Please support this Forum and Neven's Blog

Author Topic: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?  (Read 28042 times)

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« on: September 10, 2014, 11:55:22 AM »
Edit, Nov 3rd:

Lets see what the media is reporting, shall we?

[BBC]: Fossil fuels should be phased out by 2100 says IPCC... In the longer term, the report states that fossil fuel power generation without carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology would need to be "phased out almost entirely by 2100
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29855884

[CNN]: According to the IPCC, to stay below a 2-degree C increase, greenhouse gas emissions need to fall as much as 70% around the world by 2050 and to zero by 2100
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/02/world/ipcc-climate-change-report/

[AP]: UN Climate Report Offers Stark Warnings, Hope... Emissions, mainly from the burning of fossil fuels, may need to drop to zero by the end of this century for the world to have a decent chance of keeping the temperature rise below a level that many consider dangerous... the word "dangerous" disappeared from the summary altogether. It appeared only twice in a longer underlying report compared to seven times in a draft produced before the Copenhagen session. The less loaded word "risk" was mentioned 65 times in the final 40-page summary

NPR: U.N.: End Greenhouse Emissions By 2100 Or Risk 'Irreversible' Damage... the world faces "severe, pervasive and irreversible" consequences if greenhouse gas emissions are not cut to zero by 2100
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/11/02/360932486/u-n-end-greenhouse-emissions-by-2100-or-risk-irreversible-damage

[TIME]: U.N.: Phase Out Fossil Fuels By 2100 Or Face ‘Irreversible’ Climate Impact
http://time.com/3553269/un-climate-change-report/


Phew... So the party can keep going till 2100, right?


**

What if it was proven that the IPCC was in fact a suicide pact between world governments, and with the usual suspects pressing for and applauding this extraordinarily gross deception? What if the EPA's «air is safe to breathe» 2001 deception (in order to reopen Wall Street to avoid losses) is actually dwarfed by a planet–wide «scientific» effort to pretend(**) that no serious harm will come from climate change «until 2100», or at least «not until 2070»?

Would you dare to speak out against such a vast conspiracy to destroy climate and virtually all life on earth?

Would you smile as you paid your taxes to a government that you knew did everything in its powers to prepare for mass suicide, while also spending huge sums of money on deceiving you and your fellow contrymen?

What would it take for you to rise up and resist and say «NO MORE! This is criminally insane and genocidal!»?

I, for one, don't trust the governments one inch when it comes to climate and the environment. It would be like trusting the mafia to honestly investigate a mob killing spree. They're criminals, and you really have no reason to believe a single word they say.

**

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-ipcc-underestimated-climate-change/
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-science-predictions-prove-too-conservative/

Edit: Inspired by wipneus, I will use this top post to sum up the basics as time goes by. First thing to consider may be the now long lifespan [26 years] of the IPCC. Did they use all these decades to learn from their early mistakes, or to restructure the Panel accordingly to avoid info lag, errors, lobbying etc? And are we really OK with a report frequency that lets a 2014 assessment report already ridden with errors of omission, outdatedness etc, rule the ground for policymakers for 7 crucial years, despite all these errors? Ask yourself this question: Why, in the age of the Internet and online publishing, do we need to publish One report every 7 years, when new scientific insights are published online 24/7 and need to be taken into account, also by the darn policymakers?

Imagine something unimportant, like football/soccer, being confined to One giant publication once every 7 years. No matches on the telly, no league tables or gossip in the papers, just this giant «Fifth Soccer Report» of 2014, with the next one being released in 2021.

Frequency alone tells you right there that political might trumped scientific right decades ago.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2014, 10:04:07 AM by viddaloo »
[]

Laurent

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2524
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #1 on: September 10, 2014, 12:44:09 PM »
Someone did post this 2 links :

IPCC reports 'diluted' under 'political pressure' to protect fossil fuel interests
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/may/15/ipcc-un-climate-reports-diluted-protect-fossil-fuel-interests

Data Deleted From UN Climate Report Highlight Controversies
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/07/140703-ipcc-climate-report-deleted-data-global-warming-science/

The president of the IPCC whas recently saying that we should act before 2015 if we don't want to see armful events, wich is to me quite stunning, who is listening ? Nobody wants to ear really, societies are hard to change.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amxgyebPwT0
(I already said that 2°C target is insanely low)

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #2 on: September 10, 2014, 03:23:11 PM »
The Panel certainly seems corrupt to the core, if vested interests ie the fossil industry are allowed to influence it to such a degree. Why set the fox to keep the geese?
[]

plinius

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 403
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #3 on: September 10, 2014, 07:21:34 PM »
I do not see why the IPCC should be "corrupt to the core". It is a well-known thing that the summaries for policymakers are actually negotiated with government involvement and honestly I do not take this part of the report too seriously. More so, however, because the real information is in the main IPCC report, which is done by scientists, and the shortened information is not worth the waste of time if you have looked at the whole thing
.
The review process of the report is quite transparent, and I could not find mis-representation of facts.
Your claim about the dilution is partly right, at least if I trust first-hand information of people who actually will tell you privately that they _have_ cut the upper limits. Do they do it due to corruption? No, they don't. The tendency to cut/downplay the upper limits derives from the extraordinary public pressure, which forces the panelists to abandon any statement that might in any way be interpreted as fearmongering. This is of course sad and troubling, but a consequence of lobby pressure outside and _not_ inside the IPCC.

