Essay by Eric Worrall
According to NOAA scientist Pieter Tans, “if you’re measuring the atmosphere, you’re not seeing anything happening right now in terms of change.”.
Climate scientists warn of increased climate change events as carbon emissions fail to drop
Posted Sat 4 Jun 2022 at 11:47am
Emissions across the globe continue to rise despite nations committing to cut them.
Key points:
- The pandemic cut global carbon emissions in 2020, but they rebounded last year
- Scientists say carbon dioxide levels are now about the same as in the Pliocene era, when temperatures were 3.9C warmer
- May is the peak for global carbon dioxide emissions
Scientists are warning of increased climate change events including heat waves, flooding and droughts if carbon emissions are not cut.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said its long-time monitoring station at Mauna Loa, Hawaii, averaged 421 parts per million of carbon dioxide for the month of May, which is when the crucial greenhouse gas hits its yearly high.
…
“The world is trying to reduce emissions, and you just don’t see it,” said NOAA climate scientist Pieter Tans.
“In other words, if you’re measuring the atmosphere, you’re not seeing anything happening right now in terms of change.”
…
University of Illinois climate scientist Donald Wuebbles said without cuts in carbon pollution “we will see ever more damaging levels of climate change, more heat waves, more flooding, more droughts, more large storms and higher sea levels.“
…
The slowdown from the pandemic did cut global carbon emissions a bit in 2020, but they rebounded last year.
Both changes were small compared to how much carbon dioxide is pumped into the atmosphere each year, especially considering that carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere hundreds to a thousand years, Mr Tans said.
…
Read more: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-04/carbon-dioxide-emissions-hold-firm/101126312
If the Pandemic lockdowns barely made a dent, I think we can guess about the kinds of crazy societal shutdowns these guys would like to see, to achieve their CO2 reductions. A near total shutdown of vehicle use barely dented global CO2 emissions, but I guess every bit helps /sarc. And you can forget about putting up that thermostat up in winter.
The other interesting point is, CO2 levels today, right now, are now 421ppm, at least 1.5x pre-industrial levels (421 / 280 = 1.5).
Where are the superstorms and mega droughts? Climate alarmists keep promising something scary will happen, but so far the only noticeable impact of all this CO2 is a slight rise in global temperature, which according to the Potsdam Institute might have prevented the start of a new ice age. The CO2 is also causing a measurable greening of the Earth. Seems like all wins so far.
Any flood issues caused by a few inches of sea level rise can easily be countered by incremental urban renovation projects, like the “raising Chicago” project our ancestors executed in the 1850s to mitigate flooding in Chicago’s low laying districts. If raising entire buildings seems a bit much, we could go for Seattle’s less costly flood mitigation solution, raising the roads but leaving the buildings as is.
My point is if our ancestors in the 1800s could affordably raise entire cities out of flood zones, I’m pretty sure we have the technology and resources to do the same today.
Storm risk is also manageable. Even if there is an uptick in storm activity, there are plenty of places which already experience substantial storm activity, which can provide learnings for other towns. My edge of tropics hometown regularly experiences ferocious storms which would count as super storms in more temperate regions, multiple inches of rain in a few minutes, but our town planners figured out a solution – you could almost walk down the drains under my street. After the water drains away, bonus, I don’t have to water the garden that week.
Sooner or later the general public will stop listening to these nonsensical warnings of impending climate doom, but until then we need to push back against gullible politicians and well meaning alarmists, many of whom continue to cling to climate models even their alarmist colleagues suggest are producing implausible results.
“Scientists say carbon dioxide levels are now about the same as in the Pliocene era, when temperatures were 3.9C warmer.”
So how come the earth isn’t at that elevated temperature already?
Let’s not forget that it’s global warming that causes, perhaps, some change in the climate, not the level of CO2. At 1.3degsC per hundred years there won’t be much change observable
“…My point is if our ancestors in the 1800s could affordably raise entire cities out of flood zones, I’m pretty sure we have the technology and resources to do the same today.”
