I found this discussion forum posted on YouTube with Dr. James Hansen and felt the need to share. Hansen is known as the “father of global warming awareness” since his testimony on the problem before Congress in the late 1980s and frequent contributions in both peer-reviewed literature and as a science communicator to the general public. This talk was posted just today from the latest international climate talks (Conference Of the Parties-23 or “COP-23” in Bonn, Germany) dealing with getting down details behind the Paris Climate Agreement signed the world’s nations in 2015 to try to limit global warming below 2 degrees C (3.6 degrees F) relative to 1750 and preferably below 1.5 C (2.7 F).
Here is the video (by user Nick Breeze who reports on Climate Change issues and interviews scientists…check out his YouTube Channel, good stuff)…audio isn’t the greatest but it is still highly recommended if you care about this important issue.
In this discussion, Hansen pretty much lays out a major problem. With all the talks over the years, nothing significant has been done to significantly reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses into Earth’s atmosphere. He points out something which other notable climate scientists have pointed out: We have run out of time as far as waiting on attempting to prevent “catastrophic warming” as far as impacts (those impacts really pick up intensity past 1.5 degrees C…we are currently around 1.1-1.2 C over the past few years) and while there are efforts to create alternative energy solutions and research carbon dioxide removal from the atmosphere, the only viable way he sees to get nations off of carbon is for govts to force the cost of fossil fuels to reflect the harm it causes to ecological and human health (pollution, climate change, etc). He’s spoken about how this could be done to put much of the money back in the pockets of Americans in the American political context (where the greatest monetary loss would likely be to the rich with a huge carbon footprint). But having the true ecological and human cost of fossil fuels…and not just the benefit in terms of driving the common economic drivers…be added to the cost would allow much greater competitiveness in the energy industry vs. now where fossil fuels are still by far the cheapest energy available for a variety of reasons (relative ease to extract, transport, existing technology vs. building new). And with oil companies influencing govts around the world, it makes it very hard to see realistic change outside of the pledges or changes which seem significant but in the end do little good on a global scale.
Example…current Paris Agreement pledges would cause the global warming to reach at least 3-4 degrees C (5.4-7.2 F) by the last decades of this century. And there are risks of unpredictable “positive feedbacks” (some known, some unknown) such as, severe chronic Arctic sea ice loss in the summer months, mass diebacks of tropical and boreal forests or methane release from (shallow) submerged continental shelf permafrost in the Arctic Ocean which would accelerate global warming even more. Methane…a short-lived but extremely powerful greenhouse gas…has already been observed releasing at increasing rates in the East Siberian Arctic Ocean and Laptev Sea because of increasing ocean warming. There is also simply the possibility that Earth overall is more sensitive to carbon dioxide than originally thought (actual scientific paper HERE).
I made this blog partly for informing people about the realities of climate change as it is ultimately we who must make sound decisions and force our governments to do the same. These conferences and agreements are great (and obviously I disagree with President Trump’s position on the issue), but optics cannot be the only thing which comes out of all these COPs. We must have an evolutionary change in how we conduct business on our only habitable planet. There are means to turn the tide…but the political will (and money) have to be invested in actually doing it.
–Meteorologist Nick Humphrey