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #4 on: September 10, 2014, 08:00:12 PM »
Well, I still can't see how the Panel could be any more corrupt, thus the 'corrupt to the core' wording. The problem with setting the fox to keep the geese is that the fox will of course eat all the geese. The fox cannot be trusted to look after geese. Trusting the fox this way is therefore irrational, and people who do this anyway will not be farmers for a very long time.
[]

DungeonMaster

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Citizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 129
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #5 on: September 10, 2014, 10:20:25 PM »
...and what better solution is available right now?

I can see no alternative, scientific or political. Let's do with this - after all, none or their reports writes that any threat is now further than some years ago !
This forum helps me to feel less uncomfortable about "doing something" about the melting Arctic and the warming world.
Read again  Maslowski paper : why Arctic could melt in 2016 +/- 3Y !

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #6 on: September 10, 2014, 10:26:39 PM »
I can see no alternative, scientific or political. Let's do with this - after all, none or their reports writes that any threat is now further than some years ago !

LOL, always look on the bright side, eh? While I can dig a good Monty Python movie (or record) some days, I cannot enjoy them every day.
[]

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #7 on: September 11, 2014, 03:05:13 AM »
The tendency to cut/downplay the upper limits derives from the extraordinary public pressure, which forces the panelists to abandon any statement that might in any way be interpreted as fearmongering. This is of course sad and troubling, but a consequence of lobby pressure outside and _not_ inside the IPCC.

By the way, comforting me by emphasising that the bribes originate from outside the IPCC, and not from fellow IPCC scientists on the inside, doesn't make me sleep any better at night. Basic rule #1 of corruption: Pay someone in a function on the inside to follow your will by offering them a bribe from the outside. A panel can of course be corrupt without taking actual bribes or actual money from anyone, all it takes is that they yield to outside pressure and abandon the truth or their scientific integrity.

Also, it doesn't help much if you as an individual don't bother to read the summaries for the policymakers. The climate inferno is an inferno of policymaking by policymakers against individuals like you and me. The policymakers read the summary for policymakers. Not only do they read it, they also help author it. This means that if the science says their nation can only pollute 1000 units, this nation's policymakers can «help» author the summary for policymakers by changing the quota to one gazillion units by threatening to veto the entire process.

Let's say «my» nation Norway wants to approach the climate inferno in this way, because they've got a lot of oil and gas they still want to pump and sell to make a huge profit. Instead of saying no to the IPCC cooperation they can simply say no in the subtle and almost secret way of changing the number 1000 to 'gazillion' and then vote for the IPCC process. Problem solved, if it wasn't for the consequences of this corrupt process for nature, for the ecosystems and for the climate.

So because of this utterly rotten core in the way the IPCC conducts its business, the whole construct is way better suited for giving greedy polluticians a nice shiny green look in the eyes of their voters, than for actually working out the scale and nature of the climate inferno and the steps we as a species need to take to limit the number of fatalities — human beings and other lifeforms — and when these steps must be taken to avoid a ragnarok of epic proportions.

The Panel is there to make polluticians feel good about themselves and should therefore cease and desist.
[]

ritter

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 485
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #8 on: September 11, 2014, 05:57:08 PM »
The Panel is there to make polluticians feel good about themselves and should therefore cease and desist.
Having read the summary for policy makers, I fail to see how the panel is there to make politicians feel good about themselves. It can be summed up as "shit or get off the pot!"

While I agree that the IPCC has shortcomings in that it must consider the political climate and it is often years out of date by publication (primarily because the climate and science is changing so fast), it is the best consensus builder we have. We must have a scientific baseline to even begin discussion of what's to be done. Granted, that discussion in the political realm so far has been woefully inadequate.

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #9 on: September 11, 2014, 09:28:44 PM »
Haha!  :D

Which of the summaries is that? Report 1, 2 or 3? May be good for bedside reading tonight!
[]

ritter

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 485
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #10 on: September 11, 2014, 10:09:29 PM »
Haha!  :D

Which of the summaries is that? Report 1, 2 or 3? May be good for bedside reading tonight!

Take a look at summary report III.

Without additional efforts to reduce GHG emissions beyond those in place today, emissions growth is expected to persist driven by growth in global population and economic activities. Baseline scenarios, those without additional mitigation, result in global mean surface temperature increases in 2100 from 3.7 to 4.8°C compared to pre‐industrial levels10 (median values; the range is 2.5°C to 7.8°C when including climate uncertainty, see Table SPM.1)11 (high confidence).

Mitigation scenarios reaching about 450 ppm CO2eq in 2100 typically involve temporary overshoot of atmospheric concentrations, as do many scenarios reaching about 500 ppm to 550 ppm CO2eq in 2100. Depending on the level of the overshoot, overshoot scenarios typically rely on the availability and widespread deployment of BECCS and afforestation in the second half of the century. The availability and scale of these and other Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) technologies and methods are uncertain and CDR technologies and methods are, to varying degrees, associated with challenges and risks (see Section SPM 4.2) (high confidence).

