Monday, May 30, 2011

Yarra Valley Climate Action Group & 300 ppm CO2

Yarra Valley Climate Action Group

The Yarra Valley Climate Action Group (YVCAG) is a Climate Action Group of concerned citizens based in the beautiful Yarra Valley in Melbourne, Australia.

The Yarra Valley Climate Action Group (YVCAG) is composed of citizens from various walks of life who are deeply concerned about the threat to Humanity and the Biosphere in general from man-made global warming arising from greenhouse gas pollution.

We attempt through a variety of creative actions to INFORM others about the Climate Emergency and Sustainability Emergency facing the Planet and to suggest sensible, workable and timely SOLUTIONS to fellow citizens, including Government at the Local, State and Federal level.

For further information and to join YVCAG contact Gideon Polya, Secretary (G.M. Polya, Macleod).

We have linked ourselves with a national Australian umbrella association, the Climate Emergency Network (CEN), with which many other Australian Climate Action Groups are now associated.

Our position in relation to the Climate Emergency are those of the Climate Emergency Network (CEN) as set out in CEN News and reproduced below (for further details and very useful links see: http://www.climateemergencynetwork.org/ ) :

Climate Emergency Network (CEN) position on Global Warming, the Climate Emergency and Sustainability Emergency

The Danger We Face

We have examined the latest science (1) and symptoms of global warming. The imminent disintegration of the Arctic ice is an alarming indicator of rapid climate change. Our Earth is already too hot. The danger is now, and accelerating. We are extremely concerned that the current targets in relation to carbon emissions are dangerously inadequate and will expose our world to unacceptable risks. The window of opportunity for effective action is rapidly closing. We need to move at a pace far beyond business and politics as usual.

Our Core Values

We have no right to bargain away the lives of others. Our goal is a safe climate future for all people, all species, and all generations.

What The Global Community Must Do

The Global Community must concurrently halt man-made greenhouse gas emissions, remove excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and actively cool the Earth.

Climate Emergency Network Objectives

  • All levels of all governments across the globe must recognise and work together to fulfil their responsibility to secure a safe climate; it is their moral and legal duty-of-care to their citizens.
  • Underpinned by legislation, governments must lead a large scale transformation of the economy to a post-carbon society.
  • Given the extreme urgency and enormous scale of transformation required, governments must recognise and declare a Climate and Sustainability State of Emergency, whilst respecting basic human rights and freedoms.
  • The community must be engaged in recognising and supporting the Climate Emergency. Therefore, we will work to engage citizens in taking responsibility for recognising and responding to the emergency.

The Climate Emergency Network - Who We Are

The Climate Emergency Network (CEN) is a not-for-profit, non-politically-aligned network of community organisations that are campaigning for all of the above listed objectives.

Climate Emergency Network Members and Supporters

Members of the CEN are groups and organisations who agree with and support this CEN charter. Supporters of the CEN are individuals who agree with and support this CEN charter.

Footnotes

(1) “Climate Code Red: The Case for a Sustainability Emergency”, Spratt and Sutton, 2008; www.climatecodered.net



CONTACT: Yarra Valley Climate Action Group (YVCAG): gpolya@bigpond.com ; Climate Emergency Network (CEN): http://www.climateemergencynetwork.org/ .

YARRA VALLEY CLIMATE ACTION GROUP

Return atmosphere carbon dioxide (CO2) to 300 parts per million (ppm) from current dangerous 392 ppm.

100% renewable energy ASAP (Beyond Zero Emissions’ ZCA 2020 Report costs 100% renewable energy by 2020 for Australia at $370 billion).

Cessation of greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution, population expansion, deforestation & mass species extinction.

Carbon Tax to put proper price on GHG pollution (ETS ineffective).

Please do your bit to help save the Planet & join Yarra Valley Climate Action Group.

Why you should consider joining a Climate Action Group (CAG) e.g. Yarra Valley CAG

Professor James Hansen (top US climate scientist, Head, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies): “We face a climate emergency.

Professor Peter Doherty (Australian Nobel Laureate): “We are in real danger.”

Professor David de Kretser AC (Governor of Victoria): “There is no doubt in my mind that this is the greatest problem confronting mankind at this time and that it has reached the level of a state of emergency.”

Intergenerational equity means we must preserve our Planet for our children and grandchildren.

Joining Yarra Valley CAG means

· solidarity under our big YVCAG Banner at public demonstrations (e.g. Walk Against Warming & Human Sign events)

· e-mail notification about new developments & events

· notification of regular public talks on Climate Change Facts & Solutions sponsored by YVCAG

· as much or as little as you have time for – you can tell your children & grandchildren that you have acted for the future of their Planet.YVCAG meets on the first Monday of each month at the Community Room, Watsonia Library, Ibbotson Street, Watsonia (next to Watsonia Railway Station, Melways Map 20 E4) at 7.30 pm

Cyclones and climate change

Cyclones and man-made climate change.

This is a compendium of recent scientist and science-informed views about the connection between man-made global warming and increased cyclone (hurricane) intensity.

As will become apparent from the quotations below, there have been different views at the cutting edge of research in this area of science (as is normal in science) but a recent international consensus has been established as set out in item #1 (Knutson et al, 2010): “Whether the characteristics of tropical cyclones have changed or will change in a warming climate — and if so, how — has been the subject of considerable investigation, often with conflicting results. Large amplitude fluctuations in the frequency and intensity of tropical cyclones greatly complicate both the detection of long-term trends and their attribution to rising levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases. Trend detection is further impeded by substantial limitations in the availability and quality of global historical records of tropical cyclones. Therefore, it remains uncertain whether past changes in tropical cyclone activity have exceeded the variability expected from natural causes. However, future projections based on theory and high-resolution dynamical models consistently indicate that greenhouse warming will cause the globally averaged intensity of tropical cyclones to shift towards stronger storms, with intensity increases of 2–11% by 2100. Existing modelling studies also consistently project decreases in the globally averaged frequency of tropical cyclones, by 6–34%. Balanced against this, higher resolution modelling studies typically project substantial increases in the frequency of the most intense cyclones, and increases of the order of 20% in the precipitation rate within 100 km of the storm centre. For all cyclone parameters, projected changes for individual basins show large variations between different modelling studies.”


1. Thomas R. Knutson, John L. McBride, Johnny Chan, Kerry Emanuel, Greg Holland, Chris Landsea, Isaac Held, James P. Kossin, A. K. Srivastava & Masato Sugi (from the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory/NOAA, 201 Forrestal Road, Princeton, New Jersey 08542, USA; Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research, Melbourne 3001, Australia; Guy Carpenter Asia-Pacific Climate Impact Centre, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China; Program in Atmospheres, Oceans, and Climate, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 54-1620 MIT, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA; National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA; National Hurricane Center/NWS/NOAA, 11691 SW 17th Street, Miami, Florida 33165, USA; National Climatic Data Center/NOAA, 1225 W Dayton Street, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA; India Meteorological Department, Shivajinagar, Pune 411005, India; and Research Institute for Global Change, JAMSTEC, 3173-25 Showa-machi, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama, 236-0001 Kanagawa, Japan, respectively): “Whether the characteristics of tropical cyclones have changed or will change in a warming climate — and if so, how — has been the subject of considerable investigation, often with conflicting results. Large amplitude fluctuations in the frequency and intensity of tropical cyclones greatly complicate both the detection of long-term trends and their attribution to rising levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases. Trend detection is further impeded by substantial limitations in the availability and quality of global historical records of tropical cyclones. Therefore, it remains uncertain whether past changes in tropical cyclone activity have exceeded the variability expected from natural causes. However, future projections based on theory and high-resolution dynamical models consistently indicate that greenhouse warming will cause the globally averaged intensity of tropical cyclones to shift towards stronger storms, with intensity increases of 2–11% by 2100. Existing modelling studies also consistently project decreases in the globally averaged frequency of tropical cyclones, by 6–34%. Balanced against this, higher resolution modelling studies typically project substantial increases in the frequency of the most intense cyclones, and increases of the order of 20% in the precipitation rate within 100 km of the storm centre. For all cyclone parameters, projected changes for individual basins show large variations between different modelling studies.” [1].


2. Climate change, MSNBC, commenting on Knutson et al (2010) (item #1): “Top researchers now agree that the world is likely to get stronger but fewer hurricanes in the future because of global warming, seeming to settle a scientific debate on the subject. But they say there's not enough evidence yet to tell whether that effect has already begun. Since just before Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana and Mississippi in 2005, dueling scientific papers have clashed about whether global warming is worsening hurricanes and will do so in the future. The new study seems to split the difference. A special World Meteorological Organization panel of 10 experts in both hurricanes and climate change — including leading scientists from both sides — came up with a consensus, which is published online Sunday in the journal Nature Geoscience… The study offers projections for tropical cyclones worldwide by the end of this century, and some experts said the bad news outweighs the good. Overall strength of storms as measured in wind speed would rise by 2 to 11 percent, but there would be between 6 and 34 percent fewer storms in number. Essentially, there would be fewer weak and moderate storms and more of the big damaging ones, which also are projected to be stronger due to warming… An 11 percent increase in wind speed translates to roughly a 60 percent increase in damage… The storms also would carry more rain, another indicator of damage… study suggests category 4 and 5 Atlantic hurricanes — those with winds more than 130 mph — would nearly double by the end of the century.” [2].


3. Greg Holland ( National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado) and Peter Webster (Georgia Institute of Technology)(2007): “We find that long-period variations in tropical cyclone and hurricane frequency over the past century in the North Atlantic Ocean have occurred as three relatively stable regimes separated by sharp transitions. Each regime has seen 50% more cyclones and hurricanes than the previous regime and is associated with a distinct range of sea surface temperatures (SSTs) in the eastern Atlantic Ocean. Overall, there appears to have been a substantial 100-year trend leading to related increases of over 0.7°C in SST and over 100% in tropical cyclone and hurricane numbers. It is concluded that the overall trend in SSTs, and tropical cyclone and hurricane numbers is substantially influenced by greenhouse warming. Superimposed on the evolving tropical cyclone and hurricane climatology is a completely independent oscillation manifested in the proportions of tropical cyclones that become major and minor hurricanes. This characteristic has no distinguishable net trend and appears to be associated with concomitant variations in the proportion of equatorial and higher latitude hurricane developments, perhaps arising from internal oscillations of the climate system. The period of enhanced major hurricane activity during 1945–1964 is consistent with a peak period in major hurricane proportions.” [3].


4. US Today, commenting on Holland and Webster (2007) (item #3) [with a graph of number of North Atlantic hurricanes per year versus time from 1850 to 2007]): “The number of hurricanes that develop each year has more than doubled over the past century, an increase tied to global warming, according to a study released Sunday."We're seeing a quite substantial increase in hurricanes over the last century, very closely related to increases in sea-surface temperatures in the tropical Atlantic Ocean," says study author Greg Holland of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado. Working with hurricane researcher Peter Webster of Georgia Institute of Technology, Holland looked at sea records from 1855 to 2005 in a study published in the British journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A. The researchers found that average hurricane numbers jumped sharply during the 20th century, from 3.5 per year in the first 30 years to 8.4 in the earliest years of the 21st century. Over that time, Atlantic Ocean surface temperatures increased .65 degrees, which experts call a significant increase… The new study drew criticism from experts who dispute the merits of combining data from the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when hurricane-tracking satellites didn't exist, with statistics gleaned from more modern technology.” [4].


5. Dr Andrew Ash (director, CSIRO’s Climate Adaptation Flagship) re climate change, floods and cyclones (2011): “We have had stronger cyclones in history and we have had cyclones just as large in size, but it is rare to get both a very large and intense cyclone. The flooding we have experienced to date on the whole has been within the bounds of historical events though in some areas, such as the Western Downs in Queensland and parts of Victoria, all time records have been broken. While extreme events like flooding and cyclones are an expected feature of La Nina events, the oceans around eastern and northern Australia are particularly warm at present. It is usual for the ocean in the Western Pacific to be warm during a La Nina event but the ocean temperatures are currently the highest on record…[In December 2010 the Southern Oscillation Index, a measure of the extent of La Nina, recorded a level of 27.1... the highest recorded December value in history] … The record warm temperatures are most likely a combination of La Nina and additional warming from human activities. While the flooding events and cyclones experienced this year aren't caused by climate change, the record warm ocean temperatures provide conditions more conducive to exacerbating these naturally occurring events associated with La Nina." [5].


6. Professor Tim Flannery (mammalogist, palaeontologist, environmentalist and 2007 Australian of the Year) re climate change, floods and cyclones (2011): “The individual severe weather events you point to are the kind of thing climate modelling predicts will become more frequent as greenhouse gas concentrations increase.” [5].


7. Australian Bureau of Meteorology (2006) re Tropical cyclones and climate change: “Leading scientists provide an expert view of the current state of knowledge. They note that there has been a high level of interest in the topic and that substantial debate is still occurring within the scientific community. With regard to the recent tropical cyclone seasons they conclude: "No single high impact tropical cyclone event of 2004 and 2005 can be directly attributed to global warming, though there may be an impact on the group as a whole.” Dr Geoff Love, the Australian Director of Meteorology, has submitted to the World Meteorological Organization's Commission for Atmospheric Sciences, meeting in Cape Town, South Africa, a "Statement on Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change". The Statement was prepared by an expert group of scientists comprising Dr John McBride and Dr Jeff Kepert of the Bureau of Meteorology in Australia, Professor Johnny Chan of China, Julian Heming of the UK, and Dr Greg Holland, Professor Kerry Emanuel, Thomas Knutson, Dr Hugh Willoughby and Dr Chris Landsea of the US. The paper reaffirms the finding of a 1998 study saying that any change in the frequency of tropical cyclones (hurricanes/typhoons) due to climate change cannot be determined due to a lack of knowledge and limitations of the available observing technologies. The little evidence that does exist indicates little or no change in global frequency. It also says that while some recent studies have suggested the intensity of tropical cyclones (hurricanes/typhoons) has increased substantially over the past 50 years due to climate change, the scientific community is "deeply divided". Some researchers believe the climate record is too inconsistent to draw such a conclusion due to changes in observations equipment and methods over time. The panel says it cannot come to a definitive conclusion in this "hotly debated area"… No single disaster caused by a tropical cyclone (hurricane/typhoon) in 2004 or 2005 - including Hurricane Katrina in the US - can be directly attributed to global warming. Rather, climate change may have an impact on the group as a whole. Further research is needed.” [6, 7].


8. Dr John McBride and Dr Jeff Kepert ( Bureau of Meteorology in Australia), Professor Johnny Chan (China), Julian Heming (UK), and Dr Greg Holland, Professor Kerry Emanuel, Thomas Knutson, Dr Hugh Willoughby and Dr Chris Landsea (US), “Statement on Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change" (2006): “No single high impact tropical cyclone event of 2004 and 2005 can be directly attributed to global warming, though there may be an impact on the group as a whole; Emanuel (2005) has produced evidence for a substantial increase in the power of tropical cyclones (denoted by the integral of the cube of the maximum winds over time) over the last 50 years. This result is supported by the findings of Webster et al (2005) that there has been a substantial global increase (nearly 100%) in the proportion of the most severe tropical cyclones (category 4 and 5 on the Saffir-Simpson scale), from the period from 1970 to 10995, which has been accompanied by a similar decrease in weaker systems. The research community is deeply divided over whether the results of these studies are due, at least in part, to problems in the tropical cyclone data base. Precisely, the historical record of tropical cyclone tracks and intensities is a product of real-time operations. Thus its accuracy and completeness changes continuously through the record as a result of the continuous changes and improvements in data density and quality, changes in satellite remote sensing retrieval and dissemination, and changes in training. In particular a step-function change in methodologies for determination of satellite intensity occurred with introduction of geosynchronous satellites in the mid to late 1970s. The division of the community on the Webster et al and Emanuel papers is not as to whether Global warming can cause a trend in tropical cyclone intensities. Rather it is on whether such a signal can be can be detected in the historical data base.” [6, 7, 8].


9. Quirin Schiermeier (writer for Nature, cartographer, graduate in geography, statistics and economics from the University of Munich) on global warming and hurricane intensity (2008): “As this year's Atlantic hurricane season becomes ever more violent, scientists have come up with the firmest evidence so far that global warming will significantly increase the intensity of the most extreme storms worldwide. The maximum wind speeds of the strongest tropical cyclones have increased significantly since 1981, according to research published in Nature this week [see #]. And the upward trend, thought to be driven by rising ocean temperatures, is unlikely to stop at any time soon… One of the most contentious issues in the climate-change debate has been whether the strength, number and duration of tropical cyclones will increase in a warmer world. Basic physics and modelling studies do suggest that tropical storms will become more intense, because warmer oceans provide more energy that can be converted into cyclone wind. But others believe that atmospheric changes might have an inhibiting role. Increasing shearing winds - another predicted consequence of global warming - are thought to suppress the cyclonic rotation of the storms, for example… The team statistically analysed satellite-derived data of cyclone wind speeds. Although there was hardly any increase in the average number or intensity of all storms, the team found a significant shift in distribution towards stronger storms that wreak the greatest havoc. This meant that, overall, there were more storms with a maximum wind speed exceeding 210 kilometres per hour (category 4 and 5 storms on the Saffir–Simpson scale). Rising ocean temperatures are thought to be the main cause of the observed shift. The team calculates that a 1 ºC increase in sea-surface temperatures would result in a 31% increase in the global frequency of category 4 and 5 storms per year: from 13 of those storms to 17. Since 1970, the tropical oceans have warmed on average by around 0.5 ºC. Computer models suggest they may warm by a further 2 ºC by 2100.” [9].


10. Elsner, J., Kossin, J. P. & Jagger, T. H. on global warming and increased tropical cyclone intensity (2008): “Atlantic tropical cyclones are getting stronger on average, with a 30-year trend that has been related to an increase in ocean temperatures over the Atlantic Ocean and elsewhere. Over the rest of the tropics, however, possible trends in tropical cyclone intensity are less obvious, owing to the unreliability and incompleteness of the observational record and to a restricted focus, in previous trend analyses, on changes in average intensity. Here we overcome these two limitations by examining trends in the upper quantiles of per-cyclone maximum wind speeds (that is, the maximum intensities that cyclones achieve during their lifetimes), estimated from homogeneous data derived from an archive of satellite records. We find significant upward trends for wind speed quantiles above the 70th percentile, with trends as high as 0.3±0.09ms-1yr-1 (s.e.) for the strongest cyclones. We note separate upward trends in the estimated lifetime-maximum wind speeds of the very strongest tropical cyclones (99th percentile) over each ocean basin, with the largest increase at this quantile occurring over the North Atlantic, although not all basins show statistically significant increases. Our results are qualitatively consistent with the hypothesis that as the seas warm, the ocean has more energy to convert to tropical cyclone wind.” [10].


11. Mark A. Saunders and Adam S. Lea (Benfield UCL Hazard Research Centre, Department of Space and Climate Physics, University College London, Holmbury St Mary, Dorking, Surrey RH5 6NT, UK) on sea surface warming and increased Atlantic hurricane activity (2009): “Atlantic hurricane activity has increased significantly since 1995, but the underlying causes of this increase remain uncertain. It is widely thought that rising Atlantic sea surface temperatures have had a role in this16, 17, but the magnitude of this contribution is not known. Here we quantify this contribution for storms that formed in the tropical North Atlantic, Caribbean Sea and Gulf of Mexico; these regions together account for most of the hurricanes that make landfall in the United States. We show that a statistical model based on two environmental variables—local sea surface temperature and an atmospheric wind field—can replicate a large proportion of the variance in tropical Atlantic hurricane frequency and activity between 1965 and 2005. We then remove the influence of the atmospheric wind field to assess the contribution of sea surface temperature. Our results indicate that the sensitivity of tropical Atlantic hurricane activity to August–September sea surface temperature over the period we consider is such that a 0.5°C increase in sea surface temperature is associated with a ~40% increase in hurricane frequency and activity. The results also indicate that local sea surface warming was responsible for ~40% of the increase in hurricane activity relative to the 1950–2000 average between 1996 and 2005. Our analysis does not identify whether warming induced by greenhouse gases contributed to the increase in hurricane activity, but the ability of climate models to reproduce the observed relationship between hurricanes and sea surface temperature will serve as a useful means of assessing whether they are likely to provide reliable projections of future changes in Atlantic hurricane activity.” [11].

12. Webster, P. J., Holland, G. J., Curry, J. A. & Chang, H.-R. on changes in tropical cyclone number, duration, and intensity in a warming environment (2005): “We examined the number of tropical cyclones and cyclone days as well as tropical cyclone intensity over the past 35 years, in an environment of increasing sea surface temperature. A large increase was seen in the number and proportion of hurricanes reaching categories 4 and 5. The largest increase occurred in the North Pacific, Indian, and Southwest Pacific Oceans, and the smallest percentage increase occurred in the North Atlantic Ocean. These increases have taken place while the number of cyclones and cyclone days has decreased in all basins except the North Atlantic during the past decade… We conclude that global data indicate a 30-year trend toward more frequent and intense hurricanes, corroborated by the results of the recent regional assessment. This trend is not inconsistent with recent climate model simulations that a doubling of CO2 may increase the frequency of the most intense cyclones, although attribution of the 30-year trends to global warming would require a longer global data record and, especially, a deeper understanding of the role of hurricanes in the general circulation of the atmosphere and ocean, even in the present climate state.” [12].

