greenhouse gas emissions annually by 7.6% to ward off a 3.2 Celsius rise in temperature by the end of the century. So, what are you doing about it? Are you cutting back your carbon footprint by 7.6% annually? If not, why not? Those climate guys say that if you don’t cut back 7.6% starting now, by 2025, you will have to cut back by 15.4% annually. Talk about falling off the wagon and going into fossil fuel withdrawal! Whereas the world emits over 50 gigatons of GHGs right now, it has to cut that in half to prevent any higher than a 1.5 Celsius rise of temperature by 2100.
Is there another side of the story? Unbeknownst by many, yes. That other side might be what we traditionally call “good news.” But before I get to that, I’ll ask, “Do you like being cold, really cold?”
So, here’s the other side of the climate change scenario. Earth gets warmer, yes, but it doesn’t go into one of the ice-advance episodes it underwent periodically over the past two and a half million years. Adding carbon to the atmosphere might just prevent another “ice age,” considering that until recently, most geologists and geoscientists categorized the present “warm period” as an “interglacial,” meaning that your era is merely a pause in the cycle of “ice ages.”
Modeling by Thomas Crowley and William Hyde, for example, suggests that unless the injection of greenhouse gases prevents it, another “ice age” will beset the Northern Hemisphere’s midlatitudes in the next 10,000 to 100,000 years, repeating the cycle that ended about 10,000 years ago.*** Here’s what the model identifies: The oscillations between cold glacial epochs and warm interglacials began about 2.5 million years ago with switches “roughly” every 41 thousand years and colder periods getting colder and warmer periods staying about the same. Well, the model predicted Earth was about to enter a new semi-permanent ice age, possibly one that could last tens of millions of years. But, then you came along. Well, not just you, but all your kind, opening and continuing the epoch now called the Anthropocene. And Crowley and Hyde are not the first to suggest that by burning fossil fuels, humans have possibly prevented another deep freeze during which glaciers one- to two-miles thick could cover Canada, northern Eurasia, and northern and high-latitude United States.
Paris Agreement aside, we keep emitting GHGs. Good evidence supports the conclusion that China, regardless of its public statements about GHG reductions, hasn’t curbed its emissions.**** Maybe the Chinese prefer warmth to coldth.
Cut back by that 7.6%? Your choice between being warm and being cold. So, what’s better, coastal cities under the waters of rising seas or mid- and high-latitude cities under crushing glaciers? Before you cut back by that recommended 7.6%, just think for a moment what the model of Crowley and Hyde implies: Without human intervention, the next “ice age” might last millions of years. Brrrr.
*Conte, Donald J. Project Director. 1 Dec 1993. Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Pennsylvania: An Inventory. Pennsylvania Energy Office/The Earth Systems Laboratory, California University of Pennsylvania. The US EPA then sent a letter to the PEO saying it would use my study as a model for other states to follow. Since that time, just about every country has made such an inventory. One shortcoming in my study is the absence of exact figures for NOx because I could not, at that time, trust the data sources.
**UN Environmental Programme. Emissions Gap Report 2019: Global Progress Report on Climate Action. https://www.unenvironment.org/interactive/emissions-gap-report/2019/
Accessed November 26, 2019.
*** Crowley, T., Hyde, W. Transient nature of late Pleistocene climate variability. Nature 456, 226–230 (2008) doi:10.1038/nature07365
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature07365?error=cookies_not_supported&code=da074027-8dea-4c42-8bf1-fe82f334fd11#citeas Accessed November 27, 2019.
Bunches of people have written about global warming and staving off the next ice advance. Here are several sources:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/416786/global-warming-vs-the-next-ice-age/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-thawed-the-last-ice-age/
Steffen, Will, et al. 1 Dec 2007 The Anthropocene: Are Humans Now Overwhelming the Great Forces of Nature. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment. Vol. 36. No. 8. 614-621.
See also: Scientific American. March 2005, Vol. 2922, No. 3. Did Humans Stop an Ice Age?
