Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

James Hansen....."We must get back below 350 ppm to preserve civilization"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
RedEarth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 07:57 PM
Original message
James Hansen....."We must get back below 350 ppm to preserve civilization"
Twenty years ago today, before he became America’s top climate scientist, NASA’s James Hansen was among the first to warn Congress and the nation about the dangers of human-caused global warming. For a new analysis of that testimony, see Grist here.

Hansen just spoke at the National Press Club. He is also giving a briefing to the House Select Committee on Energy Independence & Global Warming. Looks like C-SPAN will skip both. Sad.

You can see look at his presentation and recent postings on his website. Here are some words of wisdom from his speech today:


This is not a time to celebrate. Emissions just keep going up.

You may have seen a lot of ads on TV about clean energy. It’s greenwashing.

Contrary to what you may have read on some blogs — we are not entering a global ice age. The world continues to warm even though we had a cold winter thanks mainly to La Niña.

I preferred to do science then communicate with the public after 1988 until 2004. At that time I realize there was a huge gap between what is understood by scientists vs. what is known by public

Planetary emergency because of tipping points.

>> 99% confidence that the dangerous level of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations is 350 ppm.

Yes, we can overshoot 350 ppm, but only on a timescale of decades.

We must get back below 350 ppm to preserve civilization.

We have reached one tipping point. We will lose all summer ice in Arctic over the next 5 to 10 years.

And that endangers Greenland ice sheet, whose mass loss accelerating.

The subtropics have expanded in size — that is desertification

The glaciers are receding. hundreds of millions of people will lose their reservoir of water for summer/fall. We have a few more decades before they’re all gone.

The less oil production the better.

We must phase out coal by 2030 and go to carbon-free energy.We need a low-loss high voltage DC electric grid.

Basic conflict today is between fossil fuel special interests and young people/unborn/nature

The disinformation campaign today borders on crimes against humanity. We do know the consequences of inaction.

Drilling off the Outer Continental shelf is exactly the wrong thing to do. A crazy thing. Extends the addiction (a little).

Geoengineering is a last resort. You wouldn’t want to go down that path.

Nothing about the climate system that says it has to be stable. Sea level stable 7000 years. We have been in the ice “sweet zone”: Stable Ice sheets on Greenland, antarctica, ice covering the artic sea but not the continents.

450 ppm gets us an ice free planet.

http://climateprogress.org/2008/06/23/drilling-off-shore-is-a-crazy-thing-says-hansen-on-20th-anniversary-of-his-famous-testimony/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
panader0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks RedEarth, and thanks James Hansen
for putting this extreme emergency in focus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FirstLight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-23-08 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
2. This is so fucking important... and there is SO much misinformation...
I like this list, I will have to print it out and use it for the next debate I have with my Dad - who says it is all a bunch of whooey..

I can't believe that we would rather collectively believe that we can hide our heads in the sand on this - isn't it obvoius?What will it take to change things? Perhaps the Earth will just change it all FOR us - and since all the symptoms are happening YEARS before the models predicted, I assume the water is boiling us little froggies much beter than we know.

see you guys in the other side, hope we can shift things
and fast!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-24-08 03:04 AM
Response to Original message
3. K + onto the greatest page (n/t)
:scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-24-08 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
4. Count on this administration getting right on it and not letting go until the problem is
fixed. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-24-08 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
5. This civilization is toast.
350 ppm isn't going to happen.

The best we can do now is slow down enough that we might build some new sort of civilization that is sustainable.

If we can't do that, the human population will be much reduced by disease, famine, and war... same as always.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-24-08 04:37 PM
Response to Original message
6. I guess that James Hanson believes that civilization is "cooked." "Done."
"Overly ripe." "Compost."

There is no way that we're going to see 350 ppm in the lifetime of any one now living.

We're very near 400 ppm and still, still, still we have people opposing the world's largest, by far, source of climate change gas free energy and talking up how they're going to save their cars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-24-08 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
7. We're boned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amerikat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-24-08 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
8. Can someone explain to me about the "low loss high voltage DC"?
"We need a low-loss high voltage DC electric grid."
I don't understand. I thought DC didn't travel very far and that Is why we use AC current.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 08:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC