Biggest jump ever seen in global warming gases
November 3, 2011 By SETH BORENSTEIN , AP Science Writer
Map shows 10 countries with most carbon emissions in 2010 and last 50 years of worldwide emissions
(AP) -- The global output of heat-trapping carbon dioxide jumped by the biggest amount on record, the U.S. Department of Energy calculated, a sign of how feeble the world's efforts are at slowing man-made global warming.
The new figures for 2010 mean that levels of greenhouse gases are higher than the worst case scenario outlined by climate experts just four years ago.
"The more we talk about the need to control emissions, the more they are growing," said John Reilly, co-director of MIT's Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change.
The world pumped about 564 million more tons (512 million metric tons) of carbon into the air in 2010 than it did in 2009. That's an increase of 6 percent. That amount of extra pollution eclipses the individual emissions of all but three countries - China, the United States and India, the world's top producers of greenhouse gases.
It is a "monster" increase that is unheard of, said Gregg Marland, a professor of geology at Appalachian State University, who has helped calculate Department of Energy figures in the past.
Extra pollution in China and the U.S. account for more than half the increase in emissions last year, Marland said.
"It's a big jump," said Tom Boden, director of the Energy Department's Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center at Oak Ridge National Lab. "From an emissions standpoint, the global financial crisis seems to be over."
Boden said that in 2010 people were traveling, and manufacturing was back up worldwide, spurring the use of fossil fuels, the chief contributor of man-made climate change.
India and China are huge users of coal. Burning coal is the biggest carbon source worldwide and emissions from that jumped nearly 8 percent in 2010.
The world is slowly using more coal and less natural gas when it should be doing just the opposite because of climate change, Marland said.
In 2007 when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued its last large report on global warming, it used different scenarios for carbon dioxide pollution and said the rate of warming would be based on the rate of pollution. Boden said the latest figures put global emissions higher than the worst case projections from the climate panel. Those forecast global temperatures rising between 4 and 11 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century with the best estimate at 7.5 degrees.
"Really dismaying," said Granger Morgan, head of the engineering and public policy department at Carnegie Mellon University. "We are building up a horrible legacy for our children and grandchildren."
©2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
-
CO2 emissions booming, shifting east, researchers report
Sep 24, 2008 |
not rated yet |
0
-
China to surpass U.S. emissions levels
Nov 07, 2006 |
not rated yet |
0
-
A new measure of global warming from carbon emissions
Jun 10, 2009 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Carbon emissions at record high: report
May 30, 2011 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Global emissions to leap 39 percent by 2030: US
May 27, 2009 |
not rated yet |
0
-
Stars containing dark matter should look different from other stars
Feb 20, 2012 |
4.5 / 5 (17) |
11
-
Physicists discover evidence of rare hypernucleus, a component of strange matter
Feb 17, 2012 |
4.7 / 5 (38) |
22
-
Fast photon control brings quantum photonic technologies closer
Feb 13, 2012 |
5 / 5 (8) |
1
-
Engineers build first sub-10-nm carbon nanotube transistor
Feb 01, 2012 |
4.9 / 5 (36) |
32
-
Something old, something new: Evolution and the structural divergence of duplicate genes
Jan 31, 2012 |
4.6 / 5 (7) |
1
-
Is the Earth really going to die
14 hours ago
-
Do some geologists actually act a lot like Randy Marsh?
Feb 11, 2012
-
Discrepancy between oxygen and carbon-dioxide levels
Feb 09, 2012
-
where gems are found in the world
Feb 09, 2012
-
Wind Waves in Reservoir ~ Wind run-up and Wind set-up
Feb 08, 2012
-
Balance of oxygen in the atmosphere
Feb 01, 2012
- More from Physics Forums - Earth
More news stories
Spitzer finds solid buckyballs in space
(PhysOrg.com) -- Astronomers using data from NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope have, for the first time, discovered buckyballs in a solid form in space. Prior to this discovery, the microscopic carbon spheres ...
14 hours ago |
4.7 / 5 (12) |
8
|
Going up: Japan builder eyes space elevator
A Japanese construction firm claimed Wednesday it could execute an out-of-this-world plan to put tourists in space within 40 years by building an elevator that stretches a quarter of the way to the moon.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
21 hours ago |
3.5 / 5 (13) |
26
ENASA satellite finds Earth's clouds are getting lower
(PhysOrg.com) -- Earth's clouds got a little lower -- about one percent on average -- during the first decade of this century, finds a new NASA-funded university study based on NASA satellite data. The results ...
