Print 89 comment(s) - last by JediJeb.. on Aug 11 at 5:57 PM

  (Source: All American Patriots)
Goal of study is to constrain temperature change to 2 degrees Fahrenheit

Researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg have calculated the amount of carbon dioxide humans can safely emit before effecting the heating of the Earth.

Scientist Erich Roeckner and his team have created a model that determines the highest volumes of carbon dioxide that humans are allowed to emit in order to ensure that Earth does not heat up by more than two degrees Celsius, which is the gate to climate warming. They've used the methodology proposed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in order to reconstruct historical emission pathways "on the basis of already-calculated carbon dioxide concentrations." 

In order for this to occur, carbon cycle data, such as the volume of carbon dioxide absorbed by forests and oceans, is added to the model. The model then simulates the evolution of carbon dioxide emissions in order to understand what the future holds and how it should be changed to prevent warming. 

The model is based on a low-resolution spatial grid with 400 kilometer grid spacing. With this kind of model, the land surface, ocean, sea ice, atmosphere and terrestrial and marine carbon cycle are all included in the study.

According to the model, carbon dioxide caused by fossil fuels must be reduced to almost zero by the end of the century to achieve long-term goals of carbon concentration stabilization in the atmosphere. The model calculated that, since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, fossil carbon dioxide has increased by 35 percent.

Other figures the model has calculated is that carbon emissions will increase from seven billion tonnes in 2000 to 10 billion tonnes in 2015. Then, emissions will have to be decreased by 56 percent by 2050, and reach zero by the end of the century for long-term stabilization to be achieved. But even if these goals are met, global warming would only stay below two degrees Celsius until 2100, and further measures will need to be taken to control warming. 

Roeckner noted that it will take centuries to stabilize the global climate system, and that their data is being studied and evaluated at other climate centers in Europe. 

"As soon as all of the results are available, we can evaluate the spread between the models," said Roeckner. "The more significant the data we have, the more accurate our forecast will be."

In other news, a University of Georgia marine chemist, Wei-Jun Cai, just disproved that melting ice at the poles will allow open water to catch carbon dioxide from the the air. According to a survey of waters in the Canada Basin, the potential carbon dioxide "sink" would be a very short period of time with minor effects due to the amount of rising emissions. 

The study was published in the July 2010 edition of Science

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

still using the wrong scaling
By dgingeri on 8/3/2010 3:29:01 PM , Rating: 5
This model still has 3 major problems that make it totally moot:

1. they use the "CO2 concentration to insulating value" is a linear scale. This is not the truth. In fact, CO2 has a logarithmic scale, with higher concentrations having less effect. Early on, with CO2 levels half of what they are today, this might have fit for a short time, but at this point in the scale, further increases would only yield half the insulating value of what the model shows.

2. they are using a constant sun emission model. The sun is cooling down. very slowly, yes, but still cooling down. it is certainly NOT constant. They never use this factor in calculating their figures. it's apparently anathema for global warming models to actually be accurate.

3. they're pushing this like going over 2F increase would be a bad thing. It probably won't be a bad thing until about 8F or 9F increase. There is good evidence that during the Medieval Warm Period, just before the little ice age, that temps were closer to 5F warmer than today. We had more food production, more food producing areas, (including vineyards in Scotland producing more and better wine than France!) and overall better, calmer weather world wide. Yes, the sea levels may increase. That just means people will have to move. (New Orleans was built in a horrible place to begin with. That city should just be let to slide into the ocean right now.)

In addition to all that, May I remind you that estimated CO2 levels were over 10 times the rate of today in the early Carboniferous era and all through the Mesozoic age. Yes, temperatures went up. Life flourished! Where do you think all our coal and oil came from? Plant life flourished to the point of huge fresh water swamps lining most of the coasts, which eventually became our coal deposits. Algae flourished and formed huge areas of the ocean that would have been green and gold and red with huge algae blooms, and these eventually became our oil deposits. Where do you think the CO2 of today came from? It certainly didn't fall from the sky as some dry ice comet that suddenly increased our CO2 levels. We can turn around and use these things to produce new, modern fuel sources and food sources.

Rising CO2 levels are nothing to be feared. We'll be better off with it. We are human beings, we'll adapt and grow with it. Not a big deal.

RE: still using the wrong scaling
By JediJeb on 8/3/2010 6:53:29 PM , Rating: 2
Rising CO2 levels are nothing to be feared. We'll be better off with it. We are human beings, we'll adapt and grow with it. Not a big deal.

I agree totally! Honestly, if the human race can not adapt to the climate changing as much as it has in the past then we really don't need to be considered the most intelligent species ever to walk this planet. What everyone fears most is not that life will disappear from the Earth, but that their comfortable way of life might be endangered a little. Consider the amount of time percentage wise that the areas of say New York City and New Orleans have been nice habitable coastlines. If mankind hopes to live on this planet more than a blip on the geologic timescale we can not expect to try to make permanent our population centers.

"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki