I admit the human element seems to have failed us here
— General "Buck" Turgidson, from Dr. Strangelove
The Paris climate talks begin officially on November 30, 2015 and run until December 11. Where do we stand?
This year will undoubtedly be the hottest year on record, though the temperature departure (anomaly) from the pre-industrial norm depends on the baseline period used. (Ars Technica, November 9. 2015).
The Met Office’s Hadley Center for Climate Science, in conjunction with the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, based its estimate on temperatures from January through September, which show the global mean surface temperature at 1.02°C above pre-industrial levels. The margin of error for this temperature measurement is 0.11°C.
The peak in global temperatures this year is being partially driven by the development of a very strong El Niño in the Tropical Pacific Ocean. Human activity, however, remains the underlying driver according to scientists. "We've had similar natural events in the past, yet this is the first time we're set to reach the 1°C marker and it's clear that it is human influence driving our modern climate into uncharted territory," said Stephen Belcher, Director of the Met Office Hadley Center.
Climate scientists use temperature anomalies rather than absolute temperatures because these anomalies more accurately describe variability over larger areas and because it is easier to gauge temperature trends. The Met Office defines “pre-industrial” as the period of 1850 to 1900. Although some industrialization had occurred by this time, earlier temperature records are less reliable
NOAA, which maintains its own climate database, compares present-day temperatures to the period of 1900 to 2000. According to its data based on the first nine months of 2015, the global temperature was 0.85°C above the 20th century average. Both agencies will publish final data on 2015 temperatures early next year.
The temperature anomaly is 0.85°C above the 1900-2000 average, and 1.02°C above the 1850-1900 baseline (+/-0.11°C).
According to Michel Jarraud of the World Meterological Organization, “we will soon be living with globally averaged CO2 levels above 400 parts per million as a permanent reality.”
On the eve of the Paris talks, humanity has entered "uncharted territory."
IEEE Spectrum posted a nice write-up of where we stand as Paris looms (November 10, 2015).
Three weeks before the start of the Paris climate talks, negotiators working to craft an international agreement that will curb rising global greenhouse gas emissions are staring into a wide gulf between what countries are willing to do and what they need to do. Most countries have stepped up with pledges to meaningfully cut carbon emissions or to at least slow the growth of emission totals between 2020 and 2030. However, national commitments for the Paris talks still fall short of what’s needed to prevent the average global temperature in 2100 from being any more than 2 degrees Celsius warmer than at the start of this century—the international community’s consensus benchmark for climate impact.
Worse still, the national pledges employ a hodgepodge of accounting methods that include some significant loopholes that ignore important emissions such as leaking methane from U.S. oil and gas production and underreported coal emissions from China.
How the promised emissions reductions will be verified post-Paris is “a big debate right now and it makes a massive difference in the numbers,” says Jennifer Morgan, global director for the climate program at the World Resources Institute (WRI), a Washington, D.C.-based non-governmental organization.
Let's look at significant loopholes and hodgepodge accounting. I've reported some of this on DOTE.
Unfortunately, uncounted emissions could push the global warming trajectory in the opposite direction, making the INDC-based temperature projection, predicting an increase between 2.7°C and 3°C, look optimistic.
Consider the underestimated methane leaks in the United States. A molecule of methane released into the atmosphere traps over 80 times as much heat within 20 years as a CO2 molecule does; after a 100-years, it will still be 28 to 34 times as potent as the longer-lived CO2 molecule. Remote sensing suggests that U.S. methane emissions are 25 to 75 percent higher than what the EPA acknowledges in its bottom-up inventory of methane sources such as oil and gas facilities, belching livestock, and landfills.
The reality of this missing methane was affirmed in July by an intensive bottom-up accounting of methane leaks at oil and gas operations in Texas’ Barnett Shale reported in the journal Environmental Science & Technology.The study predicts that methane leaks from the Barnett are about 50 percent higher than what is reported in the EPA’s inventory.
What that means for Paris is that the U.S. INDC understates its carbon footprint and overstates some of the promised carbon reductions that rely on a switch from coal to natural gas-fired power plants.
“There has been no adjustment made for this,” says Ramón Alvarez, a coauthor on the Barnett study and a senior scientist with the Environmental Defense Fund.
Other loopholes are seeing increased scrutiny thanks to intensifying media coverage in the run up to Paris. The New York Times reported last week that China has been under-counting coal emissions for many years.
And a series by online outlet Climate Central in October questioned emissions reductions attributed to European power plants burning U.S.-produced wood pellets instead of coal. According to the report, this accounts for almost half of what European regulators count as carbon-neutral renewable energy. But the source of wood is critical.
Scientists say that power plants burning waste biomass can play a key role in reducing emissions. But Climate Central's reporting found that U.S. forests are being harvested to fuel Europe's biomass power; forest regrowth to recover the released carbon could take over a century.
And let's not forget those Indonesian slash and burn emissions, which were not mentioned by IEEE Spectrum.
Not only are we humans unable to verify INDC emissions pledges after the Paris talks conclude, but we are also unable to take into account all of the GHG emissions our global civilization creates.
Certainly there will be no way to enforce the INDCs. These are voluntary pledges made by governments which won't be around to keep their promises.
Uncharted territory, indeed.
Well, it's flatland, so not exactly unexplored. I imagine you could have a pretty good guess of exactly how things will be in 2020.
Posted by: Andy | 11/11/2015 at 02:22 PM