Space & Earth / Earth Sciences
18 hours ago |
5 / 5 (8) |
13
|
Fresh scandal embroils US climate science debate
A fresh scandal over climate change has erupted in the United States after leaked documents appeared to show a right-wing funded campaign to influence how climate science is taught in schools.
11 hours ago |
4.1 / 5 (9) |
8
World's oceans get an acid bath
Among the repercussions of global climate change, the effect of ocean acidification on marine life is one of the least-understood variables.
18 hours ago |
4.3 / 5 (6) |
4
|
Researchers build first physical 'metatronic' circuit
(PhysOrg.com) -- The technological world of the 21st century owes a tremendous amount to advances in electrical engineering, specifically, the ability to finely control the flow of electrical charges using ...
Faster than light neutrinos? More like faulty wiring
You can shelf your designs for a warp drive engine (for now) and put the DeLorean back in the garage; it turns out neutrinos may not have broken any cosmic speed limits after all.
Physicists surprised by disappearing and reappearing superconductivity in iron selenium chalcogenides
Superconductivity is a rare physical state in which matter is able to conduct electricity -- maintain a flow of electrons -- without any resistance. This phenomenon can only be found in certain materials at low temperatures, ...
Stanford research team cracks animated NuCaptcha
(PhysOrg.com) -- The research team from Stanford University, led by Elie Bursztein, that previously had cracked regular CAPTCHAs and then audio CAPTCHAs, now has also successfully cracked the animated version called NuCapt ...
Flesh-eating bacteria inspire superglue
(PhysOrg.com) -- A bio-inspired superglue has been developed by Oxford University researchers that cant be matched for sticking molecules together and not letting go.
Scientists create potent molecules aimed at treating muscular dystrophy
While RNA is an appealing drug target, small molecules that can actually affect its function have rarely been found. But now scientists from the Florida campus of The Scripps Research Institute have for the first time designed ...
Nov 03, 2011
Rank: 1.8 / 5 (35)
Why can no one ask some questions instead of quivering and lashing out emotionally?
Nov 03, 2011
Rank: 4.4 / 5 (30)
Yes, those pesky MIT professors, "panic-y petes" all! They've done so little to advance scientific exploration of the known universe. Perhaps we should just shut them down?
As to your point re: "lashing out emotionally", your entire post amounts to an emotional appeal. You have attempted to denigrate what amounts to the hard work of multiple scientists, who spend their workdays actually working towards understanding these processes.
Yet, you have offered nothing in place of the information you would ask us to ignore. No facts, no evidence, no new information.
Your entire post amounts to: "I really don't like this, so why do they have to show us this stuff?"
Please try just a wee bit harder than that! I know you can do it.
Nov 03, 2011
Rank: 4.1 / 5 (18)
Nov 03, 2011
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (18)
Nov 03, 2011
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (23)
1) You asked: "Why is it so impossible to *measure* the concentration of CO2 in the air instead of calculating it?" The answer is that they do both. They measure the amount in the air (which changes over the surface of the earth) and they also calculate how much is emitted by people. The reason is that the difference between the amount emitted and the amount measured is the amount taken up by the earth (other than in the atmosphere). Knowing that number helps to understand how increases and decreases in emissions affect the amount in the air.
2) You asked: "Why would there be a decade of no warming while the CO2 continued to rise?" The answer is that there has not been a decade of "no warming." You have been watching too much Fox news or listening to Rush.
Continued:
Nov 03, 2011
Rank: 4.6 / 5 (18)
3)You asked: "Shouldn't all these positive feedback mechanisms that are supposed to magnify the warming continue working even if CO2 had remained flat just because of all the "danger" already in the air from decades ago." The answer is yes. Again, part of the reason for measuring and calculating is to be able to identify the feedback. You can't understand that if you couldn't understand the first answer above.
4) You asked: "Why can no one ask some questions instead of quivering and lashing out emotionally?" As can be seen from the posts so far, yours is the only one that lashes out emotionally (and having no facts behind it). So, I think we have to wait for you to answer this one. As for quivering, is that self-identification? There are a number of folks on this forum who speak out and I don't believe any of them are "quivering" unless it is in anticipation of giving reasonable answers to your Luddite questions.
