Comments on: On CO2 lifetime and the incompleteness of short-term mitigation options

By: Hank Roberts

Hank Roberts — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 00:17:42 +0000

Thanks; here’s some info on the longer term, taken from the IPCC:
http://www.manicore.com/anglais/documentation_a/greenhouse/temp_increase.html

By: HankRoberts

HankRoberts — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:39:35 +0000

Are there charts like the one out to 2100 you used above, going through several more centuries? I thought I’d seen them.

Response– IPCC AR4 Chapter 10 has discussion on long term commitments (pg. 822 onward) but that’s the best I’ve seen. Don’t know how much confidence I have in them.– chris

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 06:21:04 +0000

Even if the geo-engineering is technically OK, then there are possible follow on effects likely. I’ve just read a blog on that on http://www.climatechangetriage.net quoting Professor Lovelock (of Gaia fame) worrying about a techno-fix that might lead to another, as yet unidentified climate change problem, requiring another techno-fix and so on. So the message is that we need to be VERY careful with techological fixes

By: Hank Roberts

Hank Roberts — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:08:01 +0000

Are these “Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)” mandatory for your blog’s page format, or are they an option you control? e.g. “At Witz’ End – Global Warming Pro” — why bother?

Response– I could probably get rid of them somehow, but I’m not sure. They weren’t my choice to put them there

By: J

Thu, 07 Aug 2008 12:47:10 +0000

Nice blog, Chris.

One problem with the sulfate aerosols idea — it only solves part of the CO2 problem (the radiative transfer part). We’d still see the transformation of ocean chemistry (“ocean acidification”) …

People need to recognize the difference between two broad categories of geoengineering methods. One type focuses on albedo, and only ameliorates the radiative transfer effects of CO2. The other type (sequestration) actually removes CO2 from the atmosphere, and thus helps with both climate and ocean chemistry.

This is not intended as an “endorsement” of any geoengineering approach, by the way ….

By: Simon D

Simon D — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 00:24:42 +0000

On your first point:

The world also won’t end in 2100. Not enough model runs, and not nearly enough graphs and images shown to the public, extend into the next century. This is misleading about the extent of warming that can be expected when the (climate reaches equilibrium). For example, in some of the future emissions scenarios used by the IPCC, atmospheric concentrations reach a plateau (550 ppm) in 2100. People make the mistake of looking at that scenario and assuming the warming ends in 2100 too. However, the lag in the climate system – the same lag that would result in ~0.5 C warming over the next several decades even if we froze atmospheric concentrations today – would lead to further warming well into the 22nd century and possibly beyond. warming does not stop in 2100 due to the lag in the climate system.