Delaying mitigation efforts beyond those in place today through 2030 is estimated to substantially increase the difficulty of the transition to low longer‐term emissions levels and narrow the range of options consistent with maintaining temperature change below 2°C relative to pre‐industrial levels (high confidence).

Infrastructure developments and long‐lived products that lock societies into GHG‐intensive
emissions pathways may be difficult or very costly to change, reinforcing the importance of early
action for ambitious mitigation (robust evidence, high agreement).

Sleep well!  ;)

Laurent

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2524
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #11 on: September 11, 2014, 10:36:59 PM »
If I understood what I did read somewhere the 3rd report is not modified by governments ?
May be that explain better why scientific knowledge is preserved in the summary of that report ?

jai mitchell

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #12 on: September 19, 2014, 07:49:14 AM »

According to figure 6.27 of the WGI

RCP4.5 compatible fossil-fuel emissions with and without carbon cycle climate feedbacks, by 2050 the feedbacks result in an additional 20% +/-7% of additional real anthropogenic emissions reductions necessary to hold the RCP 4.5 scenario (and projected temperature responses).

They don't say what the RCP 8.5 scenario would do to those feedbacks.  I can tell you without any doubt at all that if we hold an RCP 8.5 emission trajectory through 2050 the natural feedback mechanism will be over 1/2 of anthro emissions.  In other words, we will have already unleased a runaway feedback loop that will result in over 12C of warming, globally averaged by 2200.

http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/figures/WGI_AR5_Fig6-27.jpg

this is WITHOUT permafrost release mechanisms.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-ipcc-underestimated-climate-change/

The U.N. Environmental Programme revealed this week that IPCC’s fifth assessment, due for release starting in September, 2013, will again "not include the potential effects of the permafrost carbon feedback on global climate."
Haiku of Past Futures
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

Laurent

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2524
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #13 on: September 19, 2014, 07:09:45 PM »
Gloups...what are we waiting for ? :'(

TeaPotty

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 149
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #14 on: September 20, 2014, 10:27:28 AM »
Completely agree viddalloo. An organization that doesn't seem to learn or even acknowledge their mistakes is a poor excuse for Science.

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #15 on: September 20, 2014, 06:17:42 PM »
Yes, I suppose I should say it in the thread as well, when I add something to the Top Post:

Edit: Inspired by wipneus, I will use this top post to sum up the basics as time goes by. First thing to consider may be the now long lifespan [26 years] of the IPCC. Did they use all these decades to learn from their early mistakes, or to restructure the Panel accordingly to avoid info lag, errors, lobbying etc? And are we really OK with a report frequency that lets a 2014 assessment report already ridden with errors of omission, outdatedness etc, rule the ground for policymakers for 7 crucial years, despite all these errors? Ask yourself this question: Why, in the age of the Internet and online publishing, do we need to publish One report every 7 years, when new scientific insights are published online 24/7 and need to be taken into account, also by the darn policymakers?

Imagine something unimportant, like football/soccer, being confined to One giant publication once every 7 years. No matches on the telly, no league tables or gossip in the papers, just this giant «Fifth Soccer Report» of 2014, with the next one being released in 2021.

Frequency alone tells you right there that political might trumped scientific right decades ago.
[]

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #16 on: September 20, 2014, 10:33:01 PM »
I don't know about you guys, but when it was announced in September of 2013 that Panel folks would be in Stockholm for a week finishing the WG1 report, which would be presented at the end of that week, I was waiting eagerly to download it. An unfinished version with a lot of editing notes and without the important graphs and figures was put out, but we had to wait until I think March of 2014 before the finished report was published and available for download and reading.

I can't know, but I suspect this 6 month delay was due to wrangling and editing and listening to Saudi Arabia etc who didn't want certain info to be a part of the report. I find this disgusting.
[]

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1035
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #17 on: October 02, 2014, 04:50:05 PM »
after seeing this (link intentionally broken, so I can't be blamed if you give it hits)
htt p://www.nature.com/ne ws/climate-policy-dit ch-the-2-c-war ming-goal-1.16018
, it occurred that to me there was this thread in here.

it's almost like these types pray 'oh when does the carbon cycle of the earth start to break down emitting so much ghgs so we don 't have to care about the environmentalists anymore? What? Can't hear you! Did you say Three degrees? Good!' (No, I said 'two') 'We'll go with three then and blame the nature for our follies! It's like 2010s again! Now where's my deck-chair?'
 
A quantity relates to a quantum like camel's back relates to camel's _______ ? (back, vertebra, vertebral tendon, spinal disc, paralysis)

Laurent

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2524
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #18 on: October 02, 2014, 05:01:01 PM »
http://www.nature.com/news/climate-policy-ditch-the-2-c-warming-goal-1.16018
Nice link ;)

The goal, if we are speaking of temperature should not be more than 1°C as it was the max observed in the last million years. Speaking of CO2 the goal should be 300 ppm ! Too far to achieve ? Of course not, it is far because we did not want to see. Everything above is dangerous !