13. Professor Kerry Emanuel (Program in Atmospheres, Oceans, and Climate, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA) on warming and increased cyclone intensity (2005): “Theory and modelling predict that hurricane intensity should increase with increasing global mean temperatures, but work on the detection of trends in hurricane activity has focused mostly on their frequency and shows no trend. Here I define an index of the potential destructiveness of hurricanes based on the total dissipation of power, integrated over the lifetime of the cyclone, and show that this index has increased markedly since the mid-1970s. This trend is due to both longer storm lifetimes and greater storm intensities. I find that the record of net hurricane power dissipation is highly correlated with tropical sea surface temperature, reflecting well-documented climate signals, including multi-decadal oscillations in the North Atlantic and North Pacific, and global warming. My results suggest that future warming may lead to an upward trend in tropical cyclone destructive potential, and—taking into account an increasing coastal population—a substantial increase in hurricane-related losses in the twenty-first century.” [13].


14. Professor Kerry Emanuel, Ragoth Sundararajan, and John Williams (Program in Atmospheres, Oceans, and Climate, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts} on modeling showing cyclone storm intensity generally increases with global warming (2008): “Changes in tropical cyclone activity are among the more potentially consequential results of global climate change, and it is therefore of considerable interest to understand how anthropogenic climate change may affect such storms. Global climate models are currently used to estimate future climate change, but the current generation of models lacks the horizontal resolution necessary to resolve the intense inner core of tropical cyclones. Here we review a new technique for inferring tropical cyclone climatology from the output of global models, extend it to predict genesis climatologies (rather than relying on historical climatology), and apply it to current and future climate states simulated by a suite of global models developed in support of the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report. This new technique attacks the horizontal resolution problem by using a specialized, coupled ocean–atmosphere hurricane model phrased in angular momentum coordinates, which provide a high resolution of the core at low cost. This model is run along each of 2,000 storm tracks generated using an advection-and-beta model, which is, in turn, driven by large-scale winds derived from the global models. In an extension to this method, tracks are initiated by randomly seeding large areas of the tropics with weak vortices and then allowing the intensity model to determine their survival, based on large-scale environmental conditions. We show that this method is largely successful in reproducing the observed seasonal cycle and interannual variability of tropical cyclones in the present climate, and that it is more modestly successful in simulating their spatial distribution. When applied to simulations of global climate with double the present concentration of carbon dioxide, this method predicts substantial changes and geographic shifts in tropical cyclone activity, but with much variation among the global climate models used. Basinwide power dissipation and storm intensity generally increase with global warming, but the results vary from model to model and from basin to basin. Storm frequency decreases in the Southern Hemisphere and north Indian Ocean, increases in the western North Pacific, and is indeterminate elsewhere. We demonstrate that in these simulations, the change in tropical cyclone activity is greatly influenced by the increasing difference between the moist entropy of the boundary layer and that of the middle troposphere as the climate warms.” [14].

15. Professor Ross Garnaut (climate change economist and Australian Federal Government climate change adviser) warning that floods and cyclones like those experienced by Australian in 2011 will get more extreme as global warming increases (2011): “[while climate change cannot be directly blamed for the recent flooding, or for Cyclone Yasi] the greater energy in the atmosphere and the seas can intensify extreme events and I'm afraid that we're feeling some of that today, and we're feeling that at a time when global warming is in its early stages… [re carbon tax and climate change action] "Getting back in the saddle, I would like a result this time… We've taught ourselves that we're capable of making quite a big mess of dealing with this diabolical policy problem, I hope we've learnt something along the way…We haven't played our proportionate part amongst developed countries so far. We've talked about it from time to time, but we haven't done much…It will be quite important for the international effort that Australia ceases to be a drag on the international effort…I'm not talking about us leading the world, I'm talking about our catching up." [15].

16. Parliament of Australia, Parliamentary Library (that provides carefully researched infomation to members of the Australian Federal Parliament) : “Are extreme weather events—severe storms, flooding, droughts, heat waves or extremely violent cyclones—becoming more common? The answer appears to be 'yes'. Trends towards more powerful storms and hotter, longer dry periods have been observed, according to the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report, and this trend is projected to continue.” [16].

17. Professor John Holdren (Professor of Environmental Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University; Director of the Woods Hole Research Center; recent Chairman of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and President Obama’s chief scientific adviser) on climatic disruption (2008): “Harm is already occurring (continued). (Figure) Total power released by tropical cyclones (green: Annual mean HADISST 30S-30N) has increased (circa 2-fold 1990-2003) along with sea surface temperatures (blue: West Pac + East Pac + Atlantic); Kerry Emanuel, MIT, 2006”. [17].

18. Professor Vicky Pope (head of climate change advice at the Met Office, UK) explains how a warmer world is a wetter world (2011): "As the average global temperature increases one would expect the moisture content of the atmosphere to rise, due to more evaporation from the sea surface. For every 1C sea surface temperature rise, atmospheric moisture over the oceans increases by 6-8%. Also in general, as more energy and moisture is put into the atmosphere [by warming], the likelihood of storms, hurricanes and tornadoes increases." [18].

19. Dr Andrew Glikson (former Principal Research Scientist, Australian Geological Survey Organization, Earth and paleoclimate scientist. School of Archaeology and Anthropology, Research School of Earth Science, Planetary Science Institute, Australian National University) on Queensland floods [noting according to the report, that climate scientists were careful never to point to a single event as evidence of climate change but to examine medium and long-term trends] : “'Cyclones have increased twofold over the past 20 years. Floods have increased threefold. It's happening now, and it's happening faster than some of the climate-change scientists have dared to predict” [19].

20. William Cosgrove (vice president, World Water Council), 3rd World Water Forum, 2003: "Extreme weather records are [already] being broken every year and the resulting hydro-meteorological disasters claim thousands of lives and disrupt national economies," said of the Marseille-based think tank made up of users and suppliers of water for social and economic development. The big problem is that most countries aren't ready to deal adequately with the severe natural disasters that we get now, a situation that will become much worse as storms and droughts become more pervasive. Ignoring the problem is no longer an option… The increasing incidence of extreme events provides a convincing argument to continue looking into building partnerships between science, water managers and the disaster preparedness communities, including the development and dissemination of capacity development packages and methodologies. It is telling that disaster reduction has been recognized since 2000 an issue central to poverty reduction. ” [20, 21].

21. World Water Council press release from the 3rd World Water Forum re climate change, droughts and floods (February 2003): “Economic loses from weather and flood catastrophes have increased ten-fold over the past 50 years, partially the result of rapid climate changes, the World Water Council (WWC) says. These rapid climate changes are seen in more intense rainy seasons, longer dry seasons, stronger storms, shifts in rainfall and rising sea levels,. More disastrous floods and droughts have been the most visible manifestations of these changes. From 1971 to 1995, floods affected more than 1.5 billion people worldwide, or 100 million people per year, according to experts. This total includes 318,000 killed, and more than 81 million left homeless. Major floods that left at least 1,000 people dead and caused $1 billion in damages per episode have been the most destructive… According to climate experts, the expected climatic change during the 21st century will further intensify the hydrological cycle – with rainy seasons becoming shorter and more intense in some regions, while droughts in other areas will grow longer in duration, which could endanger species and crops and lead to drops in food production globally. Evidence for the link between climate change and increasing climate variability is mounting rapidly. For example, scientific research has linked the recent droughts in the USA and Afghanistan to the effects of global warming… These climate disasters stemming from climate variability include: Floods [and Droughts] - Based on data for ther period 1950 to 1998, the number of major flood disasters has grown considerably world-wide from decade to decade – six cases in the 1950s, seven in the 1960s, eight in the 1970s, 18 in the 1980s, and 26 in the 1990s. The number of significant flood disasters in the 1990s was higher than in the three previous decades combined. Overall, global precipitation is estimated to have increased by about two percent since 1900, though not on a uniform basis. This disparity in new rainfall caused some places to become wetter and others to get drier, such as North Africa south of the Sahara. In the most calamitous storm surge, the flood in Bangladesh in April 1991 killed 141,000 people. Two floods in China, one in 1996 and the second in 1998, caused the highest material losses of the decade, of the order of $30 billion and $26.5 billion, respectively. Floods also destroy the hard-won economic advances that many in the developing world have accomplished, such as the Mozambique floods of 2000, which left nearly 1 million homeless, and Hurricane Mitch in Central America [1998]. Comparing the economic impacts of the 2000 flood in Mozambique with the 2002 flood in Central Europe clearly illustrates the disparity in how national economies are impacted by extreme events. The cost of damages reflects the income levels of the countries. According to officials at the World Bank, the Mozambique flood resulted in a 45 percent drop in GDP in 2000, whereas in Germany, the 2002 flood is estimated to have caused less than a one percent drop in GDP…Hurricane Mitch [1998] killed 11,000 people, with thousands of others missing. More than 3 million people were either homeless or severely affected. In this extremely poor regions, estimates of the total damage from the storm surpassed $5 billion. The President of Honduras, Carlos Flores Facusse, claimed the storm destroyed 50 years of progress. As far as the geographic distribution of the worst floods, the majority occurred in Asian countries … In addition, the impact of floods has had increasingly detrimental and disruptive effects on human health. In flooded areas, some diseases such as diarrhea, which kills 2.2 million children under th4 age of five per year, or leptospirosis (a systemic infection that can lead to meningitis and hemorrhagic jaundice) spread more rapidly… Many countries in Africa have been suffering from unprecedented droughts that may signal widespread climate change … Sea level rise is a concern in coastal and low-lying areas, including small islands. In addition to coastal flooding, saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers present a threat to water supplies. The average global sea level rise from 1900 to the year 2100 is expected to be 0.48 meters (19 inches), between twice and four times the rate of rise over the 20th century. The main effect on humans will be to confront extreme events such as storm surges. Areas of greatest danger include Small islands in the Pacific, mainly the Atolls; Coastal low-lying countries like Bangladesh and the Netherlands; Coastal mega-cities like Tokyo, Lagos, Buenos Aires and New York.” [20, 21].

22. Global Greenhouse Warming.com on climate and floods: "Meteorologic floods are by far the most common of the types of floods in the human experience, affecting parts of the globe every year. Such floods can bring good, such as the fertile soils formerly brought to the Nile Delta by annual flooding. However, large floods are mostly known for their catastrophic loss of life and property, such as in China and Bangladesh which repeatedly devastated by floods - Bangladesh lost 300,000 people in November 1970 and more than 130,000 in April 1991, from cyclone-induced flooding, and the massive flooding of the Yangtze River in China in 1931 caused more than 3 million deaths with a further 2 million in 1959 from flooding and starvation. …By 2025, half the world's population will be living in areas that are at risk from storms and other weather extremes," the World Water Council said, citing evidence gathered by U.N. and other experts. The economic cost of changes in climate and floods will be huge, especially for poor countries that are likely to bear the brunt of these events. The phrase Climate and Floods is something we will hear more of in the years ahead.”[22].

23. Dr James Hansen in “Storms of My Grandchildren” (2010): “Global warming does increase the intensity of droughts and heat waves, and thus the area of forest fires. However, because a warmer atmosphere holds more water vapour, global warming must also increase the intensity of the other extreme of the hydrological cycle – meaning heavier rains, more extreme floods, and more intense storms driven by latent heat, including thunderstorms, tornadoes, and tropical storms. I realized that I should have emphasized more strongly [in his 1988 testimony to a US Senate Committee] that both extremes increase with global warming.” [23].

24. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), 2006 (founded in 1848, AAAS serves some 262 affiliated societies and academies of science, serving 10 million individuals; the AAAS journal Science has the largest paid circulation of any peer-reviewed general science journal in the world, with an estimated total readership of 1 million): “The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society. Accumulating data from across the globe reveal a wide array of effects: rapidly melting glaciers, destabilization of major ice sheets, increases in extreme weather, rising sea level, shifts in species ranges, and more. The pace of change and the evidence of harm have increased markedly over the last five years. The time to control greenhouse gas emissions is now… In addition to rapidly reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it is essential that we develop strategies to adapt to ongoing changes and make communities more resilient to future changes. The growing torrent of information presents a clear message: we are already experiencing global climate change. It is time to muster the political will for concerted action. Stronger leadership at all levels is needed. The time is now. We must rise to the challenge. We owe this to future generations.” [24].

25. Senator Christine Milne (Australian Greens deputy leader; Tasmanian Greens senator) on man-made climate change and Cyclone Yasi (2011): “This is a tragedy, but it is a tragedy of climate change. The scientists have been saying that we are going to experience more extreme weather events, that their intensity is going to increase, their frequency.” [25]



References.


[1]. Thomas R. Knutson, John L. McBride, Johnny Chan, Kerry Emanuel, Greg Holland, Chris Landsea, Isaac Held, James P. Kossin, A. K. Srivastava & Masato Sugi, “Tropical cyclones and climate change”, Nature Geosciences, 3, 157 - 163 (2010): http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v3/n3/abs/ngeo779.html .

[2]. Climate change, MSNBC, “Study: stronger hurricanes loom. Fewer expected but bigger storms to bring more damage”, commenting on Knutson et al (2010), Climate change, MSNBC, 21 February 2010: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35506750/ns/us_news-environment/ .

[3]. Greg Holland and Peter Webster, “Heightened tropical cyclone activity in the North Atlantic: natural variability or climate trend?”, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, vol. 365, no. 1860. pp 2695-2716, 2007: http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/365/1860/2695.short .

[4]. US Today, “Study links more hurricanes, climate change”, 30 July 2007: http://www.usatoday.com/weather/hurricane/2007-07-29-more-hurricanes_N.htm .

[5]. Matt Granfield, “Coincidence or climate change?’, ABC Drum Unleashed, 3 February 2011: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/43560.html .

[6]. Australian Bureau of Meteorology, “Tropical cyclones and climate change”, media release, 20 February 2006: http://www.bom.gov.au/announcements/media_releases/ho/20060220.shtml .

[7]. Dr John McBride and Dr Jeff Kepert ( Bureau of Meteorology in Australia), Professor Johnny Chan (China), Julian Heming (UK), and Dr Greg Holland, Professor Kerry Emanuel, Thomas Knutson, Dr Hugh Willoughby and Dr Chris Landsea (US), “Statement on Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change", submitted to the World Meteorological Organization's Commission for Atmospheric Sciences, meeting in Cape Town, South Africa by Dr Geoff Love ( Australian Director of Meteorology), 2006: http://www.bom.gov.au/info/CAS-statement.pdf .

[8]. Tropical cyclone, subsection Global warming, Wikipedia: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:41B86CUK98wJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_cyclone+%22tropical+cyclones+and+climate+change%22&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au&source=www.google.com.au .

[9]. Quirin Schiermieier, “Hurricanes are getting fiercer. Global warming blamed for growth in storm intensity”, Nature News, 3 September 2008: http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080903/full/news.2008.1079.html .

[10]. Elsner, J., Kossin, J. P. & Jagger, T. H., “The increasing intensity of the strongest tropical cyclones”, Nature 445, 92–95 (2008): http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v455/n7209/full/nature07234.html .

[11]. Mark A. Saunders and Adam S. Lea, “Large contribution of sea surface warming to recent increase in Atlantic hurricane activity”, Nature, vol 451, pp 557-560, 2008: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7178/full/nature06422.html .

[12]. Webster, P. J., Holland, G. J., Curry, J. A. & Chang, H.-R., “Changes in tropical cyclone number, duration, and intensity in a warming environment. ” Science 309, 1844–1846 (2005): http://www.sciencemag.org/content/309/5742/1844.full .

[13] Kerry Emanuel, “Increasing destructiveness of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years”. Nature vol. 436, pp686-688, 2005: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v436/n7051/abs/nature03906.html .

[14]. Kerry Emanuel, Ragoth Sundararajan, and John Williams, “Hurricanes and Global Warming: Results from Downscaling IPCC AR4 Simulations”, Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., vol. 89, pp347–367, 2008: http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/BAMS-89-3-347 .

[15]. Professor Ross Garnaut quoited in “Cyclones, floods to get worse as warming increases: Garnaut”, ABC News, 3 February 2011: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/03/3129424.htm .

[16]. Parliament of Australia, Parliamentary Library, “More extreme weather”: http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/ClimateChange/theClimate/moreExtreme.htm .

[17]. Dr John Holdren (2008), “The Science of Climatic Disruption” (power point lecture): http://www.usclimateaction.org/userfiles/JohnHoldren.pdf .

[18]. Vicky Pope, quoted in Damien Carrington, “”Australian floods: La Nina to blame”, Guardian, 11 January 2011: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jan/11/australia-floods-la-nina .

[19]. Karen Kissane, “Disaster expert urges a retreat from the coast”, The Age, 15 January 2011: http://www.theage.com.au/national/disaster-expert-urges-a-retreat-from-the-coast-20110114-19rcg.html .

[20]. World Water Council 3rd World Water Forum, Press release, 27 February 2003: http://www.worldwatercouncil.org/fileadmin/wwc/News/WWC_News/News_2003/PR_climate_27.02.03.pdf .

[21]. “Climate change boosting floods, drought: experts”, News in Science, 3 March 2003: http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s796319.htm .

[22]. Global Greenhouse Warming.com, “Climate and floods” (2003): http://www.global-greenhouse-warming.com/climate-and-floods.html .

[23]. James Hansen, “Storms of My Grandchildren. The truth about the coming climate catastrophe and our last chance to save humanity”, Bloomsbury, London, 2009, pxv.

[24]. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), AAAS Resolution: Statement on Climate Change”, 2006: http://archives.aaas.org/docs/resolutions.php?doc_id=447 .

[25]. “TC Yasi caused by climate change: Greens”, ABC News, 1 February 2011: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/01/3127184.htm .

Australian carbon burning-related deaths and carbon burning subsidies => minimum Carbon Price of A$554 per tonne carbon

How many Australians die each year from the effects of pollutants from vehicles, coal burning for electricity and other carbon burning? Answer: about 2,200, 4,600 and 2,800, respectively. At a "value of a statistical life" (VOSL) of $7.6 million per person ($73 billion pa for Australian carbon burning-related deaths) and $9 billion pa in fossil fuel subsidies, the minimum Carbon Price to cover carbon burning-derived deaths and carbon burning subsidies is $554 per tonne of carbon as compared to the best political offer yet of $20 per tonne of carbon.

G.W. Fisher et al.in a report to the New Zealand Government (2002) : “The most likely estimate of the number of people above 30 years of age who experience premature mortality in New Zealand due to exposure to emissions of PM10 particulates from vehicles is 399 per year (with a 95% confidence range of 241-566 people) . This compares to 970 people above age 30 experiencing pre-mature mortality due to particulate pollution from all sources (including burning for home heating), and with 502 people dying from road accidents (all ages).” [1].

This data is from 2001. The New Zealand population in 2001 was 3.9 million; the Australian population was 21.5 million in 2010. [2].

Assuming identical demographics and other circumstances, then the Australian over-30 deaths from PM10 particulates from vehicles (2010) = 399 x 21.5/3.9 = 2,200.

Paul Gipes on Ontario coal burning-based deaths (2005): “Ontario's ruling party swept to power in the fall of 2003 on a series of promises. One of the most far reaching was its proposal to close the provinces coal-fired power plants by 2007. They argued that it was necessary to close the plants to protect the health of Ontario residents who lived downwind. Critics, notably in North America's fossil-fuel industry, have labeled this unrealistic if not foolhardy. Ontario generates nearly 27 TWh per year from 6,450 MW of coal-fired power plants, almost one-fifth of total provincial generation… Despite these and other limitations, the study provides sufficient economic grounds for the province to close the coal plants because of the plants' excessive environmental and social costs. Coal plants kill 668 people per year in Ontario, says the report, and cause 1,100 emergency room visits, and more than 300,000 minor illnesses per year. These and previous findings by the Ontario Medical Association were the rationale used by Ontario's ruling party in arriving at its campaign promise.” [3, 4].

Accordingly deaths from coal burning-based power generation in New Zealand 2001 were 668 x 2.28 TWh/ 27 TWh = 56.4 or about 56.

New Zealand non-coal, non-vehicle pollutant deaths in 2001 = 970 – 56.4 (coal-fired power) – 399 (vehicle exhaust) = 514.6 i.e. about 515 deaths.

Accordingly, from New Zealand data one can estimate that Australian over 30 deaths from PM10 particulates other than from vehicles and coal-fired power stations = 514.6 x 21.5/3.9 = 2,837.

Based on Treasury estimates “In 2010 when the RET begins, and a year before the emissions trading scheme, black (140.7 TWh) and brown (45.6 TWh) coal make up most [186.3 TWh or 73.1%] of Australia’s electricity (overall 254.9 TWh)”. [7].

We can accordingly estimate Australian deaths from coal in 2010 = 668 x 186.3 TWh/ 27 TWh = 4609 deaths.

In summary, from Canadian and New Zealand epidemiological data one can estimate that currently deaths from pollutants from the burning of carbonaceous materials currently totals 9,646 or about 10,000 annually, the breakdown being 4,600 (coal–fired power stations), 2,200 (vehicle particulate emissions) and 2,800 (particulates from other burning).

In 2008 the US EPA estimated that the risk avoidance-based value of a “statistical human life” was US$6.9 million, then about A$10 million [8].

According to Peter Abelson of Macquarie University in a detailed review (2002): “Many studies of the value of a statistical life have now been carried out, mainly using wage-risk or CV approaches, though apparently only one substantive study for Australia. The average VOSL [value of a statistical life] to emerge from these studies is in the order of A$3.5 to A$4.0 million. However, some recent reviews suggest that these results might be on the high side.” [9].

Peter Abelson (2007) wrote that “In Australia we spend about one-sixth of GDP to protect life and health in one way or the other”. Australia has a population of 22 million and a GDP of $1,000 billion and accordingly we could estimate the “value of a statistical life” as $1,000 billion / (22 million persons x 6) = A$7.6 million. [10].

Accordingly we can see that there is a “hidden subsidy” of fossil fuel and biomass burning in Australia = 9,646 persons x $7.6 million/person = $73 billion annually.

However there is a legislated annual subsidy of about $9 billion for fossil fuel burning in Australia. Thus there is a total of $73 billion + $9 billion = $82 billion pa in legislated and “hidden” subsidies for fossil fuel and biomass burning in Australia. [11, 12].

There is currently considerable speculation about a carbon price for Australia and the pro-environment Australian Greens have suggested an interim price of $20 per tonne of carbon. [13].

What is a minimum Australian carbon price required to cover the cost of carbon burning subsidies and carbon burning-based deaths? Australia’s annual greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution is 542 million tonnes CO2-equivalent or 542 x 12/44 = 148 million tonnes carbon (C). Accordingly, this minimum price on carbon should be $82 billion / 148 million tonnes C = $554 per tonne carbon, 28 times higher than the best interim figure suggested so far by a major Australian political party.

References.

[1]. G.W. Fisher et al., “Health effects due to moor vehicle pollution in New Zealand”, Report to NZ Government, 20 January 2002: http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/health-effects-of-vehicle-emissions.pdf .

[2]. UN Population Division, 2008 revision: http://esa.un.org/unpp/index.asp?panel=1 ) .

[3]. Paul Gipe, “Ontario study identifies social costs of coal-fired power plants”, EV World, : http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=8836 .

[4]. DSS Management Consultants Inc. and RWDI Air Inc., for the Ontario Ministry of Energy, "Cost Benefit Analysis: Replacing Ontario's Coal-Fired Electricity Generation" by April, 2005, 93 pages:
http://www.energy.gov.on.ca/english/pdf/electricity/coal_cost_benefit_analysis_april2005.pdf .

[5]. US Energy Information Administration: http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/IEDIndex3.cfm?tid=2&pid=2&aid=12 .

[6]. “Electricity production from coal sources (% of total) in New Zealand”, Trading Economics, 2008: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/electricity-production-from-coal-sources-percent-of-total-wb-data.html .

[7]. “A long life for coal”, The Age On-line, National Times, 2 November 209: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/blogs/greenlines/a-long-life-for-coal/20091102-htbb.html .

[8]. AP, MSNBC, “How to value a life? EPA devalues its estimate”, MSNBC, 10 July 2008: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25626294/ns/us_news-environment/ .

[9]. Peter Abelson, “The value of life and health for public policy”, Applied Economics, 2002: http://www.appliedeconomics.com.au/pubs/papers/pa03_health.htm .

[10]. Peter Abelson (2007), “Establishing a monetary value for lives saved: issues and controversies”, 2007.

[11]. Chris Riedy, "Energy and transport subsidies in Australia”, Institute for Sustainable Futures, UTS, 2007: http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/australia/resources/reports/climate-change/energy-and-transport-subsidies.pdf .

[12]. "Energy and transport subsides in Australia”, Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_and_transport_subsidies_in_Australia .

[13]. “Greens propose interim carbon price”, ABC News, 21 January 2010: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/01/21/2797559.htm .

[14]. March quarter, 2010, Australian National Greenhouse Accounts: http://www.climatechange.gov.au/climate-change/emissions/~/media/publications/greenhouse-acctg/national-greenhouse-inventory-march-2010.ashx .

Deaths from carbon burning

How Many People Die from Carbon Burning and Climate Change Each Year?

How many people die from Carbon Burning and Climate Change each year?

This Fact Sheet summarizes estimations of how many people die from (A) Carbon Burning and (B) Climate Change each year.

By way of introduction, we can ask the question: how many Australians die each year from the effects of pollutants from vehicles, coal burning for electricity and other carbon burning? Answer: about 2,200, 4,600 and 2,800, respectively. At a "value of a statistical life" (VOSL) of $7.6 million per person ($73 billion pa for Australian carbon burning-related deaths) and $9 billion pa in fossil fuel subsidies, the minimum Carbon Price to cover carbon burning-derived deaths and carbon burning subsidies is $554 per tonne of carbon as compared to the best political offer yet of $20 per tonne of carbon (for this updated assessment see “2011. Australian carbon burninng-related deaths and carbon burning subsidies => Carbon Price of $554 per tonne carbon” c/- Yarra Valley Climate Action Group: https://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/2011-carbon-burning ).

(A) Annual Carbon Burning Deaths

1. Air pollution deaths. In the US, poor air quality is estimated to cause tens of thousands of deaths and cost more than $100 billion annually. Globally, air pollution contributes to the deaths of more than 800,000 people per year, most in the developing world (see: http://www.ogcnetwork.net/node/349 ).

2. International comparisons of fossil fuel-based power pollution deaths. “Annual coal-based electricity deaths” [“total annual fossil fuel-based electricity deaths”] from pollutants (carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulates, volatile organics and heavy metals, notably mercury) are 170,000 [283,000] (the World), 11,000 [13,000] (India), 47,000 [47,500] (China), 49,000 [72,000] (the US), 3,400 [6,900] (the UK), 4,900 [5,400] (Australia) and 2,700 [3,800](Canada) as compared to 110 [360] (heavily renewable-based New Zealand) (see: http://green-blog.org/2008/06/14/pollutants-from-coal-based-electricity-generation-kill-170000-people-annually/ ; http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=8836 ).

3. Fossil fuel-powered transport deaths. While alternative, high-safety, high-efficiency and 100% renewable energy public transport is feasible (see Martin Mahy, “Hydrogen Minibuses”, in “Lies, Deep Fries & Statistics” (edited by Robyn Williams, ABC Books, Sydney, 2007; pp250-256), land transport is dominated by fossil fuel-powered vehicles. According to WHO “An estimated 1.26 million men, women and children were killed around the world in the first year of the 21st century - not by wars or diseases or natural disasters, but by and in traffic accidents” (see: http://www.paho.org/English/DD/PIN/whd04_features.htm ) .


It can be proportionately estimated from New Zealand data that about 2,000 Australians die from the effects of vehicle exhaust pollutants each year - in addition to the 5,000 who die from fossil fuel burning pollutants from power stations - and that 3,000 further Australians die from other fossil fuel combustion (e.g. domestic and industrial burning for heat) (see:

http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/health-effects-of-vehicle-emissions.pdf )..

4. Smoking-related deaths. Smoking of tobacco cigarettes is a highly significant carbon burning component that is associated with more than 5 million deaths worldwide each year (440,000 in the US alone) (see: http://www.who.int/tobacco/mpower/mpower_report_tobacco_crisis_2008.pdf ).

(B) Annual Climate Change-related Deaths

Avoidable mortality (excess mortality, avoidable death, excess death) in a global context can be defined as the difference between actual deaths in a country and deaths expected for a peaceful, decently governed country with the same demographics. Annual avoidable mortality (essentially from deprivation and deprivation-exacerbated disease) by this conservative, macro-scale definition is essentially zero in advanced countries but totals 14.8 million for the non-European World out of the world total of 16.0 million (2003 data; “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950”, G.M. Polya, Melbourne, 2007: http://globalbodycount.blogspot.com/ ).

1. Climate change already impacts global avoidable mortality. Climate change is already significantly contributing to the 16 million annual avoidable deaths world-wide according to UN and FAO. Thus on 12 December 2007, Bali, expressing their “deepest concern”, three Rome-based UN Agencies – FAO, the World Food Programme and the International Fund for Agricultural Development – warned that climate change is a major challenge to world food security and will increase hunger and malnutrition unless immediate action is taken. (see: http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2007/1000731/index.html )

2. Malnourished face immediate climate change risks. There are about 0.9 billion malnourished people in the world who face immediate risks from climate change impacts on agricultural production (see World Food Program: http://www.wfp.org/english/?ModuleID=137&Key=2721 ).

3. Climate change deaths and refugees from sea level rise and storm surges. a third of Bangladesh's coastline could be flooded if the sea rises one meter in the next 50 years, creating an additional 20 million Bangladeshis displaced from their homes and farms; about 10 million people are already threatened by annual floods and storms damaging riverine and coastal islands (see: http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSDHA23447920080414 ). In 2008 alone Cyclone Nargis killed at least 130,000 in Myanmar and left over 1 million homeless (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclone_Nargis ). Mega-delta countries around the world are acutely threatened (see: http://janeaustenand.blogspot.com/ ). NASA’s Dr James Hansen (2007): “As an example, let us say that ice sheet melting adds 1 centimetre to sea level for the decade 2005 to 2015, and that this doubles each decade until the West Antarctic ice sheet is largely depleted. This would yield a rise in sea level of more than 5 metres by 2095 … in my opinion, if the world warms by 2 °C to 3 °C, such massive sea level rise is inevitable, and a substantial fraction of the rise would occur within a century” (see: http://environment.newscientist.com/article/mg19526141.600 ).

4. Biofuel diversion and food price increases (compounded by global warming) threaten billions. UK Government Chief Scientific Adviser Professor John Beddington FRS has said that the biofuel diversion impact on global food prices “threatens billions” and that substitution of rain forests for biofuel production is “insane” (see: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23336840-11949,00.html ). The legislatively mandated US, UK and EU diversion of food for fuel has contributed to 2-3 fold increases in grain prices in the last year (together with global warming effects, globalization, oil prices, grain diversion for meat, and speculation) and crop-derived biofuel is actually an enormous net CO2 polluter (see: http://globalavoidablemortality.blogspot.com/ ). There are already 67 million refugees and internally displaced persons who need to be fed (see: http://www.unhcr.org/statistics/STATISTICS/4852366f2.pdf ).

5. Over 6 billion may perish this century due to global warming (Dr James Lovelock FRS). Top UK and World climate scientist Dr James Lovelock FRS has warned that climate change may already be irreversible and that over 6 billion may perish this century due to unaddressed climate change (see: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/16956300/the_prophet_of_climate_change_james_lovelock ; http://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/Home ).

Beyond Zero Emissions (BZE) ZCA2020 plan

Beyond Zero Emissions (BZE) ZCA2020 Plan

100% Renewable Stationary Energy for Australia by 2020

BZE has 20 volunteer engineers plus numerous volunteer supporters (presenters, office, IT, design): “Our goal is to facilitate the implementation of the social changes and technologies that will reduce the impacts of climate change and give our society and global ecosystems a chance of surviving into the future.”

BZE launched the ZCA2020 Plan in 2010 in conjunction with the University of Melbourne Energy Institute. It has received wide scientific, academic and business support and some tripartisan commendation (Bob Carr, Malcolm Turnbull, Greens Senator Scott Ludlam).

Google BZE for free download of the ZCA2020 Report or the much shorter ZCA2020 Synopsis. You can buy hard copies of the ZCA2020 Report from the University of Melbourne Energy Institute.

BZE is currently working on further Reports in relation to Transport, Agriculture and Land Use, Buildings and Industry.

Key features of the ZCA2020 Plan

A. Why Australia must get to zero CO2 emissions by 2020.

Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber CBE (Potsdam Institute, Germany) says that for a 67% chance of avoiding a disastrous 2 degree C temperature rise (EU policy), the world must cease carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2050 (not good odds: would you board a plane that had a 33% chance of crashing?). If we accept that “all men are created equal” then we must have equal shares in polluting the atmosphere until 2050. This means that high annual per capita CO2 polluters such as the US and Australia must cease by 2020 whereas India and Burkina Faso can actually increase CO2 pollution before finally ceasing in 2050.

Greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution largely involves CO2 but also includes other GHGs such as methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O) and man-made chorofluorohydrocarbons (CFCs), the total GHG pollution being measured as CO2-equivalent (CO2-e). “Annual per capita greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution” in units of “tonnes CO2-equivalent per person per year” (2005-2008 data) is 0.9 (Bangladesh), 0.9 (Pakistan), 2.2 (India), less than 3 (many African and Island countries), 3.2 (the Developing World), 5.5 (China), 6.7 (the World), 11 (Europe), 16 (the Developed World), 27 (the US) and 30 (Australia; or 54 if Australia’s huge Exported CO2 pollution is included) (Google “Climate Genocide”).

B. ZCA2020 Plan: 60% Concentrated Solar Thermal with molten salts energy storage, 40% Wind plus HVAC/HVDC grid & biomass and hydroelectric backup.

1. BZE deliberately chose 2 established, commercial, renewable technologies, specifically Concentrated Solar Thermal (CST) with molten salts energy storage and Wind turbines (that are being widely applied commercially already) in order to establish a “proof of principle” i.e. we can achieve 100% renewable energy by 2020 for Australia using existing commercially-applied technologies.

2. CST with molten salts energy storage involves a Power Tower surrounded by a field of mirrors (heliostats) that concentrate the solar radiation at the top of the Power Tower where it heats molten salts (potassium and sodium nitrate, melting point 220C) from a “cold” tank (290C) to 565C, this heated solution being stored in a “hot” tank. The heat is used to generate steam which drives a turbine and thence generates electricity. Molten salts storage means that the system can operate 24/7. Such systems are already supplying commercial power in the US and Spain. Nineteen (19) 220MW (million watt) modules will form each of twelve (12) 3,500 MW solar regions (42,000 MW capacity in total; capacity factor 75%)

3. Wind turbines would be used in 23 regions for a total of 6,400 turbines (28,000 MW; capacity factor 30%).

4. High voltage direct current (HVDC) and high voltage alternating current (HVAC) links would make up an efficient national grid.

5. Extensive modeling based on real meteorological data shows that in this system solar energy would supplement available wind energy to achieve required power. Biomass and hydrolelectric backup would be available for those rare occasions of low wind and low sunshine.

6. $370 billion cost over 10 years. Australia has the steel, concrete and labor resources to enable implementation and there would be 40,000 ongoing new jobs in maintenance and operations of the system (peak construction labor force 75,000).

7. Increased energy efficiency (e.g. in transport, buildings, heating and cooling) is a key part of the scheme. Indeed the power capacity would increase by 40% (from 50,000 MW now to 70,000 MW under ZCA2020) to enable electrified transport.

NB. This is just the beginning. Top scientists say that we must urgently reduce atmospheric CO2 concentration from the current 392 parts per million (ppm) to 300 ppm for a safe planet for all peoples and all species (e.g. by biochar production, re-afforestation and ceasing livestock GHG pollution) (Google 300.org).

Expert views on climate emergency

CLIMATE EMERGENCY: What Top World Scientific Experts Say

We are familiar with the notion of getting an expert second opinion when an expert medical specialist has diagnosed life threatening circumstances. However a second opinion that is a bit more optimistic simply decreases the perceived odds of death somewhat and the dire prediction remains. Leading world climate experts offer the EXPERT DIAGNOSIS that the World faces a life-threatening Climate Emergency requiring urgent action to STOP carbon pollution and indeed to REDUCE existing atmosphere greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution. However inexpert, non-scientist politicians and corporate spokespersons with vested interests in fossil fuel burning and their inexpert climate sceptic supporters are merely expressing inexpert partisan opinions that would be seen as dishonest and dangerously irresponsible in the context of expert medical specialist diagnosis of life threatening circumstances.

Below are some recent, Web-documented, expert opinions of outstanding, world-leading climate change experts and other eminent scientific experts and top scientific organizations with expertise to make authoritative comments about the Climate Emergency and related matters. Links to articles about these outstanding persons are variously given for your convenience. Key quotes are in bold and are presented in a wider educative context. 1. Dr James Hansen (top US climate scientist; Director, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies; member of the prestigious US National Academy of Sciences; 2007 Award for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility of the prestigious American Association for the Advancement of Science; see: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/ ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen ; for 1880-present NASA GISS Global Temperature graphed data see: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ and http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/ ): (a) With 8 UK, French and US climate change scientist co-authors (2008): “Paleoclimate data show that climate sensitivity is ~3 deg-C for doubled CO2 [carbon dioxide; atmospheric CO2 280 ppm pre-industrial], including only fast feedback processes. Equilibrium sensitivity, including slower surface albedo feedbacks, is ~6 deg-C for doubled CO2 for the range of climate states between glacial conditions and ice-free Antarctica. Decreasing CO2 was the main cause of a cooling trend that began 50 million years ago, large scale glaciation occurring when CO2 fell to 450 +/- 100 ppm [parts per million], a level that will be exceeded within decades, barring prompt policy changes. If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO2 forcings. An initial 350 ppm CO2 target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO2 is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon. If the present overshoot of this target CO2 is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects” (see: http://arxiv.org/abs/0804.1126 ). (b) In relation to the recent book “Climate Code Red. The case for emergency action” by David Spratt and Philip Sutton (Scribe, Melbourne, 2008; see: http://www.climatecodered.net/ ): “A compelling case … we face a climate emergency.

(c) 2007 (Hansen, J., Mki. Sato, P. Kharecha, G. Russell, D.W. Lea, and M. Siddall, 2007: Climate change and trace gases. Phil. Trans. Royal. Soc. A, 365, 1925-1954): “Paleoclimate data show that the Earth's climate is remarkably sensitive to global forcings. Positive feedbacks predominate. This allows the entire planet to be whipsawed between climate states. One feedback, the "albedo flip" property of water substance, provides a powerful trigger mechanism. A climate forcing that "flips" the albedo of a sufficient portion of an ice sheet can spark a cataclysm. Ice sheet and ocean inertia provides only moderate delay to ice sheet disintegration and a burst of added global warming. Recent greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions place the Earth perilously close to dramatic climate change that could run out of our control, with great dangers for humans and other creatures. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the largest human-made climate forcing, but other trace constituents are important. Only intense simultaneous efforts to slow CO2 emissions and reduce non-CO2 forcings can keep climate within or near the range of the past million years. The most important of the non-CO2 forcings is methane (CH4), as it causes the 2nd largest human-made GHG climate forcing and is the principal cause of increased tropospheric ozone (O3), which is the 3rd largest GHG forcing. Nitrous oxide (N2O) should also be a focus of climate mitigation efforts. Black carbon ("black soot") has a high global warming potential (~2000, 500, and 200 for 20, 100 and 500 years, respectively) and deserves greater attention. Some forcings are especially effective at high latitudes, so concerted efforts to reduce their emissions could still "save the Arctic", while also having major benefits for human health, agricultural productivity, and the global environment” (see: http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/2007/Hansen_etal_2.html ).

(d) 2008, in an address to the US National Press Club and a briefing to the US House Select Committee on Energy Independence & Global Warming Congressional Committee: “CEOs of fossil energy companies know what they are doing and are aware of long-term consequences of business as usual. In my opinion, these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature” (see: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/TwentyYearsLater_20080623.pdf ).

(e) Dr James Hansen et al. (2008): “Stabilization of Arctic sea ice cover requires, to first approximation, restoration of planetary energy balance. Climate models driven by known forcings yield a present planetary energy imbalance of +0.5-1 W/m2. Observed heat increase in the upper 700 m of the ocean confirms the planetary energy imbalance, but observations of the entire ocean are needed for quantification. CO2 amount must be reduced to 325-355 ppm to increase outgoing flux 0.5-1 W/m2, if other forcings are unchanged. A further imbalance reduction, and thus CO2 ~300-325 ppm, may be needed to restore sea ice to its area of 25 years ago”

(see: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/TargetCO2_20080407.pdf ).

2. Dr Rajendra Pachauri (2008) (economist and environmental scientist; chairman of the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajendra_K._Pachauri ): “[The UN negotiations] must progress rapidly, otherwise I am afraid that not only future generations but even this generation will treat us as having been irresponsible…The EU has to lead. If the EU does not lead, I am afraid that any attempt to bring about change and to manage the problem of climate change will collapse…Today there is a high level of expectation. If the EU does not lead, you will not be able to bring the US on board, North America, on board. You will not be able to bring on board other countries in the world as well…we would have to stabilise the greenhouse-gas concentration at more or less the level at which we are today. But in order to do that [to limit the overall warming since pre-industrial times to 2 C (3.6 F)], we have a window of opportunity of only seven years because emissions will have to peak by 2015 and reduce after that. We cannot permit a longer delay…The very wise target that the EU had set of 2.0 C (3.6 F) may need to be looked at once more, because the impacts are turning out to be more serious than we had estimated earlier” (see: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jGxKw2XS4_IHH6Xc7RVAY02dkNBg ).

3. Dr Graeme Pearman (2008) (top Australian climate scientist; Chief of CSIRO Atmospheric Research in Australia from 1992 to 2002; world expert on increasing levels of CO2 and global warming): "This science tells us that the world's climate is changing and that the change is primarily because of an increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere due to human activities. We are changing the climate. Very recent science suggests that climate change may be happening faster than we expected and that we and other species on the planet are more vulnerable to change than we thought. This is now forcing serious consideration of rapid responses by all nations as we work to tackle this shared problem. Challenges in this quest include a general community lack of appreciation of the significance of what appears to be small shifts in global average temperature, incompleteness of the knowledge-base and the need to respond using risk management" (see: http://www.monash.edu.au/news/monashmemo/stories/20080326/climate-change.html ).

4. Professor David de Kretser, A.C., Governor of Victoria, Australia (2008) (eminent Australian medical scientist; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_de_Kretser ) in launching the book “Climate Code Red. The case for emergency action” by David Spratt and Philip Sutton (Scribe, Melbourne, 2008): “The book draws on a vast array of information to build a cogent and compelling case that we do have a genuine emergency on our hands if we are to limit the rise of greenhouse gas emissions to a level at which we can limit the degradation of our planet to manageable levels … There is no doubt in my mind that this is the greatest problem confronting mankind at this time and that it has reached the level of a state of emergency.” (see: http://www.scribepublications.com.au/book/climatecodered ).

