With politics and political posturing (along with a major economic downturn), getting a comprehensive national policy together to address climate change is proving to be difficult.
Any attempt by Congress to address a well-intention national policy to address global climate change this year is doubtful. We have yet to find away to balance business concerns with a national climate change policy, even though there’s literally a brand new source of economic development that provide a dramatic surge in the nation’s economy and put millions of people to work in a new industrial paradigm for society.
But one things gets in the way and it’s our dependency on fossil fuels, which is the cause for the warming of our planet.
Agriculture’s success is highly dependent on fossil fuel whether it’s to power farm equipment to the fertilizers and chemical applied to help crops grow and ward off weeds and insects.
Attempting to deal with climate changes by addressing how we use fossil fuels will come under heavy examination, especially by agricultural groups.
For example, Nebraska Farm Bureau is “strongly oppose” to the American Clean Energy and Security Act (H.R. 2454), which would cap the amount of carbon-based emissions from certain sectors of the U.S. economy.
According to Keith Olsen, president of Nebraska Farm Bureau, “What this means for agriculture is higher input cost on the farm or ranch. While most businesses are able to pass these increases off to consumers, farmers and ranchers are unable to do that and would simply take the hit. This piece of climate change legislation ignores the complex needs of Nebraska’s very diverse agricultural industry.”
Olsen said the overall goal of the bill currently moving through the House Energy and Commerce Committee, looks to cap U.S. greenhouse gas emissions with a reduction of 83 percent by the year 2050.
He said companies with excess emission permits could then trade them off to other companies, something that is currently being done on a voluntary basis.
Also, under the bill, states would be required to get certain amounts of electricity from wind, solar and biomass. The bill sets the number at 15 percent by 2020, plus it requires a reduction of energy use by 5 percent by 2020 through energy efficiency.
Before Congress can efficiency address climate change, it must first address a comprehensive national energy policy that shifts the way our economy depends on fossil fuels.
And time is running out.
What is being called the most comprehensive modeling yet carried out on the likelihood of how much hotter the Earth’s climate will get in this century shows that without rapid and massive action, the problem will be about twice as severe as previously estimated six years ago – and could be even worse than that.
The study, according to MIT, used the its Integrated Global Systems Model, “a detailed computer simulation of global economic activity and climate processes that has been developed and refined by the Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change since the early 1990s.”
According to MIT, the new research involved 400 runs of the model with each run using slight variations in input parameters, selected so that each run has about an equal probability of being correct based on present observations and knowledge.
Other research groups, MIT researchers say, have estimated the probabilities of various outcomes, based on variations in the physical response of the climate system itself.
But the MIT model is the only one that interactively includes detailed treatment of possible changes in human activities as well – such as the degree of economic growth, with its associated energy use, in different countries, according to the study co-author Ronald Prinn, the co-director of the Joint Program and director of MIT’s Center for Global Change Science.
Prinn said that regarding global warming, it is important “to base our opinions and policies on the peer-reviewed science.”
And in the peer-reviewed literature, he said the MIT model, unlike any other, looks in great detail at the effects of economic activity coupled with the effects of atmospheric, oceanic and biological systems.
“In that sense, our work is unique,” he said.
According to MIT researchers, the new projections, published recently in the American Meteorological Society’s Journal of Climate, indicate a median probability of surface warming of 5.2 degrees Celsius by 2100, with a 90 percent probability range of 3.5 to 7.4 degrees.
Prinn said this can be compared to a median projected increase in the 2003 study of just 2.4 degrees.
The difference. he said, is caused by several factors rather than any single big change. Among these are improved economic modeling and newer economic data showing less chance of low emissions than had been projected in the earlier scenarios.
Other changes include accounting for the past masking of underlying warming by the cooling induced by 20th century volcanoes, and for emissions of soot, which can add to the warming effect.
In addition, MIT researchers said measurements of deep ocean temperature rises, which enable estimates of how fast heat and carbon dioxide are removed from the atmosphere and transferred to the ocean depths, imply lower transfer rates than previously estimated.
Prinn said these and a variety of other changes based on new measurements and new analyses changed the odds on what could be expected in this century in the “no policy” scenarios – that is, where there are no policies in place that specifically induce reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
Overall, he said, the changes “unfortunately largely summed up all in the same direction.”
“Overall, they stacked up so they caused more projected global warming.” Prinn said.
While the outcomes in the “no policy” projections now look much worse than before, there is less change from previous work in the projected outcomes if strong policies are put in place now to drastically curb greenhouse gas emissions, according to the MIT researchers.
Without action, “there is significantly more risk than we previously estimated,” Prinn says. “This increases the urgency for significant policy action.”
To illustrate the range of probabilities revealed by the 400 simulations, according to MIT, Prinn and the team produced a “roulette wheel” that reflects the latest relative odds of various levels of temperature rise. The wheel provides a very graphic representation of just how serious the potential climate impacts are.
“There’s no way the world can or should take these risks,” Prinn says.
And the odds indicated by this modeling may actually understate the problem, because the model does not fully incorporate other positive feedbacks that can occur, he said.
For example, if increased temperatures caused a large-scale melting of permafrost in arctic regions and subsequent release of large quantities of methane, a very potent greenhouse gas. Including that feedback “is just going to make it worse,” Prinn said.
Prinn said that the computer models are built to match the known conditions, processes and past history of the relevant human and natural systems, and the researchers are therefore dependent on the accuracy of this current knowledge.
Beyond this, “we do the research, and let the results fall where they may,” he said.
Since there are so many uncertainties, especially with regard to what human beings will choose to do and how large the climate response will be, “we don’t pretend we can do it accurately. Instead, we do these 400 runs and look at the spread of the odds,” Prinn said.
Because vehicles last for years, and buildings and powerplants last for decades, Prinn said it is essential to start making major changes through adoption of significant national and international policies as soon as possible.
“The least-cost option to lower the risk is to start now and steadily transform the global energy system over the coming decades to low or zero greenhouse gas-emitting technologies,” he said.