Lundaprofessorn Erik Svensson, mer känd för bloggen Biology & Politics, har nu fått ett nytt irritationsmoment i form av en kollega – professor Germund Hesslow. I sitt senaste blogginlägg kommenterar professor Svensson något upprört att ännu en icke klimatforskare gett sig in i klimatdebatten och ”förnekar” den s.k. koldioxidhypotesen. Ni kan läsa Erik Svenssons inlägg här.
I sitt inlägg kommenterar även Erik Svensson tidskriften Natures senaste nummer. Han är förvånad över hur någon kan kalla tidskriften för alarmistisk, när allt den gör är att spegla verkligheten som den är. Ur innehållet (OBS ej komplett innehåll):
Time to Act. Without a solid commitment from the world’s leaders, innovative ways to combat climate change are likely to come to nothing.
It is not too late yet — but we may be very close. The 500 billion tonnes of carbon that humans have added to the atmosphere lie heavily on the world, and the burden swells by at least 9 billion tonnes a year (see page 1117). If present trends continue, humankind will have emitted a trillion tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere well before 2050, and that could be enough to push the planet into the danger zone. And there is no reason to think that the pressure will stop then. The coal seams and tar sands of the world hold enough carbon for humankind to emit another trillion tonnes — and the apocalyptic scenarios extend from there (see page 1104).
Climate crunch: A burden beyond bearing. The climate situation may be even worse than you think. In the first of three features, Richard Monastersky looks at evidence that keeping carbon dioxide beneath dangerous levels is tougher than previously thought.
Sucking it up. It’s simple to mop carbon dioxide out of the air, but it could cost a lot of money. In the second of three features on the carbon challenge, Nicola Jones talks with the scientists pursuing this strategy.
Great white hope. Geoengineering schemes, such as brightening clouds, are being talked about ever more widely. In the third of three features, Oliver Morton looks at how likely they are to work.
Overshoot, adapt and recover. We will probably overshoot our current climate targets, so policies of adaptation and recovery need much more attention, say Martin Parry, Jason Lowe and Clair Hanson.
The worst-case scenario. Stephen Schneider explores what a world with 1,000 parts per million of CO2 in its atmosphere might look like.
Could climate change capitalism? Economist Nicholas Stern’s latest book is a rare and masterly synthesis of climate-change science and economics. His ‘global deal’ could change capitalism for the better, says Robert Costanza.
News and Views
Climate change: Too much of a bad thing. There are various — and confusing — targets to limit global warming due to emissions of greenhouse gases. Estimates based on the total slug of carbon emitted are possibly the most robust, and are worrisome.
Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C. The politically defined threshold of dangerous climate change is an increase of 2 degrees Celsius in the mean global temperature. Simulations here show that when carbon dioxide and a full suite of positive and negative radiative forcings are considered, total emissions from 2000 to 2050 of about 1,400 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide yield a 50% probability of exceeding this threshold by the end of the twenty-first century. ‘Business as usual’ emissions will probably meet or exceed this 50% probability. (Malte Meinshausen, Nicolai Meinshausen, William Hare, Sarah C. B. Raper, Katja Frieler, Reto Knutti, David J. Frame & Myles R. Allen)
Välbalanserat eller vinklat?