Foundation Search
|
Humanity 3000
HOME | SEMINARS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
SYMPOSIA 1 2 |
WORKSHOPS 1 2 3 4 5
Workshop 5
“Anthropogenic Climate Destabilization: A Worst-case Scenario”
Participant Statement
September 12–14, 2008 | Bellevue, Washington
Dennis M. Bushnell
What are the three critical questions you would ask pertaining to “anthropogenic climate change: a worst-case scenario” – and why?
1. Determine whether the several/various positive feedbacks [e.g., fossil methane release from tundra and ocean, fossil CO2 release from tundra and ocean, reduced ocean CO2 uptake, resultant albedo changes and water evaporation, etc.] are the reason for the current accelerated climate change observations. These accelerated changes, occurring much faster than the IPCC projections, include greatly increased arctic ice demise, increased CO2 levels, and increased ocean warming. Once the reasons for these accelerated changes are determined, redo the climate change projections for purposes of informing the political/regulatory/policy/economic debates regarding remediation approaches/ways forward.
2. Perform serious study of the assertions made by Peter Ward in his book Under a Green Sky that the current anthropogenic CO2 release rate is 100 times that which triggered the massive Permian Extinction [90%+ species extinction]. In that extinction the fossil record indicates that the oceans went anoxic, producing massive growth of anoxic bacteria, which produced massive amounts of H2S, which made the atmosphere toxic and took out the ozone layer, causing major radiation damage to life forms. Such a climate-change mechanism alters the warming discussion completely from a warm day and wet feet to an EXISTENTIAL Threat.
3. Getting the physics, etc., more or less “right” is critical for BOTH the potential time-scales and the potential impacts. In A above, with the positive feedbacks by 2100 some estimates indicate 14 degrees C rise, more than twice the current IPCC projections. At those temperatures all the ice would melt beyond 2100 with an attendant ocean rise of some 75 meters, submerging the current homes of some 2.3 billion people. IF Peter Ward is correct [and we are currently losing an area of the ocean equal to the size of Texas yearly to anoxic conditions] then we will have to take far more drastic remedial action perhaps far sooner, depending upon the projected timescales with the “right” physics included. The current sitrep is that much of the physics is incomplete – including the effects and physics of aerosols.
The “Worst Case” warming “existence proof” that we have is Venus, whose atmospheric conditions are thought to be due to massive CO2 releases from volcanoes – some 400 degrees C planetary surface temperature. There is sufficient water and CO2/methane on Earth to produce Venusian conditions here if it all went into the atmosphere. This is not expected to happen, at least with the physics as it is currently understood. IF the Permian with its H2S issues/effects were replayed we would be forced, via synthetic and genomic biology, to morph the biota, including the humans. That is, if we cannot engineer our way out of the process[es] itself. There are a surfeit of renewable energy sources [algae/halophytes on wastelands using salt water, wind, hot rock geothermal, solar thermal, solar PV], which have a combined capacity of some 40 times that needed to replace fossil carbon. Their economics are either equal to or more favorable than the current fossil carbon approaches. Technically, we could obviate, if we move quickly, the really drastic impacts of climate change. The REAL ISSUE is whether or not we have the will to do so. This workshop, the identification of what will/could happen if we do not seriously pursue remediation, is an important part of the “will-producing” process – adult education.
Copyright © 1996–2008 Foundation For the Future
|
Programs