5. Dr James Lovelock, (top UK climate scientist; Fellow of the Royal Society; proponent of the Gaia hypothesis; http://www.ecolo.org/lovelock/ ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Lovelock ),

(a) 2006: “In Chapter 1 I describe a simple model where the sensitive part of the Earth system is the ocean; as it warms, so the area of the sea that can support the growth of algae grows smaller as it is driven ever closer to the poles, until algal growth ceases. The discontinuity comes because algae in the ocean both pump down carbon dioxide [by photosynthesis] and produce clouds [through cloud-seeding dimethyl sulphide production]. (Algae floating in the ocean actively remove carbon dioxide from the air and use it for growth; we call the process “pumping down” to distinguish it from the passive and reversible removal of carbon dioxide as it dissolves in rain or sea water). The threshold for the failure of the algae is about 500 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide, about the same as it is for Greenland’s unstoppable melting” (See: “The Revenge of Gaia”, Allen Lane, London; p51).

(b) 2007: “Most of the large climate models used to predict future climates still rely mainly on atmospheric physics, and this includes the models on which the IPCC report is based. The influence of the clouds and the ocean are incompletely included and that of the Earth's natural ecosystems hardly at all. Present day climate models are good at explaining past climates but seem unable to agree on the course of global heating beyond about 2050, by the end of the century predictions vary over a wide range. This stark view was reinforced in May this year by the publication by Rahmstorf and his colleagues ["Recent Climate Observations Compared to Projections", Science 4 May 2007: Vol. 316. no. 5825, p. 709] of high quality measurements of the rise in global mean temperature, sea level and CO2. These showed that even the gloomiest predictions of the IPCC were underestimating the severity of climate change now” (see: http://www.jameslovelock.org/page24.html ).

(c) 2006: “When Malthus first warned of the overpopulation of the Earth in 1800, there were only one billion of us. He has been derided ever since, yet I think he was right. One billion is about the right number and I fear that we will reach it not by our own choice but by attrition” (see: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/james-lovelock-you-ask-the-questions-411765.html ; see also: http://machineslikeus.com/People/Lovelock_James.html ; http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/mar/15/desertification.ethicalliving and )

(d) 2008: “I hate academia. Most of the scientists who work there are not free men any more and they can't speak out. That's no way to do science” (see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/mar/15/desertification.ethicalliving ).

(e) 2009, on biochar: "The biosphere pumps out 550 gigatonnes of carbon yearly; we put in only 30 gigatonnes. Ninety-nine per cent of the carbon that is fixed by plants is released back into the atmosphere within a year or so by consumers like bacteria, nematodes and worms. What we can do is cheat those consumers by getting farmers to burn their crop waste at very low oxygen levels to turn it into charcoal, which the farmer then ploughs into the field. A little CO2 is released but the bulk of it gets converted to carbon. You get a few per cent of biofuel as a by-product of the combustion process, which the farmer can sell. This scheme would need no subsidy: the farmer would make a profit. This is the one thing we can do that will make a difference, but I bet they won't do it ... I'm an optimistic pessimist. I think it's wrong to assume we'll survive 2 °C of warming: there are already too many people on Earth. At 4 °C we could not survive with even one-tenth of our current population. The reason is we would not find enough food, unless we synthesised it. Because of this, the cull during this century is going to be huge, up to 90 per cent. The number of people remaining at the end of the century will probably be a billion or less"

(see New Scientist, January 2009: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126921.500-one-last-chance-to-save-mankind.html ).

6. Professor David Pimentel (1998) (Professor of Ecology and Agricultural Science at the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA): “At present, humans face serious malnutrition, land degradation, water pollution and shortages, and declining fossil energy resources. In addition, with related changes in the natural environment, many thousands of species are being lost forever. If the human population increases dramatically over the next several decades, as it is projected to do, the strains on these limited resources will grow as well. Some people are starting to ask just how many people the Earth can support if we want to cease degrading the environment and move to a sustainable solar energy system? There is no solid answer yet, but the best estimate is that Earth can support about 1 to 2 billion people with an American Standard of living, good health, nutrition, prosperity, personal dignity and freedom. This estimate suggests an optimal U.S. population of 100 to 200 million. To achieve this goal, humans must first stabilize their population and then gradually reduce their numbers to achieve a sustainable society in terms of both economics and environmental resources. With fair policies and realistic incentives, such a reduction in the human population can be achieved over the next century” (see: http://www.populationpress.org/essays/essay-pimentel.html ).

7. Dr Timothy Searchinger and colleagues (“Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change”, Science 29 February 2008, Vol. 319. no. 5867, pp. 1238 – 1240: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1151861 ): “Most prior studies have found that substituting biofuels for gasoline will reduce greenhouse gases because biofuels sequester carbon through the growth of the feedstock. These analyses have failed to count the carbon emissions that occur as farmers worldwide respond to higher prices and convert forest and grassland to new cropland to replace the grain (or cropland) diverted to biofuels. By using a worldwide agricultural model to estimate emissions from land-use change, we found that corn-based ethanol, instead of producing a 20% savings, nearly doubles greenhouse emissions over 30 years and increases greenhouse gases for 167 years. Biofuels from switchgrass, if grown on U.S. corn lands, increase emissions by 50%. This result raises concerns about large biofuel mandates and highlights the value of using waste products.”

8. Dr Joseph Fargione and colleagues (“Land Clearing and the Biofuel Carbon Debt”, Science 29 February 2008, Vol. 319. no. 5867, pp. 1235 – 1238: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/1152747 ): “Increasing energy use, climate change, and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuels make switching to low-carbon fuels a high priority. Biofuels are a potential low-carbon energy source, but whether biofuels offer carbon savings depends on how they are produced. Converting rainforests, peatlands, savannas, or grasslands to produce food crop–based biofuels in Brazil, Southeast Asia, and the United States creates a "biofuel carbon debt" by releasing 17 to 420 times more CO2 than the annual greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions that these biofuels would provide by displacing fossil fuels. In contrast, biofuels made from waste biomass or from biomass grown on degraded and abandoned agricultural lands planted with perennials incur little or no carbon debt and can offer immediate and sustained GHG advantages.”

9. Professors O. Hoegh-Guldberg, P. J. Mumby and colleagues (Coral Reefs Under Rapid Climate Change and Ocean Acidification, Science 14 December 2007: Vol. 318. no. 5857, pp. 1737 – 1742 (see: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/318/5857/1737 ): “Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is expected to exceed 500 parts per million and global temperatures to rise by at least 2°C by 2050 to 2100, values that significantly exceed those of at least the past 420,000 years during which most extant marine organisms evolved. Under conditions expected in the 21st century, global warming and ocean acidification will compromise carbonate accretion, with corals becoming increasingly rare on reef systems. The result will be less diverse reef communities and carbonate reef structures that fail to be maintained. Climate change also exacerbates local stresses from declining water quality and overexploitation of key species, driving reefs increasingly toward the tipping point for functional collapse.”

10. Dr Chris Thomas and numerous colleagues (Extinction risk from climate change, Nature 427, 145-148, 2004; see: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v427/n6970/full/nature02121.html ): “Climate change over the past approx30 years has produced numerous shifts in the distributions and abundances of species and has been implicated in one species-level extinction. Using projections of species' distributions for future climate scenarios, we assess extinction risks for sample regions that cover some 20% of the Earth's terrestrial surface. Exploring three approaches in which the estimated probability of extinction shows a power-law relationship with geographical range size, we predict, on the basis of mid-range climate-warming scenarios for 2050, that 15–37% of species in our sample of regions and taxa will be 'committed to extinction'. When the average of the three methods and two dispersal scenarios is taken, minimal climate-warming scenarios produce lower projections of species committed to extinction (approx18%) than mid-range (approx24%) and maximum-change (approx35%) scenarios. These estimates show the importance of rapid implementation of technologies to decrease greenhouse gas emissions and strategies for carbon sequestration.”

11. Dr Cynthia Rosenzweig, Professor David D. Karoly and numerous other colleagues (2008) (Attributing physical and biological impacts to anthropogenic climate change. Nature, 453, 353-357, 2008): “Significant changes in physical and biological systems are occurring on all continents and in most oceans, with a concentration of available data in Europe and North America. Most of these changes are in the direction expected with warming temperature. Here we show that these changes in natural systems since at least 1970 are occurring in regions of observed temperature increases, and that these temperature increases at continental scales cannot be explained by natural climate variations alone. Given the conclusions from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report that most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-twentieth century is very likely to be due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations, and furthermore that it is likely that there has been significant anthropogenic warming over the past 50 years averaged over each continent except Antarctica, we conclude that anthropogenic climate change is having a significant impact on physical and biological systems globally and in some continents” (see: http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abstracts/2008/Rosenzweig_etal_1.html ).

12. Dr Andrew Balmford and numerous colleagues (Science 9 August 2002, Economic Reasons for Conserving Wild Nature, Science Vol. 297, pp. 950 – 953): “On the eve of the World Summit on Sustainable Development, it is timely to assess progress over the 10 years since its predecessor in Rio de Janeiro. Loss and degradation of remaining natural habitats has continued largely unabated. However, evidence has been accumulating that such systems generate marked economic benefits, which the available data suggest exceed those obtained from continued habitat conversion. We estimate that the overall benefit:cost ratio of an effective global program for the conservation of remaining wild nature is at least 100:1” (see: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/297/5583/950 ).

13. Dr Phillip S. Levin, Dr Donald A. Levin (2002) (Dr Donald A. Levin is Professor of Biology, University of Texas, Austin; his son Dr Phillip Levin is a biologist with the National Marine Fisheries Service): “The numbers are grim: Some 2,000 species of Pacific Island birds (about 15 percent of the world total) have gone extinct since human colonization. Roughly 20 of the 297 known mussel and clam species and 40 of about 950 fishes have perished in North America in the past century. On average, one extinction happens somewhere on earth every 20 minutes. Ecologists estimate that half of all living bird and mammal species will be gone within 200 or 300 years. Although crude and occasionally controversial, such statistics illustrate the extent of the current upheaval, which spans the globe and affects a broad array of plants and animals…The current losses are, however, exceptional. Rates of extinction appear now to be 100 to 1,000 times greater than background levels, qualifying the present as an era of “mass extinction”. The globe has experienced similar waves of destruction just five times in the past” (see: http://www.soc.duke.edu/~pmorgan/levin&levin.2002.the_real_biodiversity_crisis.html ).

14. Dr John Holdren (2008) (Professor of Environmental Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University; Director of the Woods Hole Research Center; recent Chairman of the American Association for the Advancement of Science): “I don’t like the term “global warming,” because it’s misleading. It implies something that’s mainly about temperature, that’s gradual, and that’s uniform across the planet. And in fact, temperature is only one of the things that’s changing. It’s a sort of an index of the state of climate. The whole climate is changing: the winds, the ocean currents, the storm patterns, snow packs, snowmelt, flooding, droughts. Temperature is just a bit of it. It’s also highly non-uniform. The largest changes are occurring in the far north in the Arctic, in the Antarctic Peninsula in the far south. It is certainly not gradual, in the sense that it is rapid compared to the capacity of ecosystems to adjust. It’s rapid compared to the capacity of human systems to adjust… I think that most people, even most scientists, continue to underestimate how far down the path to climate catastrophe we’ve already traveled. We are committed, the United States and 190 other countries are committed, under the Framework Convention on Climate Change to avoid dangerous human interference in the climate system. And the fact is, it’s already too late to do that. We’re already experiencing dangerous interference. Floods, major floods, are up all over the world. Wildfires are up in almost every region of the world where wildfires have been a problem. Wildfires erupt fourfold in the last thirty years in the western United States” (see: http://www.democracynow.org/2008/7/3/global_disruption_more_accurately_describes_climate ).

