Climate Scientists: No Time To Lose

Petition Signed By 215 Scientists Calls For 50% Cut In Greenhouse Emissions By 2050

(AP)  For the first time, more than 200 of the world's leading climate scientists, losing their patience, urged government leaders to take radical action to slow global warming because "there is no time to lose."

A petition from at least 215 climate scientists calls for the world to cut in half greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. It is directed at a conference of diplomats meeting in Bali, Indonesia, to negotiate the next global warming treaty. The petition, obtained by The Associated Press, is to be announced at a press conference there Wednesday night.

The appeal from scientists follows a petition last week from more than 150 global business leaders also demanding the 50 percent cut in greenhouse gases. That is the estimate that scientists calculate would hold future global warming to a little more than a 3-degree Fahrenheit increase and is in line with what the European Union has adopted.

In the past, many of these scientists have avoided calls for action, leaving that to environmental advocacy groups. That dispassionate stance was taken during the release this year of four separate reports by the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

But no more.

"It's a grave crisis, and we need to do something real fast," said petition signer Jeff Severinghaus, a geosciences professor at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, Calif. "I think the stakes are way, way too high to be playing around."

The unprecedented petition includes scientists from more than 25 countries and shows that "the climate science community is essentially fed up," said signer Andrew Weaver of the University of Victoria in Canada. It includes many co-authors of the intergovernmental climate change panel reports, directors of major American and European climate science research institutions, a Nobel winner for atmospheric chemistry and a winner of a MacArthur "genius" award.

"A lot of us scientists think the problem needs a lot more serious attention than it's getting and the remedies have to be a lot more radical," said Richard Seager, a scientist at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.

The organizers of the petition - two Australians, two Germans and an American - would not comment about their efforts before their 11 p.m. EST press conference. But several scientists who signed on talked of losing patience.

"Action needs to be taken and needs to be taken now," said Marika Holland, a scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research who signed on. "The longer we wait, the worse it's going to become."

Negotiators in Bali are working on the initial groundwork for a treaty that would take effect after 2012, the expiration date of the Kyoto Protocol, a climate treat the United States didn't sign. However, no on expects concrete results at the closed-door sessions.

NASA scientist Gavin Schmidt, who signed the petition, said "the time for half-measures and the time for voluntary agreements and the time for arguing about 1 percent here and 1 percent there - those things are no longer relevant."

Schmidt noted while scientists have been dismissed by some as unrealistic, the call for a 50 percent emissions cut by business leaders "helps give credence to the idea that it's achievable."

Policy analysts, who weren't part of either petition, split on how meaningful the two petitions are.

What's happening is people are agreeing "that the cost of inaction is on the high side and the cost of action is affordable," said Joseph Romm, a policy analyst at the liberal think-tank Center for American Progress, energy business consultant and trained physicist.

But Jerry Taylor, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute said "scientists are in no position to intelligently guide public policy on climate change." Scientists can lay out scenarios, but it is up to economists to weigh the costs and benefits and many of them say the costs of cutting emissions are higher than the benefits, he said.

Granger Morgan, a professor of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University, said he sees "a growing realization among a wide variety of players that we've got to stop talking about this and start some action." But, he added, "I'm not going to hold my breath that we're going to get anything."

[toolmangler-2009]

posted on 16-8-2006 @ 03:58 AM

The Whole Solar System is Undergoing Global Warming.

This is a fact that not many people know about, and quite a few people, would like that there was no evidence to back this fact, because some people would like the world to believe that human activity is the cause for global warming on Earth. I am not advocating that releasing harmful gases, and chemicals in the oceans and atmosphere are good, but after a few years of research, I have come to understand that global warming is happening in the Solar System, not just on Earth.

Some people just want to listen to what some environmentalists are claiming, that global warming is happening because of human activity, and we are the cause for the extreme changes in climate we have been seeing lately getting worse and worse.


Martian Ice Shrinking:

New gullies that did not exist in mid-2002 have appeared on a Martian sand dune.
That''s just one of the surprising discoveries that have resulted from the extended life of NASA''s Mars Global Surveyor, which this month began its ninth year in orbit around Mars. Boulders tumbling down a Martian slope left tracks that weren''t there two years ago. New impact craters formed since the 1970s suggest changes to age-estimating models. And for three Mars summers in a row, deposits of frozen carbon dioxide near Mars'' south pole have shrunk from the previous year''s size, suggesting a climate change in progress.

