“In the latest ‘Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 5th Assessment Report’ (IPCC AR5), there have been published a selection of ‘Representative Concentration Pathways’ (RCP’s).
Dr Matt Watson, from the school of earth Sciences at the University of Bristol (UK), made this point strongly at a recent meeting at the Royal Society in London:“Why are we doing this? Why are we doing this research? This is why, this is the latest projections from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the alarming thing is that these two scenarios [RCP 2.6 and RCP 4.5] both include negative emissions technology. So, there is geoengineering, of the flavour of carbon dioxide removal, in the best case scenarios.”
“The very, very alarming thing for us is that we are on this path here, that is RCP 8.5. We are slap bang on this trajectory and this puts us in a very different place in our children’s lifetime.”
All hope of maintaining a liveable planet has been gambled on negative emissions technology that simply does not exist. In fact it is “Fantasy Technology” that they hope will be invented sometime in the future.
Chair of the IPCC Dr Rajendra Pachauri
“If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment”
Valencia Spain, Nov 17, 2007.
U.N. Report Describes Risks of Inaction on Climate Change – The New York Times.
Nick Breeze recorded this seminal presentation that is a must watch if you want to understand the horrendous gamble that the dominant culture has taken with all complex life on the planet. Watch the video at the following link; Survivable IPCC projections based on science fiction.
More posts by Nick Breeze: http://envisionation.co.uk
We have crossed a multitude of “Tipping Points” and the IPCC has gambled everything on little more than science fiction.
I'm an anti-imperialist, environmental activist and blue ocean sailor, who is passionate about the earth and all it's inhabitants without favour. Brace for imminent impact as we bare witness to the non-linear unraveling of the biosphere and habitability disappearing for most if not all complex life on the only habitable planet we know of. To quote President Niinistö in North Russia: ‘If We Lose the Arctic, We Lose the World’. Folks we have lost the Arctic.
Reblogged to Nature bats last forum.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Excellent interview on Radio Ecoshock on this subject;
[audio src="http://www.ecoshock.net/downloads/ES_TFriedrich.mp3" /]
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on Move for Change and the Brooklyn Culture Jam and commented:
It amuses me (as it must amuse Kevin Hester) that the climate denialists disparage the IPCC as some ‘liberal’ source of information too quick to announce bad tidings. In fact, the science in the fifth assessment is quite clear–there’s no survivable climate scenario absent geoengineering we haven’t invented yet. Clock is ticking. Brace for impact.
LikeLike
Professor Guy McPherson discusses the role of the IPCC.
LikeLike
“Coal on limited lifespan as CCS hopes go up in smoke
By Giles Parkinson on 29 June 2017
The coal industry is facing a new crisis point as a group of leading scientists call for the construction of new coal generators to cease within three years, and as the industry’s flagship “clean coal” and carbon capture and storage project went up in smoke in the US.”
“As reported elsewhere on this web site, the US energy utility Southern Co finally gave up on its much-vaunted Kemper coal gasification and CCS project, after costs soared from $US1.8 billion to more than $US7.5 billion ($A10 billion), and it realised it wasn’t going to work.”
http://reneweconomy.com.au/coal-limited-lifespan-ccs-hopes-go-smoke-11013/#undefined.gbpl
LikeLike
“The IPCC’s grafting of 20th century growth and productivity data onto future scenarios completely misses the intimate relationship between energy and economies.”
More excellent work from Insurge Intelligence;
View at Medium.com
LikeLike
Another feedback loop making a mockery of the failed IPCC predictions.
https://theconversation.com/warm-waters-melting-antarctic-ice-shelves-may-have-appeared-for-the-first-time-in-over-7-000-years-82016?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+October+20+2017+-+86057143&utm_content=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+October+20+2017+-+86057143+CID_b127cf7b781aaa5d422c8a966b3ba814&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=flowing+up+to+the+surface
LikeLike
LikeLike
LikeLike
More on this subject from Nick Breeze and Kevin Anderson
LikeLike
The latest from Sam Carana debunking the IPCC delusion.
We have already exceeded 1.5C
https://arctic-news.blogspot.co.nz/2018/02/ipcc-seeks-to-downplay-global-warming.html
LikeLike
The IPCC have gambled everything on fantasy technology and lost, don’t shoot the messenger!
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/03/the-paris-climate-accords-are-starting-to-look-like-fantasy.html?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=s3&utm_campaign=sharebutton-b
LikeLike
More on the myth of scalable CCS now from Tindall Centre for Climate Change Research
http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/news/new-animation-paris-agreement-requires-co2-removal-atmosphere
LikeLike
Scientific American calls out the biggest gamble of all time. Survival of most if not all complex life o the planet has been left to a ‘crap shoot’ of CCS that is fantasy technology.
We saw the same thing with the nuclear industry telling us they would sort out the waste issue ‘later’. It’s later and still no joy.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/dont-gamble-our-planets-future-on-unproved-technologies/
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLike
More excellent work from Radio Ecoshock calling out the IPCC and their politically diluted latest report.
