Global CO2 Emissions Up 45 Percent a Year since 1990

ScienceRocks

Democrat all the way!
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
59,455
Reaction score
6,754
Points
1,900
Location
The Good insane United states of America
Global CO2 Emissions Up 45 Percent a Year since 1990
2010 Carbon Dioxide, Worst Year Ever
Discovery.com, Sept. 23, 2011

A record-setting 36.4 billion tons of carbon dioxide were added to the atmosphere in 2010. That's a 45 percent increase in the global annual release of carbon dioxide by humans since 1990, reports the European Commission's Joint Research Centre and PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency in the report "Long-term trend in global CO2 emissions."

Although many industrialized nations made cuts in the amount of carbon dioxide pollution they created, the rapid growth of India, China, Brazil and other developing nations resulted in a net increase during the two decades studied in the report.


The good news is that countries which signed on to the Kyoto Protocol seem likely to meet their reduction goal of 5.3 percent from 1990 levels. The European Union-27 and Russia decreased emissions by 7 percent and 28 percent respectively, between 1990 and 2010. Japan's emissions stayed at about the same level.

The United State's annual release of carbon dioxide increased 5 percent between 1990 and 2010.

After the global economy was shaken in 2008, emissions fell. But from 2009 to 2010 carbon dioxide made a serious comeback. Emissions increased 5.8 percent during that period, the fastest ever. Major economies, China (10 percent), India (9 percent), USA (4 percent) and the EU-27 (3 percent) led the pack in increased emissions of carbon dioxide pollution.

The record setting increase in emissions between 2009 and 2010 was really more of a return to normal after the economic recovery, and didn't necessarily represent a massive failure in reduction plans. For example, the report notes that the EU-27's emissions were lower in 2010 (4.4 billion tons) than in 2007 (4.6 billion tons).

On a person-by-person basis, the United States is still the world's number one carbon dioxide polluter, although China now releases more. The USA emits 18.6 tons of carbon dioxide per person, compared to China's 7.5 tons and the EU-27's 8.8 tons.

Despite trends towards renewable energy, hybrid cars and other more efficient technologies, power generation (40 percent) and road transportation (15 percent) account for the lion's share of pollution production, in both the industrialized and the developing world.

The European Commission’s report is based on data from the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research as well as country by country statistics.

Carbon dioxide allows ultraviolet radiation from the sun to pass through the Earth's atmosphere. That radiation then heats the surface, producing infrared radiation. But carbon dioxide traps infrared radiation within Earth's atmosphere, and causes average global temperatures to rise.

2010 Carbon Dioxide, Worst Year Ever : Discovery News


b2 is 2c of warming globally...Which is 36.5 gtons of carbon. 23.5 gtons in 2000 +13 gtons added to that based on the ipcc http://www.ipcc.ch/graphics/syr/fig4-1.jpg ,=36.5 gtons. If this right we're about to hit it.

WOW, this says -> IEA CO2 Emissions Update 2010 - Bad News and this Worst ever carbon emissions leave climate on the brink | Environment | The Guardian says 30.6 billion tons for 2010, but this says we're at 36.4 billion tons, which takes us to near b2 emissions by 2030 estimate right now. I don't know what to trust.
 
Last edited:

wirebender

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
1,723
Reaction score
122
Points
48
Location
NC
And global temperatures don't seem to be reacting properly to such an increase do they? Must be something dreadfully wrong with the greenhouse hypothesis.
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
59,401
Reaction score
7,258
Points
1,840
Location
Portland, Ore.
Really? The Northwest and Northeast Passages are both open at present. Open enough for big freighters. We are in the midst of a year with two strong La Ninas, and still a TSI that is lower than it has been, but we are still having warm temperatures globally. UAH, GISS, and the rest all agree that the temps are definately in the plus category, in spite of the negative forcings.
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
59,401
Reaction score
7,258
Points
1,840
Location
Portland, Ore.
Well, both are a path to catastrophe. And the bean counters will sort it out in the coming months.

If this years double La Nina gives us a properly cold winter in the Northern Hemisphere, I think the larger figure will be a certainty for 2011-2012.
 

wirebender

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
1,723
Reaction score
122
Points
48
Location
NC
Really? The Northwest and Northeast Passages are both open at present. Open enough for big freighters. We are in the midst of a year with two strong La Ninas, and still a TSI that is lower than it has been, but we are still having warm temperatures globally. UAH, GISS, and the rest all agree that the temps are definately in the plus category, in spite of the negative forcings.