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #19 on: October 02, 2014, 05:03:27 PM »
Good point, Pmt!

That link, however, was too annoying on my iPad, so I'll take full responsibility for posting it here.



BTW, I see now that the authors are Pausers, they think the surface stopped warming in 1998:

Scientifically, there are better ways to measure the stress that humans are placing on the climate system than the growth of average global surface temperature — which has stalled since 1998 and is poorly coupled to entities that governments and companies can control directly.


Pausers *and* Flat-Earthers:

How could human stresses on the climate be rising faster even as global surface temperatures stay flat?

« Last Edit: October 02, 2014, 05:22:12 PM by viddaloo »
[]

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #20 on: October 02, 2014, 05:38:33 PM »
In summary, they want the Paris Climate meeting to get lost in discussions about what goals we should set, instead of trying to achieve the first goal, set in Copenhagen in 2009.

I can see where they're coming from and wish them all the worst.
[]

Laurent

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2524
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #21 on: October 02, 2014, 05:43:27 PM »
It is typical of an ambiguous article.
They say that the temperature have stalled (wich is wrong) since 1998 and at the same time, they show a graph that does say that 90% of the energy goes into the oceans. The same graph displayed on Neven's blog showing a non stop rise of 4 nuclear bombs per second added to the whole (more now ?).
We are seeing a "plateau" (I prefer "plateau") because the arctic and the oceans absorb the excess energy, once the Arctic is gone we can do our prayers...bye, bye climate stability...bye, bye little feed backs...let the run away taking place.

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1035
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #22 on: October 03, 2014, 05:37:31 AM »

The goal, if we are speaking of temperature should not be more than 1°C as it was the max observed in the last million years. Speaking of CO2 the goal should be 300 ppm ! Too far to achieve ? Of course not, it is far because we did not want to see. Everything above is dangerous !

1 degree would be safer of course yes. There's still some disagreement on how the curves obtained from ice sheet relate to the maximums over continents, though it looks like f.e. during the Holocene maximum the buffering capacity of (then still) extensive ice sheets prevented earth from going to warming phase (melting all the permafrost and releasing the clathrates that are on the edge of the stable zone) towards 4 degrees. Descent from Pliocene warmth to Pleistocene ice age cycles was pretty continuous so the opposite could of course be a possibility, but given the the nature of exothermal reactions (such as a methanotroph producing more methane from newly unfrozen stuff on ground warming the environment by the said methane) I don't see a possibility of such a slow transition.

As an aside, last year (edit: oops, it was last spring, how the time seems to fly)made an image of 'group Hansen' reconstruction of temperatures (pretty large image):
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B34nFtPgUZzjdTBvNTVNcWNSc2s/view?usp=sharing , but of course there are other more detailed recods from more recent times. Started doing an image of these too but didn't finish since was not sure of how to attach couple of records to others (they've been obtained from different parts of the globe, some are oceanic, some continental proxies, some limited to outside polar regions and vice versa.) here's how far I got (Basically it's the wikipedia climate history image at nearly full resolution up to 64Mya) (huge)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B34nFtPgUZzjUDRsa1dMcGFSQk0/view?usp=sharing

This was intended to show how slow the previous changes were compared to the anthropogenic one, but the scale differences are so huge it does little to serve this purpose. (and the resolution before Eemian interglacial is too undetailed to exclude a possibility of rapid swings style Dansgaard-Oescher)
« Last Edit: October 03, 2014, 09:11:38 AM by Pmt111500 »
A quantity relates to a quantum like camel's back relates to camel's _______ ? (back, vertebra, vertebral tendon, spinal disc, paralysis)

Laurent

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2524
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #23 on: October 03, 2014, 10:26:27 AM »
In the pliocene and before, the Milancovich cycle was different so it is difficult to match these past datas and nowadays (concerning temp and CO2 correlation). The datas show a downward trend wich is different in our case where we are seeing a terrific increase of CO2 (no wonder).
What is new to me is that the graph below says Antartica did thawed at 2,5 °C...it won't be long before we reach that level. (I may be dead when it does happen but still very fast so).
A pity your graphs are blurred.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2014, 10:32:13 AM by Laurent »

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1035
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #24 on: October 03, 2014, 04:25:41 PM »
at least the former one (Hansen-group) shows up ok when I try to download it. the other one isn't finished anyway, I haven't got good numbers on couple of sections in there, and at least two sets would need to be somewhat adjusted to reflect ocean/continent balance in the proxies, so it is blurred and likely some tenths of degrees offset on sections...
A quantity relates to a quantum like camel's back relates to camel's _______ ? (back, vertebra, vertebral tendon, spinal disc, paralysis)

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Oracle of Delphi
« Reply #25 on: October 13, 2014, 12:37:17 PM »
The concept of asking ravingly mad women abusing hallucinogenic substances for advice on important matters of state may seem strange to most people today. Yet if your predecessors asked the Oracle of Delphi before they went to war, the idea of asking the Oracle before you yourself commit your people to a potentially fatal war for your state, may seem more rational. In fact, it may seem to you and your countrymen to be «the safest thing to do».