15. Professor Tim Flannery (2008) (eminent Australian mammalogist, palaeontologist and climate change activist; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Flannery ): “[inserting global dimming sulphur into the stratosphere] would change the colour of the sky. It's the last resort that we have, it's the last barrier to a climate collapse. We need to be ready to start doing it in perhaps five years time if we fail to achieve what we're trying to achieve…The consequences of doing that are unknown …The current burden of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is in fact more than sufficient to cause catastrophic climate change… Everything's going in the wrong direction at the moment, timelines are getting shorter, the amount of pollution in the atmosphere is growing…It's extremely urgent" (see: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23724412-2,00.html ).

16. The UK Royal Society (founded in 1660; “the Royal Society, the national academy of science of the UK and the Commonwealth, is at the cutting edge of scientific progress”; the Royal Society is one of the world’s most prestigious scientific bodies and its members include the most outstanding British and Commonwealth scientists): “Climate change controversies: a simple guide. The Royal Society has produced this overview of the current state of scientific understanding of climate change to help non-experts better understand some of the debates in this complex area of science. This is not intended to provide exhaustive answers to every contentious argument that has been put forward by those who seek to distort and undermine the science of climate change and deny the seriousness of the potential consequences of global warming. Instead, the Society - as the UK's national academy of science - responds here to eight key arguments that are currently in circulation by setting out, in simple terms, where the weight of scientific evidence lies” (see: http://royalsociety.org/page.asp?id=6229 ).

17. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2007 (the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988; it has produced 4 successive Assessment Reports, the last being the Fourth in 2007: http://www.ipcc.ch/ ): “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level … Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations” (see IPCC, 2007 Summary for Policymakers: http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-spm.pdf ).

18. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), 2006 (founded in 1848, AAAS serves some 262 affiliated societies and academies of science, serving 10 million individuals; the AAAS journal Science has the largest paid circulation of any peer-reviewed general science journal in the world, with an estimated total readership of 1 million): “The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society. Accumulating data from across the globe reveal a wide array of effects: rapidly melting glaciers, destabilization of major ice sheets, increases in extreme weather, rising sea level, shifts in species ranges, and more. The pace of change and the evidence of harm have increased markedly over the last five years. The time to control greenhouse gas emissions is now.” (see: http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2007/0218am_statement.shtml ).

19. US National Academy of Sciences (US PNAS) and 10 other national science academies, 2005 (the US PNAS is one of the world’s most prestigious scientific bodies and its members include the most outstanding US scientists): “The US National Academy of Sciences joined 10 other national science academies today in calling on world leaders, particularly those of the G-8 countries meeting next month in Scotland, to acknowledge that the threat of climate change is clear and increasing, to address its causes, and to prepare for its consequences. Sufficient scientific understanding of climate change exists for all nations to identify cost-effective steps that can be taken now to contribute to substantial and long-term reductions in net global greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming. The statement echoes the findings and recommendations of several previous reports by the US National Academies” (see: http://nationalacademies.org/onpi/06072005.pdf ).

20. Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia’s premier scientific research organization), Climate Change in Australia Technical Report 2007: “The key findings of this report includes that by 2030, temperatures will rise by about 1 ºC over Australia – a little less in coastal areas, and a little more inland - later in the century, warming depends on the extent of greenhouse gas emissions. If emissions are low, warming of between 1 ºC and 2.5 ºC is likely by around 2070, with a best estimate of 1.8 ºC. Under a high emission scenario, the best estimate warming is 3.4 ºC, with a range of 2.2 ºC to 5 ºC” (see: http://www.csiro.au/resources/ps3j6.html#2 ).

21. Dr Andrew Glikson (an Earth and paleo-climate research scientist at Australian National University, Canberra, Australia) in “The Methane Time Bomb and the Triple Melt-down" (see: : http://www.countercurrents.org/glikson101008.htm ): For some time now, climate scientists warned that melting of subpolar permafrost and warming of the Arctic Sea (up to 4 degrees C during 2005–2008 relative to the 1951–1980) are likely to result in the dissociation of methane hydrates and the release of this powerful greenhouse gas into the atmosphere (methane: 62 times the infrared warming effect of CO2 over 20 years and 21 times over 100 years) The amount of carbon stored in Arctic sediments and permafrost is estimated as 500–2500 Gigaton Carbon (GtC), as compared with the world’s total fossil fuel reserves estimated as 5000 GtC. Compare with the 700 GtC of the atmosphere, which regulate CO2 levels in the range of 180–300 parts per million and land temperatures in a range of about – 50 to + 50 degrees C, which allowed the evolution of warm blooded mammals. The continuing use of the atmosphere as an open sewer for industrial pollution has already added some 305 GtC to the atmosphere together with land clearing and animal-emitted methane. This raised CO2 levels to 387 ppm CO2 to date, leading toward conditions which existed on Earth about 3 million years (Ma) ago (mid-Pliocene), when CO2 levels rose to about 400 ppm, temperatures to about 2–3 degrees C and sea levels by about 25 +/- 12 metres. There is little evidence for an extinction at 3 Ma. However, by crossing above a CO2 level of 400 ppm the atmosphere is moving into uncharted territory. At this stage, enhanced methane leaks threaten climate events, such as the massive methane release and fauna extinction of 55 million years ago, which was marked by rise of CO2 to near-1000 ppm.”

22. Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research., Germany (see: http://www.pik-potsdam.de/institute/director ) (2008): “"It is a compromise between ambition and feasibility. A rise of 2oC could avoid some of the big environmental disasters, but it is still only a compromise…It is a very sweeping argument, but nobody can say for sure that 330ppm is safe. Perhaps it will not matter whether we have 270ppm or 320ppm, but operating well outside the [historic] realm of carbon dioxide concentrations is risky as long as we have not fully understood the relevant feedback mechanisms" (see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/sep/15/climatechange.carbonemissions ) [280 ppm is the pre-industrial atmospheric CO2 concentration].

23. Professor Kevin Anderson and Dr Alice Bows (UK climate scientists, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of Manchester) have recently estimated that an annual 6-8% DECREASE in greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution is required to stabilize atmospheric CO2-e (carbon dioxide equivalent) at a still catastrophic 450 ppm (parts per million). Unfortunately, the best Obama and Brown can offer is 2% annual GHG pollution DECREASE and the current policies of huge per capita GHG polluter Australia mean, subject to transient recession effects) an annual 2% INCREASE in Australia’s Domestic and Exported GHG pollution (subject to recession effects).

Professor Kevin Anderson and Dr Alice Bows:According to the analysis conducted in this paper, stabilizing at 450 ppmv [carbon dioxide equivalent = CO2-e, atmospheric concentration measured in parts per million by volume] requires, at least, global energy related emissions to peak by 2015, rapidly decline at 6-8% per year between 2020 and 2040, and for full decarbonization sometime soon after 2050 …Unless economic growth can be reconciled with unprecedented rates of decarbonization (in excess of 6% per year), it is difficult to envisage anything other than a planned economic recession being compatible with stabilization at or below 650 ppmv CO2-e ... Ultimately, the latest scientific understanding of climate change allied with current emissions trends and a commitment to “limiting average global temperature increases to below 4oC above pre-industrial levels”, demands a radical reframing of both the climate change agenda, and the economic characterization of contemporary society” (see: Kevin Anderson & Alice Bows, “Reframing the climate change challenge in light of post-2000 emission trends”, Proc. Trans. Roy. Soc, A, 2008: http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/366/1882/3863.full ; Gideon Polya, “Good and bad climate news”, Green Blog, 2009: http://www.green-blog.org/2009/01/13/good-and-bad-climate-news/ ; and George Monbiot, “One shot left”, Monbiot.com (also published in the UK Guardian, 2008): http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2008/11/25/one-shot-left/ ).

24. Myles R. Allen, David J. Frame, Chris Huntingford, Chris D. Jones, Jason A. Lowe, Malte Meinshausen & Nicolai Meinshausen (2009): “Global efforts to mitigate climate change are guided by projections of future temperatures1. But the eventual equilibrium global mean temperature associated with a given stabilization level of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations remains uncertain, complicating the setting of stabilization targets to avoid potentially dangerous levels of global warming. Similar problems apply to the carbon cycle: observations currently provide only a weak constraint on the response to future emissions. Here we use ensemble simulations of simple climate-carbon-cycle models constrained by observations and projections from more comprehensive models to simulate the temperature response to a broad range of carbon dioxide emission pathways. We find that the peak warming caused by a given cumulative carbon dioxide emission is better constrained than the warming response to a stabilization scenario. Furthermore, the relationship between cumulative emissions and peak warming is remarkably insensitive to the emission pathway (timing of emissions or peak emission rate). Hence policy targets based on limiting cumulative emissions of carbon dioxide are likely to be more robust to scientific uncertainty than emission-rate or concentration targets. Total anthropogenic emissions of one trillion tonnes of carbon (3.67 trillion tonnes of CO2), about half of which has already been emitted since industrialization began, results in a most likely peak carbon-dioxide-induced warming of 2 °C above pre-industrial temperatures, with a 5–95% confidence interval of 1.3–3.9°C.” (Myles R. Allen, David J. Frame, Chris Huntingford, Chris D. Jones, Jason A. Lowe, Malte Meinshausen & Nicolai Meinshausen, Nature 458, 1163-1166, 30 April 2009: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v458/n7242/abs/nature08019.html ).

25. Peter A. Stott (Met Office, Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research (Reading Unit), Meteorology Building, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6BB, UK), D. A. Stone (Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PU, UK) & M. R. Allen (Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK) (2004) on the 2003 European heatwave: “The summer of 2003 was probably the hottest in Europe since at latest AD 1500, and unusually large numbers of heat-related deaths were reported in France, Germany and Italy. It is an ill-posed question whether the 2003 heatwave was caused, in a simple deterministic sense, by a modification of the external influences on climate—for example, increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere—because almost any such weather event might have occurred by chance in an unmodified climate. However, it is possible to estimate by how much human activities may have increased the risk of the occurrence of such a heatwave. Here we use this conceptual framework to estimate the contribution of human-induced increases in atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases and other pollutants to the risk of the occurrence of unusually high mean summer temperatures throughout a large region of continental Europe. Using a threshold for mean summer temperature that was exceeded in 2003, but in no other year since the start of the instrumental record in 1851, we estimate it is very likely (confidence level >90%) that human influence has at least doubled the risk of a heatwave exceeding this threshold magnitude.” (P.A. Stott, D.A. Stone and M.R. Allen “Human contribution to the European heatwave of 2003”, Nature 432, 610-614 (2004): http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v432/n7017/full/nature03089.html .