Science has published a major new study, “The Sensitivity of Polar Ozone Depletion to Proposed Geoengineering Schemes” (subs. req’d). That study finds:

The large burden of sulfate aerosols injected into the stratosphere by the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991 cooled Earth and enhanced the destruction of polar ozone in the subsequent few years. The continuous injection of sulfur into the stratosphere has been suggested as a “geoengineering” scheme to counteract global warming. We use an empirical relationship between ozone depletion and chlorine activation to estimate how this approach might influence polar ozone. An injection of sulfur large enough to compensate for surface warming caused by the doubling of atmospheric CO2 would strongly increase the extent of Arctic ozone depletion during the present century for cold winters and would cause a considerable delay, between 30 and 70 years, in the expected recovery of the Antarctic ozone hole.

Of course, this geo-engineering scheme has lots of other problem. An earlier study noted:

Read more

McCain has put out a climate policy that, like Bush’s, wouldn’t help the climate (see McCain speech, Part 2: Relying on offsets = Rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic). Wednesday he announced he won’t even bother showing up to vote on his friend Joe Lieberman’s climate bill because of insufficient subsides (read “pork”) for nuclear power (see here) three weeks after saying he supported it (see here).

Now will the media finally stop idolizing this Bush clone who has mastered W’s art of saying one thing, to get favorable media coverage, and then doing the exact opposite, either to please his base or because that’s what he really believes?

Indeed, given that Time said earlier this monththat McCain’s “stance on global warming –it’s real, and we need to deal with it –is his campaign’s best evidence that he’s not just like George W. Bush,” it would seem we are left with a McCain who is just like George W. Bush.

Let’s see if the traditional media start to change their coverage from the nonsense peddled in stories like “On Policy, Obama Breaks Little New Ground,” a frothy front-page McCain press release article by the Washington Post. That article claims the Illinois Senator has supposedly “dismissed the importance of policy proposals” — even though he actually has a detailed climate plan that would actually save the climate (see “Obama’s excellent energy and climate plan”). The Post then actually claims

Read more

NASA’s James Hansen has posted a “summary of recent attempts to provide information and interact with governors re actions needed to stem climate change” here. As he explains in the accompanying e-mail:

This Sunday evening (June 1) I will give a talk at Cary Hall in Lexington, Massachusetts a few hundred yards from where the first shots of the American Revolution were fired. Perhaps there is an analogy between the gap that developed between the best interests of the American people and policies of despotic King George and the gap that has developed between the best interests of the public (and nature) and the policies (mainly those related to energy) that we now live under.

A different sort of revolution, within the democratic framework, is needed, but it won’t be easy. What makes it a hair-raising drama, with an outcome far from assured, is the combination of climate system inertia and resulting planetary energy imbalance, energy system inertia, and climate system tipping points.

The event referred to above (7:30 PM, June 1) is hosted by the Lexington Global Warming Action Coalition (info at www.lexgwac.org). It starts with a short talk by Mark Bowen, author of Censoring Science, followed by my talk on the science, and then open discussion. There is a $5 admission. I have no financial interest in the book or event (but I probably get in free).

Needless to say, if you live in the Boston area, this is a must see.

There is one policy area where I pretty strongly disagree with Hansen. He calls for:

Read more

Part 1 looked at why “The permafrost won’t be perma for long.” Part 2 looked at whether the potential destruction of the tundra represents “The point of no return” for the climate, necessitating that we keep atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide below 450 ppm or else risk going to 800 ppm to 1000 ppm. Here I examine two local amplifying feedbacks that further threaten the permafrost — forests and fires.

Reduced snow cover and albedo (reflectivity) in the summertime Arctic landscape, caused by global warming, has added local atmospheric heating “similar in magnitude to the regional heating expected over multiple decades from a doubling of atmospheric CO₂” (Science, subs. req’d). That same Science study warns “Continuation of current trends in shrub and tree expansion could further amplify this atmospheric heating 2-7 times.”

The point is that if you convert a white landscape to a boreal forest, the surface suddenly starts collecting a lot more solar energy. That trend is occurring now, as seen in these two photos from a recent ScienceNews article, “Boreal forests shift north.”

“Upper photo taken in 1962 shows tundra-dominated mountain slope in Siberian Urals. A 2004 photo of the same site, below, shows conifers were setting up dense stand of forest.”

Now, another major study warns that the warming-driven northward march of vegetation poses yet another threat to the tundra.

Read more

In March, British prime minister Tony Blair launched the Breaking the Climate Deadlock initiative to promote a new global agreement on climate change.

Today he has an Op-Ed the in the Washington Post, “Leading On Climate Change: How Action in Congress Can Move the World,” in which he argues

The climate change bill that senators are to begin debating next week is a hugely important signal of intent on behalf of U.S. legislators. Yes, negotiations could still alter the legislation. But the bill’s core proposition is correct: Unless the United States radically reduces its greenhouse gas emissions, along with other major emitters, the damage to the climate will be irreversible.

Well, the bill certainly does not put this country on a path to “radically” reduce GHGs (see “Boxer bill update: Probably no U.S. CO2 emissions cut until after 2025“), but I agree with Blair the vote will be cast in mostly symbolic terms. I hope Boxer can at least get a majority vote in the Senate, but not if she has the water down the bill even more. Enough is enough.

It must be said that Blair is years too late in his strong public pleas for U.S. action. Almost exactly a year ago The Guardian had reported: “Tony Blair believes he is close to persuading George Bush to accept an ambitious plan to bring the world’s greatest polluters into international partnership to fight climate change for the first time.” As I wrote at the time, “Yes, and monkees will fly out of my — but let it go” (see “Bush 100, Blair 0. Game over“).

Blair blew it big time as PM on the climate issue. Still, it’s good to see him using his high profile now to press for climate action. Here is the rest of Blair’s argument:

Read more