Vocal Voices

That the rhetoric of the governments around the world has been changing on controlling carbon emissions? Even the US is shifting to a way of controlling them more closely.

Perhaps this is the old game of "now we have the technology it's time to make some money out of the punters with legislation"? Then again perhaps it is not.

So I did what I do every year or so. I went to the nooah Global CO2 monitoring site and checked out the recorded CO2 levels. Then I did a bit of thinking.

So first of all, I did a decadal analysis of average CO2 growth in ppmv (parts per million volume).

1960's 0.8
1970's 1.3
1980's 1.6
1990's 1.5
2000's 1.9
2010's 2.4

Ok so we can, perhaps, discount the 2010's as there are only 4 years, not 10. But, then again, maybe not.

I did some checking.

Highest ever growth. 1998. OK but I also remember that this followed the longest ever recorded period of forest and peat fires in Indoneisa, along with huge forest clearances in Brazil. We've never recorded either forest loss or carbon burning on that scale before. So 1998 was a huge peak.

Fine, but if you look a little further, 1999 and 2000 were quite a bit lower than the average trend for the 90's. Quite literally a manifestation of organic balance. The huge amounts of CO2 available encouraged plant growth which, it appears, consumed it for around 2 - 4 years.

The next blip is around 2008/9. When we saw a truly massive slow down in economic activity the world over. Also an equivalent drop in transport and holiday travel. Reducing those years well below the average for the decade.

Again in 2010 we saw the Eya volcano erupt and disrupt both air and it's attendant ground transport for several months. Showing a marked reduction in that year's CO2 growth.

But, in the end, as you can see from the list above, we continue to push more and more CO2 into the atmosphere at ever greater densities. The planet can't process it and we impact the climate, year on year, on year.

More concerning is that we have global agreements on reducing CO2 emissions by 20% below the 1990 levels. Yet, looking at the chart above, globally, we have far exceeded that.

So far every year of the 2010's, bar 2011, for good reason, sit in the top 5 highest CO2 growth recorded. Only 1998 is higher than all of them and 2005 is the third highest recorded.

In fact by the end of 2019, 'average CO2 growth will start to reach the levels seen in 1998. PPMv of CO2 will be above 400 at all times in the year. Note that over the last 800,000 years the average deep glacial level has been around 160ppmv and the highest interglacial peak has been around 280ppmv.

This can't go on. 2014 is already in top 5 territory for CO2 growth and we haven't finished the year yet.

The hour is late and we cannot go on the way we are going and expect to emerge unscathed. Yet our politicians fiddle as the planet burns. They have wasted two full decades arguing as to whether they can just ignore it. Now they know they cannot, but are still undecided as to what they will do about it.

Perhaps they think that 5 billion really is a better number for the population of the planet? But to listen to the Pope, apparently we're to open our doors and keep allowing the overpopulated areas to populate the places in balance.

As I see it we dodged the bicycle in the 60's. The motorcycle in the 70's, the car in the 80's and the bus in the 90's. The 2000's were like rushing across the roundabout at the Arc De Triomphe in Paris (done that in the 70's). Yet the longer we continue to ignore the issue, it won't be like dodging bullets. It will be like dancing around the traffic on the M1 at Luton at 5pm on a Friday.....

I do like Forrest Gump. Stupid is as Stupid does....

Some interesting figures there, Suff.

I believe that politicians will never 'grasp the nettle' with respect of this issue. Undoubtedly, the introduction of methods of tackling global warming would mean a drastic change in the type of existence man has now become accustomed to, and to put into effect the changes that are really necessary would not be likely to ensure the re-election of the politicians who proposed them.

In other words, we might as well get used to the idea that we are approaching the end of man's existence on planet Earth. No doubt certain forms of life will survive or evolve, capable of living here - who knows?

To sum up I say, 'Why worry? There's nothing you and I can do about it.

Oh they'll try and do something about it. In the end, when it's far too late.

We'll all pay for it too.

They have been told, every decade, for the last 3 decades, that the cost of fixing the mess goes up exponentially as each decade goes by.

It won't kill off the human race. Although we might try with war eventually when things become bad enough. However it will thin it out drastically.

Figures and DNA show that Humans were more than 1M in number before the start of the last ice age. They dwindled to around 1,000 before the end of it..... Interesting to know that the same may be true with heat rather than cold....