Earth to G8: Limit Global Warming Emissions!

The results of the latest G8 meeting on climate change are as exciting as flat beer. So, before any of the G8 countries start patting themselves on the back for agreeing to set limits on global warming, let's get something straight. Their arrows are pointed at the wrong target -- and the arrows are virtual, not real, at this point. It is a very hollow and cynical start towards solving a very real and urgent problem. It is also a dangerous road, because it sets us up for failure, which further discourages humanity from seriously addressing the problem.

As the Associated Press reported, the G8 resolution, agreeing that our climate should not warm beyond 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), is nonbinding, and no one offered any details towards actually achieving this goal. Well, wishing isn't enough. And while it is understandable that we think of the warming in terms of temperature, a temperature goal does not make sense.

Here's why. As our own climate scientists have shown, the more we examine the consequences of global warming, the more we begin to realize just how complex the web of physical and ecological feedbacks are to global warming. This means that we can try all we want, but in the end we cannot accurately predict how fast the temperature will rise because of our actions. Our record on predicting climate change bears this out. Scientists across the spectrum, from those of the most respected climate committee, the International Panel on Climate Change, to respected climate change researchers who work on this full time, have consistently underestimated the speed with which the Earth is warming and reacting to that warming.

What to do? Create a goal that reflects what we can control: limit the greenhouse gas emissions that we are pumping into the atmosphere. Here is where countries can set real goals, with real policies to attain those goals. Contrary to the timid handwringing of some economists who insist that it is too disruptive to move fast on this issue, just the opposite is true.
The longer we wait, the more disastrous the economic consequences from the resulting climate change to all that sustains us: our farms, our water, our quality of life, and the natural ecosystems that already store so much carbon for us. We have the technology now to create fuel efficient cars, energy efficient homes and industries, and alternative clean energy sources to replace fossil fuels for most uses, all which would ultimately increase our quality of life.

World War II showed just how fast we can move as a society, when our leadership impresses us with the urgency of the situation, and gives us the necessary guidance and encouragement. At the outset of WWII, we didn't set a goal of keeping German occupied territory to some upper limit. Rather, we set the goal of making as many airplanes, tanks, and artillery as possible, and mobilizing quickly as many troops as possible. Similarly, our goal now should be to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as much as we can, as fast as we can, and as economically as we can. Our free online book, "Cool the Earth, Save the Economy", shows in detail how we can address the climate crisis more effectively and much faster than our government has yet to propose.

President Obama could be much more inspirational and truthful about addressing climate change than he has so far. He could have presented himself as a far more effective leader at the G8 conference, for example, if he had noted that we have to agree on an effective timetable to limit emissions, and then proposed a U.S. plan that leads the way for other nations. The sooner he does so, the sooner U.S. economic prospects and social stature will rise among nations. Now that's real beer.

Comments

[Jeff Goldstein - Huffpost Blogger]

Mary Ellen and John-

Here's a post that I think is relevant for the readers, and addresses the basis for the actions that must be taken rapidly. There's also a comment by Jim Hansen-

"Understanding Why Climate Change is Human-Induced"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-goldstein/understanding-why-climate_b_225309.html

[Mary Ellen Harte and John Harte - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks for the post, Jeff, and keep up the good work. We also cover this aspect in our free online book, given above. We hope you can host it at your websites and spread the word about it. President Obama has once again just noted how important education is. Education is the first step towards harnessing the citizenry towards solving this problem.

[DougDeWitt]

Mary Ellen and John,

Please allow me to pitch in to help you out in your quest to eliminate the carbon footprint from the entire power generation industry..­.

We hope to introduce newly developed technology this year, capable of providing utility-scale co-generation of raw (intermittent and unreliable) wind and solar power production. The algorithm we've developed will enable us to store excess renewable output generated in the "fat" times in the form of cryogenic H2 and O2, and then to retrieve that energy using our super-efficient steam generation system to drive conventional steam turbine generator technology.

Our patent-pending system will successfully convert raw renewable to 100% renewable, level-load power. This can be sold to utilities without the need for further conditioning, and with Zero carbon footprint. To our knowledge, we're the first company to achieve such a goal. [e-mail]

[BobLablah]

HuffPost's Pick

India and China will never be dumb enough to limit their CO2 emissions. Time to look for another "solution". How about we all buy some short sleeve shirts?

[Mary Ellen Harte and John Harte - Huffpost Blogger]

Actually, China isn't making short sleeve shirts. Rather, they are now investing heavily in building wind turbines for themselves, and making solar panels (our book notes that their first billionaire made his fortune in solar panels). Their car fuel standards are much higher than ours, as well. We lag BEHIND China in terms of investing in clean energy and energy efficient cars.

[noneIn2008]

One new coal plant per week. One new nuclear plant per month. We lag China in everything. Time to learn Mandarin.