Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Poll

What is acceptable for ultimate manmade carbon dioxide emissions, compared to present day?

0%
5 (35.7%)
10%
6 (42.9%)
25%
1 (7.1%)
50%
2 (14.3%)
75%
0 (0%)
100%
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 14

Author Topic: What do we consider acceptable for carbon dioxide emissions?  (Read 2314 times)

ccgwebmaster

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1085
  • Civilisation collapse - what are you doing?
    • View Profile
    • CCG Website
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 0
What do we consider acceptable for carbon dioxide emissions?
« on: April 02, 2014, 06:59:21 PM »
I'm hoping to use the results of this poll to drive a discussion about actually practical (theoretically at least) solutions amongst forum members (if forum members cannot agree practical targets and solutions, I doubt the wider public is going to do any better - let alone the UN and international forums).

Before one can discuss practical solutions one needs a practical target from which one can derive a strategy to fulfill it. So to what proportion of current emissions must we cut down to?

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2748
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 162
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: What do we consider acceptable for carbon dioxide emissions?
« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2014, 07:02:53 PM »
Is this figure to be before or after deducting sequestrations?

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 896
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: What do we consider acceptable for carbon dioxide emissions?
« Reply #2 on: April 02, 2014, 07:24:38 PM »
One very deep exhalation as the ultimate man comes to the realization that even though the wealth of the world has now been bequeathed to him. there's no one left to order about & no one left to feel better than ;>{

(your did ask for the ultimate emission)

Terry

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 509
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: What do we consider acceptable for carbon dioxide emissions?
« Reply #3 on: April 02, 2014, 07:44:22 PM »
Yes, the word "ultimate" makes the decision trivial. But "practical" would mean something different than that.

Practically one would go for 20%. After that we would have to iterate that procedure a couple of times and try to learn how to get the CO2 out of the atmosphere again.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2014, 07:51:18 PM by SATire »

ccgwebmaster

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1085
  • Civilisation collapse - what are you doing?
    • View Profile
    • CCG Website
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What do we consider acceptable for carbon dioxide emissions?
« Reply #4 on: April 02, 2014, 08:16:06 PM »
Is this figure to be before or after deducting sequestrations?

Good question. If you mean manmade sequestration I guess in this context it's preferable to stick with what we know we can do - and set aside unproven or speculative (insufficiently researched) techniques. Given that proviso it would seem reasonable to define the figure as after deducting manmade sequestration as we're talking about our net effect. It would need to be sequestration that could continue for as long as the emissions though?

If you mean natural sequestration I'm not sure we should presume upon that (at least not over short term timescales) - firstly we don't have unlimited capacity here, and secondly some natural sinks for carbon dioxide are still problematic (for instance ocean acidification) or might even definitively become net sources in the not too distant future.

[EDIT] Just to be clear, I don't think we need to put a lot of thought into this particular value - just to find by consensus a reasonable ball park value in the context of our individual understanding - precisely the same activity that would need to be done at some point by the wider public or international agreement.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2014, 09:24:46 PM by ccgwebmaster »

icefest

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 258
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What do we consider acceptable for carbon dioxide emissions?
« Reply #5 on: April 02, 2014, 10:58:48 PM »
I think I'd select more in the ballpark of 1-3% before natural sequestration.
Because (and this is based on a ballpark estimate) I expect some oil/mineral-based chemistry to be hard to replace.
Open other end.