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

[toolmangler-2009]

my mistake, it is coal fired.

[toolmangler-2009]

I am puzzled about how a nuclear power plant gives greenhouse gasses (check the picture at the top)

[libra127]

"Meanwhile in other news:
Record Snowfall Hits Maine and North Dakota.
But no mention of this by the Mainstream Media, because it violates The Consensus..."
Posted by hawksprings at 05:43 PM : Dec 05, 2007

You''re kidding here, right, hawksprings ? You can''t possibly be stupid enough to believe that one record-setting snowstorm in one part of the country actually "violates" the well-established consensus of the world''s top climate scientists on global warming, can you ?? Your ignorance of science is breathtaking. Global warming does NOT mean it doesn''t get cold and even snow in winter. It doesn''t mean temperatures everywhere, everday, just keep getting warmer and warmer. It''s a matter of averages...

[octavianfdlr]

On Dec 05, 2007, at 05:58 PM, rf35 posted:
"...many of them say the costs of cutting emissions are higher than the benefits..."

So, the money required to cut emissions is not worth the lives of future generations?
-----------------
No, rf35. The cost in human lives to cut emissions is not worth the small benefit.

If you need to misrepresent those who disagree with you to make yourself seem more reasonable than they, perhaps it is because they are more reasonable than you.

[r5161944]

John Stossel is wrong on climate change, as he is on much else. In addition his ''skeptic'' act is childish.

[incog-nito]

Sounds like a good plan to me. The science is settled; no need to argue any more; it''''s time for action!
So I propose that we fire all those taxpayer grant funded climate scientists, and hire a bunch of practical engineers who can solve the engineering problems of getting rid of the CO2. Too bad that the skills required to write computer video game climate models, do not equip one to solve practical engineering problems.

Posted by Seafang at 07:00 PM : Dec 05, 2007

You must not understand science very well. Engineering is applied SCIENCE. Engineers work from and use research done by scientists. They work in conjunction with each other.

[ivandrago]

Even if do refuse to believe in global warming, i doubt many people can honestly believe that a smoke stack belching pollution is good for anybody''s health. I used to have to drill (USNG) close to a refinery a few years back, and I can tell you it wasn''t a pleasant experience. I would tear up from stuff coming from the refineries. It smelled like rotten potatoes, and could make you short of breath on a run.

I couldn''t have imagined what it''s like to live next such a place. Those people around those refineries had a higher rate of cancer. Poor people always have to live next to these places. Rich people have the cloat to say no way.

Just though I''d point that out to you denialist out there.

[seafang]

Sounds like a good plan to me. The science is settled; no need to argue any more; it''s time for action!
So I propose that we fire all those taxpayer grant funded climate scientists, and hire a bunch of practical engineers who can solve the engineering problems of getting rid of the CO2. Too bad that the skills required to write computer video game climate models, do not equip one to solve practical engineering problems.

[rf35]

"...many of them say the costs of cutting emissions are higher than the benefits..."

So, the money required to cut emissions is not worth the lives of future generations?

[hawksprings]

How about we ban conferences that delegates have to fly in jets to?

That oughta lower CO2 output...

[MacTrek777]

I believe the climate is changing but I think anything we can do would have minimal effect at best and the cost would be too high for most people to tolerate. Just look at how the climate has changed in the past when there were fewer people. It happened then without any assistance from man.

[hawksprings]

Meanwhile in other news:
Record Snowfall Hits Maine and North Dakota.

But no mention of this by the Mainstream Media, because it violates The Consensus, and it would be heresy to mention anything that might dispute 215 scientists, Algore, and the Church of Global Warming.

http://www.kxmb.com/News/187023.asp
http://news.mainetoday.com/updates/019270.html

[jcr103]

Guess what bit** global warming is real, it''s driven by the burning of fossil fuels, and the affects are only accelerating. Time to pull your head out of your a** because reality is calling.

[scottyusa]

Well if we have to act that fast then how about removing some CO2 from the aptmosphere instead of just cutting down on our output? The technology exists. CO2 scrubbers have been on submarines for decades. One big one in each city in the world would be a good start. You talk about a necessary drastic option this is it. We need to reverse it not slow it down.

[johnstossel]

Global warming is a fairy tale. I bet these guys believe that Peter Pan actually existed.