How do you reconcile «mad, drugged-out crone» with «safest thing to do»? Well, it's the 1000 dollar question, innit? The heart of the matter is that it provided answers. It was social convention and highly socially accepted to seek these answers. And so no–one really bothered about the quality of these answers, the applied methodology etc.

Now, that was really strange, but a long time ago, thousands of years, in the recently austerity–struck Greece. Surely, we would never find ourselves in a similar situation, here, today? Well, one would hope so. Yet, in real–life, we are perhaps as preoccupied with social conventions and socially accepted ways of getting answers, as the old Greeks were.

It seems that if the issue or challenge is vast enough, we will accept any type of answer from any body of people, no matter their skill levels, ties to vested interests, how political might trumphs scientific right, etc. We have an answer! Might as well have come from the spaced–out Oracle of Delphi.
[]

Laurent

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2524
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #26 on: October 17, 2014, 01:38:49 PM »
IPCC corrects claim suggesting climate change would be good for the economy
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/17/ipcc-corrects-claim-suggesting-climate-change-would-be-good-for-the-economy

In a new paper due to appear in the The Economic Journal, published by the Royal Economic Society, Stern and Dr Simon Dietz show that if models are amended so that climate change impacts can affect the drivers of economic growth, they find that rising global temperatures could lead to a collapse in living standards.


Hmm, really, a collapse in living standards...only that ? really, if it was only a collapse in living standards, I would be very happy...

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1756
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #27 on: October 17, 2014, 06:03:22 PM »
IPCC corrects claim suggesting climate change would be good for the economy
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/17/ipcc-corrects-claim-suggesting-climate-change-would-be-good-for-the-economy

In a new paper due to appear in the The Economic Journal, published by the Royal Economic Society, Stern and Dr Simon Dietz show that if models are amended so that climate change impacts can affect the drivers of economic growth, they find that rising global temperatures could lead to a collapse in living standards.


Hmm, really, a collapse in living standards...only that ? really, if it was only a collapse in living standards, I would be very happy...


I think it is a case of they are using an economic model so that is what they project.

abstract includes

From this work many have drawn the conclusion that an efficient global emissions abatement policy comprises modest and modestly increasing controls. On the contrary, we use DICE itself to provide an initial illustration that, if the analysis is extended to take more strongly into account three essential elements of the climate problem – the endogeneity of growth, the convexity of damages, and climate risk – optimal policy comprises strong controls. To focus on these features and facilitate comparison with Nordhaus’ work, all of the analysis is conducted with a high pure-time discount rate, notwithstanding its problematic ethical foundations.


I take this as saying that more aggressive government policy earlier on is better even with high discount rates.

That seems a reasonable conclusion to me.

Whether these guidance figures would be adequate might be more debatable:

As a guide, we find that these models suggest
the carbon price in a setting of globally coordinated policy, such as a cap-and trade
regime or a system of harmonised domestic carbon taxes, should be in
the range $32-103/tCO2 (2012 prices) in 2015. It must be remembered that
the DICE model lacks adjustment costs, so the high end of the range should be
interpreted cautiously. On the other hand and potentially of great importance,
we have, notwithstanding our extensions, omitted important risks in relation to
the distribution of damages, which could give higher carbon prices. Within two
decades the carbon price should rise in real terms to $82-260/tCO2. Doing so
would, according to the model, keep the expected atmospheric stock of carbon
dioxide to a maximum of c. 425-500ppm and the expected increase in global
mean temperature to c. 1.5-2degC above pre-industrial.


$32 to $82 in two years seems a pretty steep rate of rise. I can't see politicians being brave enough to continue with such a policy for long even if it was shown to be needed or at least appropriate.

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #28 on: October 17, 2014, 10:38:16 PM »
IPCC corrects claim suggesting climate change would be good for the economy
The IPCC actually said that?!

Guess so:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has corrected a controversial claim that small amounts of global warming could have overall positive economic impacts, after I pointed out that it was based on inaccurate information.

Oh my. This is far worse than even I thought. Climate Change good for economy? In 2014? OMG.

I feel a documentary film title coming: «How IPCC Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Methane Bomb».
« Last Edit: October 17, 2014, 10:48:28 PM by viddaloo »
[]

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #29 on: October 17, 2014, 11:42:18 PM »
Speaking of which: There seems to be no less than 3 potentially interesting CH₄ flicks in my feed today.





[]

TeaPotty

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 149
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #30 on: October 19, 2014, 09:33:50 PM »
IPCC corrects claim suggesting climate change would be good for the economy
The IPCC actually said that?!

Guess so:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has corrected a controversial claim that small amounts of global warming could have overall positive economic impacts, after I pointed out that it was based on inaccurate information.

Oh my. This is far worse than even I thought. Climate Change good for economy? In 2014? OMG.


This the same IPCC who deemed it virtually impossible for warming to pass 2C just a few years ago, and who _still_ argues that we can avoid 2C by 2050 by winging it. Just think about it, the recent IPCC doc is so conservative and so outdated in its research, that any conclusions made based on it is instantly a case of Greenwashing. It's time to accept that the IPCC is an org meant to serve the interests of the 1%.

