Vocal Voices

Climate scientists have been arguing and or warning about Climate Change for decades. Those who argue that a large part of the change is man-made have been queried, and to some extent, silenced by those who are against. But let's leave that.....

Now the International Energy Agency (IEA) has produced a report claiming that we can only burn a third of existing fossil fuel reserves without a serious risk of de-stabilising the climate. These people are not climate scientists, far from it. Their remit is to track fossil energy security, its economic development and its environmental impact. What they have done is crunch the numbers based on today's extraction rates and technological know-how.

Their figures show that we will reach the Tipping Point in about thirty years - 2040ish.

What they do not show is that the third (of today's resources) will get bigger as new fossil energy resources (shale gas, methane clathratres, tar sands etc) are identified and brought online. As the size of the third grows the timescale for the Tipping Point gets nearer.

As I said earlier, these are not climate scientist, they are energy experts who inform and advise governments and the energy companies of trends and likely events. Their numbers show that we will probably run out of atmosphere before we run out of fossil energy reserves.

I wonder if anyone is listening?

Workingman wrote:I wonder if anyone is listening?

The lights are on but nobody is home….

From 2008 to 2011 we had the lowest solar minimum in the last 100 years. Both the Arctic and Antarctic continued to break down.

Then the sun came back, half as forceful as the last cycle and things kicked off again. We started to break records again. Note that in the minimum we still continued in the “record” band but just slowed a bit. From 2011 the brakes were off and we’re sliding downhill again.

This year we’ve seen extraordinary changes in the Arctic weather. An arctic basin storm which was huge and wandered all over the central Arctic for a month. Destroying northern hemisphere weather, damaging crops and causing large flooding events.

Still the party goes on. Still nobody is listening. There is now a Trans Arctic shipping company. Pretty soon there will be no need for icebreakers from June to October. Ships, the dirtiest transport mechanism in the world will start to ply the Arctic regularly, damaging a pristine environment and taking CO2 emissions right to the heart of the problem.

Methane emissions from the Arctic circle and, especially, from the Arctic sea are doubling year on year. Soon they will double month on month. Local climate change from methane is 75 times higher than that caused by CO2 in the first 5 years. It is also self reinforcing. The more methane emissions, the more warmth, the more methane emissions due to thawing of methane deposits.

It’s like the biggest rave party ever, not fuelled by drugs but fuelled by fossil fuels. When the party ends, the cleanup job won’t be measured in money, it will be measured in lives.

But hey, why all this doom and gloom? There’s a party going on, get with it!

I read an article about the Arctic a few weeks back and two of its most interesting points were these:

1. The Arctic rim countries of Russia, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Canada and the US are considering making the Arctic a toll region where ships using the summer route pay a toll.

2. An annual £62 billion is being invested in the region in order to access its fossil fuel wealth. We are familiar with the technology of prospecting for, and extracting, oil/gas under open waters. We are not so sure about how to do the same from seas covered in x metres of moving ice. We need to know in order to benefit.

Reading between the lines I would say that the Arctic is almost a lost cause. Why? Because there is a lot of money to be made.

Worse WM, they are investing in research to mine Methane Clathrates.

There is more carbon energy locked up in clathrates than in all the carbon already released. By a factor of about 5:1.

Talk about a suicide pact.....

I don't think there is any point in getting too concerned about it.

The human race won't do anything about it until it's too late. We won't be here then.

If I ever say anything about it, I am invariably told I should move with the times.

Well there's one good reply to that. Dib Dib Dib....

However there is another. Ignoring the environmental impact of burning fossil fuels IS getting with the times. Those stuck in a time warp are those who think the challenges of the human race are waste disposal and recycling. Those same people who emit 1m additional tonnes of CO2 to recycle something like Galss, which could be melted down and re-used instead.

Those are the people stuck in the time warp. Because if we don't resolve the CO2 issue we won't be worrying about waste and recycling. There won't be enough people left for it to be a big issue.

Now THAT is getting with the times and embracing change.

Those who deny it and tell you to "get with it" have their heads stuck in the sand. Or other darker areas....