Sure we do. What we don’t have are the technology and resources to get all the permits from the many government agencies, local, state and federal, to do the same today. By the time all those are obtained, assuming they ever are, well, let’s just say if Noah had to face this bureaucracy, all the humans and animals would have drowned.
The biggest GHG is the Hot Air is that spoken by the likes of IPCC, COPxx etc.!
Btw I recently saw a BBC programme stating “Carbon” Emissions, so thought …Oh they are generically covering Carbon Dioxide & Methane; but then the narrator then went on to say Carbon & Methane!
Most people will think Carbon as the black sooty bad substance, not any other allotropes* like diamonds etc. The conceptual disparities are quite laughable in this anti-“Carbon”/CO2 age.
*Eight allotropes of carbon: a) Diamond, b) Graphite, c) Lonsdaleite, d) C60 (Buckminsterfullerene or buckyball), e) C540, f) C70, g) Amorphous carbon, and h) single-walled carbon nanotube or buckytube.
Donald Wuebbles said without cuts in carbon pollution “we will see ever more damaging levels of climate change, more heat waves, more flooding, more droughts, more large storms and higher sea levels.“
Mr Wuebbles is a soothsayer? He speaks with such certainty and this is based on what knowledge?
carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere hundreds to a thousand years, Mr Tans said.
CO2 stays in the atmosphere for 16 years. Say bomb test labelled CO2 measurements. Anything longer than that is dystopian spin.
Since 1963, as a result of a worldwide test ban treaty, 14C levels in the atmosphere have been decreasing exponentially with a mean half-life of 16 years.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2871409/
And if it really were a thousand years, then reductions in CO2 emissions will have no effect for centuries anyway. Although when the subject is long term climate prediction under different emission scenarios, the supposedly long lifetime of CO2 in the atmosphere magically disappears.
The “world” is not trying to reduce GHG emissions. That is the claim of the political leaders in several countries, but the only countries that are incurring major economic costs to reduce emissions are in the OECD. Data from the BP Statistical Review of Energy and other sources has consistently shown that, since 1990 when climate became a political issue, global emissions have risen. Today they are at least 60 per cent higher and they continue to rise largely due to economic and population growth in the non-OECD countries, which already account for two-thirds of global emissions. The myth that the whole world is reducing emissions is dangerous, because it adds to the propaganda that demands ever more sacrifices of living costs and freedoms by the people of the OECD countries, despite no offsetting global emissions “benefits”.
‘The world is trying to reduce emissions,’
Actually, no it isn’t. If you added up how many of the population were actively doing something to reduce emissions – ignoring those acting under duress trying to save money – then the percentage will be in single figures. There is not even a majority of countries in the world who are trying to reduce emissions.
Ah, yes, one of the many ways the Climate Liars like to lie – the red herring fallacy. The implication, of course is that the CO2 was the cause of the higher temperatures, hoping they won’t get called on it.
“Scientists say carbon dioxide levels are now about the same as in the Pliocene era, when temperatures were 3.9C warmer ”
So, that isnt case today, and you cant blame ‘thermal lag’, the surface temps respond to CO2 as quickly as they do to solar forcing each morning when the sun gets up. Todays high temperatures are NOT the results of sunshine 20 years ago, 2 years ago, or even yesterday!
They are the result of sunshine today!
And that so called ‘ocean heat uptake’. Doesnt apply to solar forcing, and in any case IR cant penetrate water, visible can. The oceans can not ‘uptake’ heat from IR. It is impossible.
“University of Illinois climate scientist Donald Wuebbles said without cuts in carbon pollution “we will see ever more damaging levels of climate change, more heat waves…”
The UK Met Office say the same, while referring to major heatwaves which are in reality discretely solar driven and a cause of climate change.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQemMt_PNwwBKNOS7GSP7gbWDmcDBJ80UJzkqDIQ75_Sctjn89VoM5MIYHQWHkpn88cMQXkKjXznM-u/pub