They blinded me with science...

Most Recent Climate Research
Bellona Foundation http://www.bellona.no/
Dec. 8, 2009 * 13:00-14:30


The Bellona Foundation hosted a panel of 3 scientists to update the climate science since the 4th IPCC report (2007). This was a very informative and kind of intense panel. I wanted to know the current science, but at the same time it was kind of scary and disconcerting. Have we already passed the point of no return?

As I stated in an earlier entry, I feel i am on a constant see-saw - and this panel was one of those times i was headed down. Jumping from plenary session to side event to NGO table there is so much discrepancy in the numbers and science being thrown around in terms of what we need to cut, how much, and by when.

But one important comment that the scientist from CICERO made was the lack on good reporting to the public. Because there are natural variations in warming trends, there have been and are going to be periods of cooling as the earth warms - but overall the trend is undoubtedly warming over the long-term - with 2009 being one of the warmest years on record. Relaying this information about the natural trends to the public might dispel some of the skepticism and allow for more understanding as to the science of our warming planet.

Also, climate variability create uncertainties in the exact numbers due to positive feedback loops and variability in clouds and water vapor. But, the science does show that the ocean uptake of CO2 has steadily lowered (meaning the ocean is not absorbing as much CO2 as it previously had - and leading to increased ocean acidification).

Another significant issue to consider is that even as the emissions are reduced to zero, there will still be a significant amount of CO2 and GHGs in the atmosphere - so there will be a lag time from when we stop emitting and when we see the effects - the temperature of the earth will be very slow to lower.

Much of the actions and campaigns have focused on the number "350" - which equates to 350ppm as the target level CO2 in the atmosphere and would prevent many of the more significant impacts we would expect to see from temperature rise. Right now we are at around 380ppm.

The disconcerting part of this panel - though the reality of it is - we probably won't get to 350 according to the science. Policy makers are adopting a 450 scenario. More than likely, though, 550 is the realistic figure. This represents a doubling of the current CO2 levels and at least a 3 degree rise in temperature. Given this scientific prediction, adaptive measures should be the focus - in essence we should be prepping for the extremes.

Adaptation and Mitigation have been 2 keys words thrown around in these sessions - both plenary meetings and side events. Both are important tactics that should be simultaneously employed to embrace the realities that we are likely to face. We should continue to mitigate to slow and potentially prevent as much of the catastrophic changes that may result from a rise in temperature, while preparing for the 'worst case scenario' of up to a 6 degree C rise in temp. Holland, for example is currently preparing for a 3M rise in sea level over the next 100 years.

Given our current activities, even if we halted everything now, there would still be a 1 degree rise in temp. - pretty much unavoidable at this point. The proposed emissions reductions and numbers being thrown around currently only get 2/3 of the way to 2020 target numbers and 6% of the way to our 2050 numbers.

On the way to the Bella Center each morning we walk down a pathway next to a canal. There are some creepy emaciated statutes that stand in the water - representing people that will be displaced by sea level rise - but the more eye-opening part of this walk are the bright red lights that are hung on the beams of the bridge over the canal as you walk down the path (I will get a picture of this so it is easier to visualize). These lights at the top of the beams/base of the bridge represent where the sea will be if we experience a 7m rise (which is not unlikely if our activities continue business as usual).

Although these scenarios (both science and visual) are scary - they should not immobilize us into a state of inaction - but rather propel us into an even more aggressive push to reduce emissions and prevent or limit as much of the potential effects as possible - mitigation AND adaptation.