Multiple peer reviewed studies have shown that the ice loss in the arctic is due to wind, and weather patterns, not global warming. Sorry guy, you fail again.
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
59,401
Reaction score
7,258
Points
1,840
Location
Portland, Ore.
Greenhouse gas mitigation can reduce sea-ice loss and increase polar bear persistence : Nature : Nature Publishing Group

Greenhouse gas mitigation can reduce sea-ice loss and increase polar bear persistence
Steven C. Amstrup,1, 7 Eric T. DeWeaver,2 David C. Douglas,3 Bruce G. Marcot,4 George M. Durner,1 Cecilia M. Bitz5 & David A. Bailey6
Affiliations Contributions Corresponding author Journal name:
Nature
Volume:
468,
Pages:
955–958
Date published:
(16 December 2010)
DOI:
doi:10.1038/nature09653
Received 30 March 2010 Accepted 08 November 2010 Published online 15 December 2010
Article tools日本語要約

On the basis of projected losses of their essential sea-ice habitats, a United States Geological Survey research team concluded in 2007 that two-thirds of the world’s polar bears (Ursus maritimus) could disappear by mid-century if business-as-usual greenhouse gas emissions continue1, 2, 3. That projection, however, did not consider the possible benefits of greenhouse gas mitigation. A key question is whether temperature increases lead to proportional losses of sea-ice habitat, or whether sea-ice cover crosses a tipping point and irreversibly collapses when temperature reaches a critical threshold4, 5, 6. Such a tipping point would mean future greenhouse gas mitigation would confer no conservation benefits to polar bears. Here we show, using a general circulation model7, that substantially more sea-ice habitat would be retained if greenhouse gas rise is mitigated. We also show, with Bayesian network model outcomes, that increased habitat retention under greenhouse gas mitigation means that polar bears could persist throughout the century in greater numbers and more areas than in the business-as-usual case3. Our general circulation model outcomes did not reveal thresholds leading to irreversible loss of ice6; instead, a linear relationship between global mean surface air temperature and sea-ice habitat substantiated the hypothesis that sea-ice thermodynamics can overcome albedo feedbacks proposed to cause sea-ice tipping points5, 6, 8. Our outcomes indicate that rapid summer ice losses in models9 and observations6, 10 represent increased volatility of a thinning sea-ice cover, rather than tipping-point behaviour. Mitigation-driven Bayesian network outcomes show that previously predicted declines in polar bear distribution and numbers3 are not unavoidable. Because polar bears are sentinels of the Arctic marine ecosystem11 and trends in their sea-ice habitats foreshadow future global changes, mitigating greenhouse gas emissions to improve polar bear status would have conservation benefits throughout and beyond the Arctic12.
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
59,401
Reaction score
7,258
Points
1,840
Location
Portland, Ore.
The central role of diminishing sea ice in recent Arctic temperature amplification : Nature : Nature Publishing Group

The central role of diminishing sea ice in recent Arctic temperature amplification
James A. Screen1 & Ian Simmonds1
Affiliations Contributions Corresponding author Journal name:
Nature
Volume:
464,
Pages:
1334–1337
Date published:
(29 April 2010)
DOI:
doi:10.1038/nature09051
Received 10 November 2009 Accepted 12 March 2010
Article tools日本語要約

The rise in Arctic near-surface air temperatures has been almost twice as large as the global average in recent decades1, 2, 3—a feature known as ‘Arctic amplification’. Increased concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases have driven Arctic and global average warming1, 4; however, the underlying causes of Arctic amplification remain uncertain. The roles of reductions in snow and sea ice cover5, 6, 7 and changes in atmospheric and oceanic circulation8, 9, 10, cloud cover and water vapour11, 12 are still matters of debate. A better understanding of the processes responsible for the recent amplified warming is essential for assessing the likelihood, and impacts, of future rapid Arctic warming and sea ice loss13, 14. Here we show that the Arctic warming is strongest at the surface during most of the year and is primarily consistent with reductions in sea ice cover. Changes in cloud cover, in contrast, have not contributed strongly to recent warming. Increases in atmospheric water vapour content, partly in response to reduced sea ice cover, may have enhanced warming in the lower part of the atmosphere during summer and early autumn. We conclude that diminishing sea ice has had a leading role in recent Arctic temperature amplification. The findings reinforce suggestions that strong positive ice–temperature feedbacks have emerged in the Arctic15, increasing the chances of further rapid warming and sea ice loss, and will probably affect polar ecosystems, ice-sheet mass balance and human activities in the Arctic2.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
116,463
Reaction score
29,680
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
Polar Bears? Doubling down on losing bets again OR?

Does every hotel in Vegas fight for your business?
 