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #31 on: October 19, 2014, 09:41:57 PM »
I believe that is correct, Sir.
[]

Laurent

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2524
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #32 on: October 27, 2014, 10:45:23 AM »
At the IPCC
http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2014/05/08/john-broome/at-the-ipcc/

Is the IPCC Government Approval Process Broken?
http://www.robertstavinsblog.org/2014/04/25/is-the-ipcc-government-approval-process-broken-2/

IPCC reports 'diluted' under 'political pressure' to protect fossil fuel interests
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/may/15/ipcc-un-climate-reports-diluted-protect-fossil-fuel-interests


The last round of negociations (5 days) will arrive the 2nd of november...

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #33 on: November 03, 2014, 10:04:54 AM »
TeaPotty on the newest IPCC report:

Lets see what the media is reporting, shall we?

[BBC]: Fossil fuels should be phased out by 2100 says IPCC... In the longer term, the report states that fossil fuel power generation without carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology would need to be "phased out almost entirely by 2100
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29855884

[CNN]: According to the IPCC, to stay below a 2-degree C increase, greenhouse gas emissions need to fall as much as 70% around the world by 2050 and to zero by 2100
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/02/world/ipcc-climate-change-report/

[AP]: UN Climate Report Offers Stark Warnings, Hope... Emissions, mainly from the burning of fossil fuels, may need to drop to zero by the end of this century for the world to have a decent chance of keeping the temperature rise below a level that many consider dangerous... the word "dangerous" disappeared from the summary altogether. It appeared only twice in a longer underlying report compared to seven times in a draft produced before the Copenhagen session. The less loaded word "risk" was mentioned 65 times in the final 40-page summary

NPR: U.N.: End Greenhouse Emissions By 2100 Or Risk 'Irreversible' Damage... the world faces "severe, pervasive and irreversible" consequences if greenhouse gas emissions are not cut to zero by 2100
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/11/02/360932486/u-n-end-greenhouse-emissions-by-2100-or-risk-irreversible-damage

[TIME]: U.N.: Phase Out Fossil Fuels By 2100 Or Face ‘Irreversible’ Climate Impact
http://time.com/3553269/un-climate-change-report/


Phew... So the party can keep going till 2100, right?
[]

jai mitchell

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #34 on: November 03, 2014, 04:38:13 PM »
In a recent lecture at Columbia University, James Hansen stated that our "locked in" warming based on current GHG abundances and the time lag associated with reaching equilibrium temperature was about .7 C of additional globally averaged warming from today's values.

Today's values are .6 degrees above pre-industrial so we have currently locked in 1.3C of this warming. 

So we can increase our emissions and then stop once we reach 450 ppm and we will be ok because. . .

(IPCC body of assumptions) 

ECS is only about 2.3C per doubling (not 4.5 as some recent research has suggested) the arctic sea ice will maintain coverage through the end of 2100 (vs. 2020-2035 September ice free)  there will be no emissions of methane from permafrost (vs. observed increased decomposition happening today)

When the arctic becomes ice free in June 1st the albedo shift alone will be equivalent to current top of atmosphere (TOA) radiation imbalance of additional warming, leading to a rapid warming of .7C (globally averaged) and 20C (regionally).
Haiku of Past Futures
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #35 on: November 04, 2014, 06:57:28 AM »
Warning: The below image is only data showing CH4 releases in the ESAS, so keep in mind the IPCC promised us in March this year in their 5th report that warming oceans couldn't release CH4 from subsea permafrost, as warming water would also expand and thus increase depth & pressure, so that the CH4 would be safe.

Thank you, IPCC.
[]

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1756
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #36 on: November 04, 2014, 01:33:55 PM »
Warning: The below image is only data showing CH4 releases in the ESAS, so keep in mind the IPCC promised us in March this year in their 5th report that warming oceans couldn't release CH4 from subsea permafrost, as warming water would also expand and thus increase depth & pressure, so that the CH4 would be safe.

Thank you, IPCC.


So the level is above 1950ppb. That doesn't seem particularly surprising for the time of year (typically high Nov to Feb in Northern latitudes)



Show a significant acceleration from about 5.2ppb per year and I would be sitting up and taking notice.

IPCC
FAQ 6.2: Could Rapid Release of Methane and Carbon Dioxide from Thawing Permafrost or Ocean Warming Substantially Increase Warming?
Permafrost is permanently frozen ground, mainly found in the high latitudes of the Arctic. Permafrost, including the sub-sea permafrost on the shallow shelves of the Arctic Ocean, contains old organic carbon deposits. Some are relicts from the last glaciation, and hold at least twice the amount of carbon currently present in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Should a sizeable fraction of this carbon be released as methane and carbon dioxide, it would increase atmospheric concentrations, which would lead to higher atmospheric temperatures. That in turn would cause yet more methane and carbon dioxide to be released, creating a positive feedback, which would further amplify global warming. The Arctic domain presently represents a net sink of carbon dioxide—sequestering around 0.4 ± 0.4 PgCyr–1 in growing vegetation representing about 10% of the current global land sink. It is also a modest source of methane: between 15 and 50 Tg(CH4) yr–1) are emitted mostly from seasonally unfrozen wetlands corresponding to about 10% of the global wetland methane source. There is no clear evidence yet that thawing contributes significantly to the current global budgets of these two greenhouse gases. However, under sustained Arctic warming, modelling studies and expert judgments indicate with medium agreement that a potential combined release totalling up to 200 PgC as carbon dioxide equivalent could occur by the year 2100.


Doesn't seem like your characterisation of IPCC report is very fair.

jai mitchell

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #37 on: November 04, 2014, 08:29:25 PM »

compare





The RCP 8.5 models a methane budget increasing to about 3,500 ppb by 2100.  This correlates to just under 30GT of Carbon in the form of methane being released over the next 85 years according to david archer's methane model. found here:  http://climatemodels.uchicago.edu/methane/

Please note that all of these emission scenarios maintain a constant anthropogenic methane signal and are only looking at the "slug" of methane injected into the atmosphere, enteric fermentation from agricultural activities will likely produce significant portions of the stated slug of methane so all values shown are inclusive of all additional sources not just arctic values.

RCP 8.5

(just under 30 PG of carbon in the form of methane over 85 years) - worst case scenario of massive methane release from permafrost under summer ice free arctic conditions, but without clathrate "bomb"



The issue here is with the other RCPs, you know, the ones that are being used to predict 2C of potential warming.

here is RCP 6.0

(4.5 PG of carbon in methane over 50 years -- much more likely under currently increasing warming regimes without massive step-change permafrost decomposition under summer ice free conditions)




and here is RCP 4.5

(.9 PG of carbon in methane over 30 years)



Here are the associated temperatures with ONE standard deviation of uncertainty in shading for each RCP.


(source:  http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v3/n4/fig_tab/nclimate1716_F1.html )

As you can see, the inclusion of likely emissions of methane from this region is understated in every scenario except for RCP 8.5 and RCP 6.0 (if we are lucky enough to have summer sea ice last through the latter half of the century.)

And in all of these scenarios, the unrealistically low median ECS value of 3.0 means that real temperatures will likely be in the higher end of the 1-sigma shading shown in the above diagram for all RCPs.

are you convinced?
Haiku of Past Futures
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

jai mitchell

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #38 on: November 04, 2014, 10:25:33 PM »
In developing the above post, I went and plotted the RCP 8.5 CH4 forcing for the CMIP5 models.  The spreadsheets are open access and available here:  http://www.pik-potsdam.de/~mmalte/rcps/index.htm#Download


This is the RCP 8.5 CH4 radiative forcing used in CMIP5 for the model runs:

note that it plateaus at just below 1.1 Watts per meter^2 for CH4 contributions to total radiative forcing.




However,

David Archer's model of radiative forcing for the identical atmospheric concentrations noted above project that forcing will plateau at 1.94 W/m^2.  sorry if it is hard to see, that is the plateau value though.



Can anyone help me to reconcile this?  It is off by almost 50% underestimations compared to the archer model!

Haiku of Past Futures
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #39 on: November 04, 2014, 11:03:10 PM »
#IPCCFAIL

[]

jai mitchell

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #40 on: November 04, 2014, 11:51:04 PM »
Vid,

with regard to deep ocean clathrates, which this section talks about, they are absolutely correct.  The primary concern in the arctic is the very shallow ESAS (30meter) average depth clathrates which are under considerable amounts of permafrost.
Haiku of Past Futures
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #41 on: November 04, 2014, 11:53:49 PM »
Can anyone help me to reconcile this?  It is off by almost 50% underestimations compared to the archer model!

Maybe pop David Archer an email?
[]

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #42 on: November 04, 2014, 11:59:45 PM »
Vid,

with regard to deep ocean clathrates, which this section talks about, they are absolutely correct.  The primary concern in the arctic is the very shallow ESAS (30meter) average depth clathrates which are under considerable amounts of permafrost.


No, I believe it's pretty obvious they talk about clathrates in general, without any mention of deep ocean (or depth), and they must have known about the ESAS area when this was written:

[]

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #43 on: November 05, 2014, 12:17:50 AM »
They just dismiss catastrophic release out of hand as very unlikely, with ocean heat–driven volume expansion as the only available justification in that paragraph.

Even if 30 m ESAS waters were to become 31 m, I don't think clathrates would be safe if ocean temperatures locally increase 5C. So in conclusion, I don't feel safe from reading IPCC reassurances about this being very unlikely. They could have other motivations for writing this than it being actually and scientifically unlikely. In this way they may ironically cause panic through not wanting to cause panic.
[]

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1756
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #44 on: November 05, 2014, 02:02:38 AM »
References:

6.4.7.3 Future CH4 Hydrate Emissions Substantial quantities of methane are believed to be stored within submarine hydrate deposits at continental margins (see also Section 6.1, FAQ 6.2). There is concern that warming of overlying waters may melt these deposits, releasing CH4 into the ocean and atmosphere systems.

