Re: [Fwd: CEO #8: Honesty About Dangerous Climate Change]

[Paul Baer <pbaer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Title: Re: [PEN-L] [Fwd: CEO #8: Honesty About Dangerous Climate

Thanks Gene - though I could have posted it myself, your creds probably will get more people to read it.

Have you read it yourself yet? It's funny - I've been doing a lot of fancy calculations all of which show something that you could have done in 1990 - if the climate sensitivity might be even as high as 4ºC, you might want stabilization at under half a doubling - 400 ppm CO2 e. But then, the arguments for 2º weren't as well developed then either.

--pb

> I was asked to forward this by the
> writers.
>
> Gene Coyle
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: CEO #8: Honesty About Dangerous
> Climate Change Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 22:08:17 -0700 From: Climate
> Equity Observer <ceo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> To:
> (Recipient list suppressed)
> Friends;
>
> Just in case you're in a good mood, we thought we'd send you this new
> issue of Climate Equity
> Observer. It doesn't directly address "the equity issue,"
> but it helps, we think, to lay the foundation upon which real climate
> equity will have to be built. It does so by calling for Honesty About
> Dangerous Climate Change.
>
> This isn't a critique of the denialists. Rather, it's our attempt to
> clear a bit of air about the 2ºC line and its implications.
>
> 2ºC is now commonly recommended as the maximum degree of warming
> that can plausibly be seen as consistent with the avoidance of
> "dangerous climate change." It's a good start, especially
> given the pressures we all face to be "realistic."
> Unfortunately a careful analysis shows that the emissions paths and
> carbon dioxide concentration targets that generally accompany
> professions of support for the 2ºC goal - typically, 450 parts per
> million (ppm) CO2 or higher - are actually likely to produce
> temperature increases much higher than 2ºC.
>
> If you're not familiar with the arguments for a 2ºC target, we
> suggest the Climate Action Network's adequacy position paper, adopted at
> COP-8 in late 2002 and recently presented, in a condensed and
> user-friendly way, as part of an excellent CAN briefing called Building
> on Kyoto.
>
> If you are already familiar with the case for drawing the line at
> 2ºC, but wondering just exactly what the 2ºC goal means, this might
> be a better place to start. Or at least a good place to return to.
>
> PS: If the links in this mail don't work for you, go to
> www.ecoequity.org. All should be clear from there...
> Paul Baer: pbaer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Tom Athanasiou: toma@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> EcoEquity: www.ecoequity.org
> Climate Equity Observer: ceo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Dead Heat: Global Justice and Global Warming
> http://www.ecoequity.org/docs/deadheat.htm