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

RE: Biased pseudo-science
By mcnabney on 8/3/2010 4:57:59 PM , Rating: 1
Higher atmospheric CO2 does make plants grow better.

In fact, I have an entire tropical rainforest in my backyard.

FYI - increasing growth rates does not mean that living biomass is increasing. In fact, it is still shrinking - primarily due to carbon-heavy trees being torched in Brazil to make way for soybean plants.

I know that you are so proud to have a tiny bit of knowledge in your head, but you will actually have to think beyond the sound-bite to get anywhere. Unless you are aiming for Fox News.

RE: Biased pseudo-science
By dgingeri on 8/3/2010 5:44:51 PM , Rating: 2

Earth has, at one point in time, had about 19 times as much CO2 as current. During some of the most prolific times for life in general, CO2 levels were up to ten times current levels.

extra CO2 and a little extra heat won't kill us. As a matter of fact, it is more likely to make the world more livable for us. For instance, did you know that in the Medieval Warm Period, from about 500AD to about 1100AD, human civilization was growing strong and had more land for food production. There were actually vineyards and wine making facilities in Scotland! We still haven't gotten warm enough to do that today. Another 2-3F would probably be quite good for our food production and population.

RE: Biased pseudo-science
By roadhog1974 on 8/4/2010 11:10:56 PM , Rating: 2
For instance, did you know that in the Medieval Warm Period, from about 500AD to about 1100AD, human civilization was growing strong and had more land for food production.

And we know this from the incredibly detailed global census records from the time.

It's definately not a speculative guess extrapolated from
incomplete data of dubious reliability.

RE: Biased pseudo-science
By Spuke on 8/3/2010 6:28:42 PM , Rating: 1
Unless you are aiming for Fox News
You lost it when you brought this into your post. Is Fox News the poster child for "I'll not be a sheep"? If they are, maybe I'll start watching them. If 1 billion people stand up and shout at the top of their lungs, "the Earth is flat"! That does not make it so. Skepticism is good. We should all question what we see and hear and make up our own minds.

"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer

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