Nov 03, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (5)
Nov 03, 2011
Rank: 2.8 / 5 (15)
Educate yourself. Loser.
"Keeling Curve". Google is your friend.
Nov 03, 2011
Rank: 1.6 / 5 (20)
Nov 03, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (17)
25 years."
"a tenacious British mathematician named Nic
Lewis started looking into the question of sensitivity and found that the only
wholly empirical estimate of sensitivity cited by the IPCC had been put through
an illegitimate statistical procedure which effectively fattened its tail on the
upward end it hugely increased the apparent probability of high warming at
the expense of low warming. When this is corrected, the theoretical probability
of warming greater than 2.3C is very low indeed."
"Handing the reins of power to pseudoscience has an unhappy history. Remember
eugenics. Around 1910 the vast majority of scientists and other intellectuals
agreed that nationalizing reproductive decisions so as to stop poor,
disabled and stupid people from having babies was not just a practical but a
moral imperative of great urgency."
They still do support eugenics.
http://www.bishop...resy.pdf
Nov 03, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (12)
Johny boy, better educate yourself instead of sheepishly listening to FOX news and Anthony Watts. There has been no "no-warming" decade!! And of course a single decade is too small to reveal anything. Look at the record since 1880 and the BEST data. ,
Nov 04, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (12)
You are a liar RyggTard.
Like Every other Libertarian/Randite who has ever existed.
"Remember Jim Hansen of NASA told us in 1988 to expect 24 degrees in 25 years." - RyggTard
Nov 04, 2011
Rank: 3.9 / 5 (9)
Nov 04, 2011
Rank: 3.8 / 5 (4)
IMO it's a good opportunity to correlate the carbon dioxide levels with concentration of another gases in atmosphere.
Nov 04, 2011
Rank: 1.4 / 5 (9)
exactly the point...look at the BEST data not the headlines...10 years. no rise
Nov 04, 2011
Rank: 4.5 / 5 (6)
25 years."
Perhaps Jim Hansen was wrong. Now, stick to the topic please.
Nov 04, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
I am accustomed to seeing the CO2 levels expressed as ppm. I can't find the 6% increase in emissions expressed in this usual fashion.
Nov 04, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (6)
It has? I think not.
http://en.wikiped...missions
1) See above
2) a sudden rise may also mean that buffer systms (like solubility in water or increased algae takeup) are full. I.e. that we have pased the 'tipping point'.
How such 'secondary effects' argue against AGW you have to explain.
Nov 04, 2011
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
Nov 04, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
You're right of course. But, that shouldn't bar anyone from wanting to improve the situation. For the most part, energy production is a result of high-level government policy decisions combined with (in free markets anyway) corporate production efforts.
So, by your logic, we should all just sit around and twiddle our thumbs until such time as we're all solar?
Hardly. Better to analyze and discuss. Who knows - some individuals on here may put these ideas into real-world use.
Nov 04, 2011
Rank: 1.4 / 5 (9)
But he is 'right' now?
Nov 05, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (8)
He never said 25' in 25 years. You are a liar.
And this isn't the first time you have been caught in a lie. There have now been several dozen instances.
I have never encountered a Libertarian/Randite who wasn't a perpetual and congenital liar.
You are no exception RyggTard.
Nov 05, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (8)
Oh look another liar.
Here is the BEST data over the last decade.
http://tamino.fil...d01b.jpg
Best shows a 0.14'C rise over the last decade.
http://tamino.wor...ts-foot/
Nov 05, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Nov 05, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Nov 05, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (8)
But that is not science.
Nov 05, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Never mind, the bottom line is you don't care about the environment. Just admit that.
Nov 05, 2011
Rank: 3.5 / 5 (2)
While I understand your mode of thinking I tend to disagree.
How is buying yourself a wind turbine or solar panel a governmental policy decision?
As of right now it's more cost effective in the long run assuming electrical prices continue to go up or even stay where they are at.
Nov 05, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
Correct. Your continuous stream of lies is not science.
I have never encountered a Libertarian/Randite who wasn't a perpetual and congenital liar.
RyggTard is no exception to that observation.