Considering a potential warming of bottom waters by 1, 3 and 5 K during the next 100 years, Reagan and Moridis (2007) found that hydrates residing in a typical deep ocean setting (4°C and 1000 m depth) would be stable and in shallow low-latitude settings (6°C and 560 m) any sea-floor CH4 fluxes would be oxidized within the sediments. Only in cold-shallow Arctic settings (0.4°C and 320 m) would CH4 fluxes exceed rates of benthic sediment oxidation. Simulations of heat penetration through the sediment by Fyke and Weaver (2006) suggest that changes in the gas hydrate stability zone will be small on century timescales except in high-latitude regions of shallow ocean shelves. In the longer term, Archer et al. (2009a) estimated that between 35 and 940 PgC could be released over several thousand years in the future following a 3 K seafloor warming.

'will be small on century timescales except in high-latitude regions of shallow ocean shelves' doesn't sound terribly reassuring. Nevertheless perhaps Fyke and Weaver (2006) might be worth a read?

12.5 heading is
12.5 Climate Change Beyond 2100, Commitment, Stabilization and Irreversibility

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1756
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #45 on: November 05, 2014, 02:16:09 AM »
They just dismiss catastrophic release out of hand as very unlikely, with ocean heat–driven volume expansion as the only available justification in that paragraph.


Actually the quote says it is SLR from mass changes not volume changes.

I wonder about volume though. Initial thought is volume increase does not increase mass so no change in pressure and that is why they are specifying mass driven SLR.

However as there is more warming in the arctic, does this raise SL via volume/density change more there and consequently water flows away from Arctic reducing the mass and pressure? Perhaps this effect is just tiny compared to effect of melting glaciers and ice sheets on land increasing the mass?

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #46 on: November 05, 2014, 02:25:10 AM »
: NannyIPCC
However, sea level rise due to changes in ocean mass enhances clathrate stability in the ocean.

I strongly believe this to be a BS sentence, lobbied into place by vested interests. Why else would you include a clear BS sentence in such an important report for human future/survival?

Argument: By the time ESAS sea levels rise 1 m (due to glacier melt and thermal expansion), the same cause (as of the 1 m rise) will have warmed the ESAS sea floor by 5 or maybe 10C.

Do the math. CH4 is kept in place by low temperature and high pressure. Take away the low temperature and it is not kept in place. The minute pressure increase in no way compensates for the dramatically increased temperature.

In a thaw you only have to melt the darn thing, you don't have to heat it to +10C.
[]

TeaPotty

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 149
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #47 on: November 05, 2014, 06:33:57 AM »
: NannyIPCC
However, sea level rise due to changes in ocean mass enhances clathrate stability in the ocean.

I strongly believe this to be a BS sentence, lobbied into place by vested interests. Why else would you include a clear BS sentence in such an important report for human future/survival?

Argument: By the time ESAS sea levels rise 1 m (due to glacier melt and thermal expansion), the same cause (as of the 1 m rise) will have warmed the ESAS sea floor by 5 or maybe 10C.

Do the math. CH4 is kept in place by low temperature and high pressure. Take away the low temperature and it is not kept in place. The minute pressure increase in no way compensates for the dramatically increased temperature.

In a thaw you only have to melt the darn thing, you don't have to heat it to +10C.

The methane denialists also rely on really simple models to assert their high confidence, which just smacks me of irresponsibility. Gavin Shmidt's lecture debunking "methane alarmism" was so awful, but the mainstream science community lapping it up like its gospel is even worse in my opinion. A few slanderous jokes on twitter also helped get everyone in line.

A year or two ago Gavin's reply to me on twitter about methane is that their levels are not increasing. Today, he can no longer say that, so claims its rate is slow. I doubt he will ever be held responsible for being wrong, and the science is currently pointing to him likely being wrong. We have so many potential methane sources, and we understand so little about them.

Then there's the corporations starting to extract methane from clathrates as a new fossil fuel  >:(
« Last Edit: November 05, 2014, 07:46:30 AM by TeaPotty »

Anne

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 522
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #48 on: November 06, 2014, 12:51:44 AM »
Then there's the corporations starting to extract methane from clathrates as a new fossil fuel  >:(
I don't go in for conspiracy theories, but all around us we can see negligence and self-interest. When the two combine it is very convenient for people making money.

viddaloo

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1302
  • Hardanger Sometimes
    • View Profile
Re: What if IPCC was proven to be a suicide pact?
« Reply #49 on: November 06, 2014, 08:58:23 AM »
Maybe we won't get any more UN climate reports:
http://news.yahoo.com/5-reports-future-un-climate-body-debated-153109162.html

Next year, the IPCC is set to make a decision on its future and even the panel itself is asking whether it makes sense to embark on another mammoth climate report, which would be its sixth since 1988.

The painstaking and time-consuming work of the Nobel Peace Prize-winning group has meant that some of its findings are already out of date by the time its reports are published.

On the sidelines of the IPCC meeting in Copenhagen, The Associated Press asked climate experts inside and outside the IPCC process about the value of the panel and its giant reports.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2014, 09:07:38 AM by viddaloo »
[]