**** Miller, S.M., Michalak, A.M., Detmers, R.G. et al. China’s coal mine methane regulations have not curbed growing emissions. Nat Commun 10, 303 (2019) doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07891-7
With 300 million people, USA still has the highest per capita emissions, but in absolute tonnage, the 1.5 billion people of China emit double the GHGs of the United States. And in per capita emissions, China has now surpassed the E.U. So, yes, for those concerned about per capita emissions, USA is the bad guy, but in total quantities, China is. The U.N. researchers say that the world needs to cut greenhouse gas emissions annually by 7.6% to ward off a 3.2 Celsius rise in temperature by the end of the century. So, what are you doing about it? Are you cutting back your carbon footprint by 7.6% annually? If not, why not? Those climate guys say that if you don’t cut back 7.6% starting now, by 2025, you will have to cut back by 15.4% annually. Talk about falling off the wagon and going into fossil fuel withdrawal! Whereas the world emits over 50 gigatons of GHGs right now, it has to cut that in half to prevent any higher than a 1.5 Celsius rise of temperature by 2100.
Is there another side of the story? Unbeknownst by many, yes. That other side might be what we traditionally call “good news.” But before I get to that, I’ll ask, “Do you like being cold, really cold?”
So, here’s the other side of the climate change scenario. Earth gets warmer, yes, but it doesn’t go into one of the ice-advance episodes it underwent periodically over the past two and a half million years. Adding carbon to the atmosphere might just prevent another “ice age,” considering that until recently, most geologists and geoscientists categorized the present “warm period” as an “interglacial,” meaning that your era is merely a pause in the cycle of “ice ages.”
Modeling by Thomas Crowley and William Hyde, for example, suggests that unless the injection of greenhouse gases prevents it, another “ice age” will beset the Northern Hemisphere’s midlatitudes in the next 10,000 to 100,000 years, repeating the cycle that ended about 10,000 years ago.*** Here’s what the model identifies: The oscillations between cold glacial epochs and warm interglacials began about 2.5 million years ago with switches “roughly” every 41 thousand years and colder periods getting colder and warmer periods staying about the same. Well, the model predicted Earth was about to enter a new semi-permanent ice age, possibly one that could last tens of millions of years. But, then you came along. Well, not just you, but all your kind, opening and continuing the epoch now called the Anthropocene. And Crowley and Hyde are not the first to suggest that by burning fossil fuels, humans have possibly prevented another deep freeze during which glaciers one- to two-miles thick could cover Canada, northern Eurasia, and northern and high-latitude United States.
Paris Agreement aside, we keep emitting GHGs. Good evidence supports the conclusion that China, regardless of its public statements about GHG reductions, hasn’t curbed its emissions.**** Maybe the Chinese prefer warmth to coldth.
Cut back by that 7.6%? Your choice between being warm and being cold. So, what’s better, coastal cities under the waters of rising seas or mid- and high-latitude cities under crushing glaciers? Before you cut back by that recommended 7.6%, just think for a moment what the model of Crowley and Hyde implies: Without human intervention, the next “ice age” might last millions of years. Brrrr.
*Conte, Donald J. Project Director. 1 Dec 1993. Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Pennsylvania: An Inventory. Pennsylvania Energy Office/The Earth Systems Laboratory, California University of Pennsylvania. The US EPA then sent a letter to the PEO saying it would use my study as a model for other states to follow. Since that time, just about every country has made such an inventory. One shortcoming in my study is the absence of exact figures for NOx because I could not, at that time, trust the data sources.
**UN Environmental Programme. Emissions Gap Report 2019: Global Progress Report on Climate Action. https://www.unenvironment.org/interactive/emissions-gap-report/2019/
Accessed November 26, 2019.
*** Crowley, T., Hyde, W. Transient nature of late Pleistocene climate variability. Nature 456, 226–230 (2008) doi:10.1038/nature07365
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature07365?error=cookies_not_supported&code=da074027-8dea-4c42-8bf1-fe82f334fd11#citeas Accessed November 27, 2019.
Bunches of people have written about global warming and staving off the next ice advance. Here are several sources:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/416786/global-warming-vs-the-next-ice-age/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-thawed-the-last-ice-age/
Steffen, Will, et al. 1 Dec 2007 The Anthropocene: Are Humans Now Overwhelming the Great Forces of Nature. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment. Vol. 36. No. 8. 614-621.
See also: Scientific American. March 2005, Vol. 2922, No. 3. Did Humans Stop an Ice Age?
**** Miller, S.M., Michalak, A.M., Detmers, R.G. et al. China’s coal mine methane regulations have not curbed growing emissions. Nat Commun 10, 303 (2019) doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07891-7
RSS Feed