Last edited:

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
59,401
Reaction score
7,258
Points
1,840
Location
Portland, Ore.
OK, Bent, your turn. Those are just two from Nature. Didn't even go to Science, or the Geophysics Journal. So show me something to back your assertation, from a peer reviewed journal.
 

wirebender

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
1,723
Reaction score
122
Points
48
Location
NC
Present those studies, or be branded the liar you are.
We both know that you are the liar rocks. I don't need to lie because reality supports my position.

http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/5/755/2011/tcd-5-755-2011.pdf

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2011JD015847.shtml

There are several out there but I don't have time to look this morning. If you are interested (which I am sure you aren't) find them yourself. If you aren't bright enough, I will be back monday to help you.
 
Last edited:

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
59,401
Reaction score
7,258
Points
1,840
Location
Portland, Ore.
OK. The amount of storms in the Arctic affect the distribution of the ice during the summer. So, what is being said is that the distribution of these storms significantly differant now than it is in the past? Or are they saying that all things being equal, less storms and more sunny days will create a lower amount of ice in September?

If the distribution of these storms is significantly differant than it was in the past, one is left asking why this would be the case? Couldn't have anything to do with a rapidly warming arctic, could it?

But, all things being equal, then a year with less storms has less ice at the end of the season. And then when the next season with the normal amount of storms comes along, there will be a year with a normal amount of ice at the end of the melt season. But this is not what we have seen.

Every decade, for many decades, the amount of ice is diminishing, not only in the summer, but also in the winter.


JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 116, D15105, 10 PP., 2011
doi:10.1029/2011JD015847

Dramatic interannual changes of perennial Arctic sea ice linked to abnormal summer storm activity

Dramatic interannual changes of perennial Arctic sea ice linked to abnormal summer storm activity
Key Points
Interannual changes of Arctic sea ice are related to varying storm activity
Fewer summer storms favor low sea ice at the end of the melt season
Storms impact the cloud cover and ice motion, and consequently sea ice melt
James A. Screen

School of Earth Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Ian Simmonds

School of Earth Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Kevin Keay

School of Earth Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

The perennial (September) Arctic sea ice cover exhibits large interannual variability, with changes of over a million square kilometers from one year to the next. Here we explore the role of changes in Arctic cyclone activity, and related factors, in driving these pronounced year-to-year changes in perennial sea ice cover. Strong relationships are revealed between the September sea ice changes and the number of cyclones in the preceding late spring and early summer. In particular, fewer cyclones over the central Arctic Ocean during the months of May, June, and July appear to favor a low sea ice area at the end of the melt season. Years with large losses of sea ice are characterized by abnormal cyclone distributions and tracks: they lack the normal maximum in cyclone activity over the central Arctic Ocean, and cyclones that track from Eurasia into the central Arctic are largely absent. Fewer storms are associated with above-average mean sea level pressure, strengthened anticyclonic winds, an intensification of the transpolar drift stream, and reduced cloud cover, all of which favor ice melt. It is also shown that a strengthening of the central Arctic cyclone maximum helps preserve the ice cover, although the association is weaker than that between low cyclone activity and reduced sea ice. The results suggest that changes in cyclone occurrence during late spring and early summer have preconditioning effects on the sea ice cover and exert a strong influence on the amount of sea ice that survives the melt season.
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
59,401
Reaction score
7,258
Points
1,840
Location
Portland, Ore.
Interesting point here, this covers snow cover, not glacial ice. However, one does have to ask what the reason for the changing wind patterns are?

http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/5/755/2011/tcd-5-755-2011.pdf

Abstract
The changes in seasonal snow covered area in the Hindu Kush-Himalayan (HKH)
region have been examined using Moderate – resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer
(MODIS) 8-day standard snow products. The average snow covered area of the HKH
region based on satellite data from 2000 to 2010 is 0.76 million km2 5 which is 18.23% of
the total geographical area of the region. The linear trend in annual snow cover from
2000 to 2010 is −1.25±1.13%. This is in consistent with earlier reported decline of
the decade from 1990 to 2001. A similar trend for western, central and eastern HKH
region is 8.55±1.70%, +1.66%±2.26% and 0.82±2.50%, respectively. The snow
10 covered area in spring for HKH region indicates a declining trend (−1.04±0.97%). The
amount of annual snowfall is correlated with annual seasonal snow cover for the western
Himalaya, indicating that changes in snow cover are primarily due to interannual
variations in circulation patterns.
Snow cover trends over a decade were also found to
vary across seasonally and the region. Snow cover trends for western HKH are pos15
itive for all seasons. In central HKH the trend is positive (+15.53±5.69%) in autumn
and negative (−03.68±3.01) in winter. In eastern HKH the trend is positive in summer
(+3.35±1.62%) and autumn (+7.74±5.84%). The eastern and western region of HKH
has an increasing trend of 10% to 12%, while the central region has a declining trend
of 12% to 14% in the decade between 2000 and 2010. Snow cover depletion curve
20 plotted for the hydrological year 2000–2001 reveal peaks in the month of February
with subsidiary peaks observed in November and December in all three regions of the
HKH.
.......................................................................................................
6 Conclusions
In this 5 investigation different techniques were used to remove cloud cover and this
has improved usability of snow cover product. The snow cover products were further
validated using snowfall data of the Western Himalaya and high resolution AWiFS data
of the Eastern Himalaya.
The average snow cover area of the Hindu Kush-Himalayan region based on satellite
10 data from 2000 to 2010 is 0.76million km2 which is 18.23% of the total geographical
area. The linear trend in annual snow cover from 2000 to 2010 is –1.25±1.13%. This
is significantly different from earlier reported for 2000–2008 (Immerzeel et al., 2009),
and decline is significantly less than reported for an earlier decade between 1990 and
2010 (Menon et al., 2010). The good correlation between snow cover, mean annual
15 snowfall and mean annual vertical velocity at 500mb in the winter period for the Western
Himalaya suggest the changes in snow cover between 2000 and 2010 are due to
inter annual variations in circulation pattern. Snow cover trend over 2000–2010 was
also found to vary across seasons and geographical extent.The snow cover area in
spring indicates declining trend (–1.04±0.97%) for Hind Kush-Himalayan region. The
20 western and eastern region of Hind Kush-Himalayan has increasing trend (10%–12%),
while central region has declining trend (12%–14%) in this decade. Intra-annual variation
showed areal extent of snow cover peaks in the month of February with subsidiary
peaks were observed in November and December.
 

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
59,401
Reaction score
7,258
Points
1,840
Location
Portland, Ore.
USGS Release: Earth’s Acidity Rising -- Major Causes and Shifting Trends Examined to Guide Future Mitigation Efforts (9/23/2011 9:45:00 AM)

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. – Human use of Earth’s natural resources is making the air, oceans, freshwaters, and soils more acidic, according to a U.S. Geological Survey – University of Virginia study available online in the journal, Applied Geochemistry.

This comprehensive review, the first on this topic to date, found the mining and burning of coal, the mining and smelting of metal ores, and the use of nitrogen fertilizer are the major causes of chemical oxidation processes that generate acid in the Earth-surface environment.

These widespread activities have increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, increasing the acidity of oceans; produced acid rain that has increased the acidity of freshwater bodies and soils; produced drainage from mines that has increased the acidity of freshwater streams and groundwater; and added nitrogen to crop lands that has increased the acidity of soils.

Previous studies have linked increased acidity in oceans to damage to ocean food webs, while increased acidity in soils has the potential to affect their ability to sustain crop growth.

“We believe that this study is the first attempt to assess all of the major human activities that are making Earth more acidic,” said USGS scientist Karen Rice, who led the study. “We hope others will use this as a starting point for making scientific and management progress to preserve the atmosphere, waters, and soils that support human life.”

While there has been some progress in reducing the effects of some of these activities through modifications in how the minerals are mined and used in some parts of the world, and increased regulations, other regions are expanding their use of these resources and increasing the effects of acidification.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
116,463
Reaction score
29,680
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location


"They said if I pretended to be stranded and 'look desperate' there was a baby seal in it for me. Am I proud of my part in the AGW hoax? No. What can I say, I have a weakness for baby seals"
 
Last edited:

Old Rocks

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
59,401
Reaction score
7,258
Points
1,840
Location
Portland, Ore.
USGS: Glaciers Retreating in Asia
News release: "Many of Asia’s glaciers are retreating as a result of climate change. This retreat impacts water supplies to millions of people, increases the likelihood of outburst floods that threaten life and property in nearby areas, and contributes to sea-level rise. The U.S. Geological Survey, in collaboration with 39 international scientists, published a report on the status of glaciers throughout all of Asia, including Russia, China, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Kazakhstan...As glaciers become smaller, water runoff decreases, which is especially important during the dry season when other water sources are limited. Climate change also brings warmer temperatures and earlier water runoff from glaciers, and this combined with spring and summer rains can result in flood conditions. The overall glacier retreat and additional melt can increase the amount of water dammed in the vicinity of a glacier, and the added pressure enhances the likelihood of disastrous outburst flooding."


This report, Satellite Image Atlas of Glaciers of the World, is the 9th in the series of 11 volumes to be published as the USGS Satellite Image Atlas of Glaciers of the World.

Glaciers of Asia, Edited by Richard S. Williams, Jr., and Jane G. Ferrigno
USGS Release: Glaciers Retreating in Asia (8/25/2010 10:33:00 AM)
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top