LikeLike
The latest analysis from Dahr Jamal via Patrick Farnsworth of the “Last Born in the Wilderness blog and You Tube chanel;
LikeLike
“IEEFA have just published a great report detailing the failure of all the North American CCS projects. Very good reference.” Care of Cindy Baxter;
http://ieefa.org/ieefa-report-holy-grail-of-carbon-capture-continues-to-elude-coal-industry-cautionary-tale-applies-to-domestic-and-foreign-projects-alike/?fbclid=IwAR29jHytYxK1hzrph5VyfPkhVIAlHhR3lyqKLMQsUC3ixH4zJhJ6uJGKgTM
LikeLike
LikeLike
Study shows IPCC is underselling climate change. It’s no shit sherlock Wednesday from where i’m studying!
https://phys.org/news/2019-03-ipcc-underselling-climate.html?fbclid=IwAR1OKQyX6acFGWK6GvDh07EvM3QtAzgzt26sbjs0v_DKtz04bGOxt-Eamyw
LikeLike
Carbon Dioxide removal sucks;
https://theecologist.org/2020/nov/13/carbon-dioxide-removal-sucks?fbclid=IwAR2DenXhzKFWYsqCdwpyjdS2OcmLGjiN79t49OUuBkousLb0QALbl-cvivs
LikeLike
Courtesy of the wonderful Alice Friedemann
“Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) systems, touted as techno-fixes for global warming, usually put more greenhouse gases into the air than they take out, a study published last month has confirmed.
Carbon capture and storage (CCS), which grabs carbon dioxide (CO2) produced by coal- or gas-fired power stations, and then uses it for enhanced oil recovery (EOR), emits between 1.4 and 4.7 tonnes of the gas for each tonne removed, the article shows.
Direct air capture (DAC), which sucks CO2 from the atmosphere, emits 1.4-3.5 tonnes for each tonne it recovers, mostly from fossil fuels used to power the handful of existing projects.
If DAC was instead powered by renewable electricity – as its supporters claim it should be – it would wolf down other natural resources.
And things get worse at large scale.”
https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/bioerq/v5y2020i3d10.1007_s41247-020-00080-5.html?fbclid=IwAR0On8IChi78vYUEIosMqKf6fXt1t-w4zTRlUmUCEBfKEOML8dWjKWFbO7w
LikeLike
Carbon capture and storage at scale is fantasy technology.
The IPCC gambled the entire biosphere and lost.
https://dgrnewsservice.org/civilization/ecocide/climate-change/net-zero-and-other-climate-delusions/?fbclid=IwAR0qSnFx0TUjnpl48-h0XKeG7ycXSdFW0kUZzyaV8G9k8ntZib7g3WnHdE0
LikeLike
More evidence that CCS doesn’t work at scale
https://www.eco-business.com/news/carbon-capture-and-storage-wont-work-critics-say/?fbclid=IwAR1a86Vz-f6v6VXPCiaI2LoK6t9H5P9KmGeHAQMDzP6Jz_9FE784FqfiHwE
LikeLike
Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) systems put more greenhouse gases into the air than they take out.
https://theecologist.org/2020/nov/13/carbon-dioxide-removal-sucks?fbclid=IwAR29xhOlY6f21_-TDdIg5U3m9cUag6orOrRwQ_4jcutmmgA9imdj18NGz3E
LikeLike
Dinosaur adopts the IPCC position of relying on Fantasy technology to keep the planet habitable.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/may/16/half-of-emissions-cuts-will-come-from-future-tech-says-john-kerry?CMP=twt_a-environment_b-gdneco&fbclid=IwAR2mOJLeSl8kX17aOM07HNoTv9Go3Zmfqpf6NYRey2_0RMus65sKghlP5Tk
LikeLike
LikeLike
Here’s the blog post with all the corroborating links embedded
https://guymcpherson.com/science-update-continued-ipcc-conservatism-and-lies/
LikeLike
LikeLike
LikeLike
“Seven reasons why policymakers should reject carbon capture and storage”
https://www.ciel.org/issue/carbon-capture-and-storage/?fbclid=IwAR3CzU4M_s5nqlIA9YPyq4euT72N0rs2VD8J6a-BortFY6Uo8e5Vb3a2zUw
LikeLike
LikeLike
“Baseline temperature refers to the predicted increase in average global temperature rises. Earlier in the year, the UK Met Office and World Meteorological Organization released research demonstrating that there is more than a 40% chance that the annual average global temperature in at least one of the next five years will temporarily reach 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.”
The article lies from the very first paragraph.
Using 1750 as a baseline we have already surpassed 1.5C
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/08/ipcc-report-on-climate-change?fbclid=IwAR16PQe_Kok7x5wZsVFxuippHRnmnqEdqY7VGomBPpyDnexXdi3Bhu0LBiQ
LikeLike
And then one needs to think about what the CO2 levels were back in 1750 and compare them to now. Mind-boggling jump there! But so many lies are floating around from the fossil fuel profiteers and their paid politician mouthpieces, like turds from a flooded outhouse, that the average person (like most in the US who get all their news from the corporate MSM) is just overwhelmed with bullshit and unable to distinguish fact from fantasy. and don’t want to because reality is just too damned scary.
I keep seeing the term ‘baseline’ used in different streams of media and they are all over the place. Even one of Biden’s was about cutting CO2 from the ‘2005’ baseline! Like that is going to make any damned difference? It is…boggling the mind trying to decipher how these ‘leaders’ think.
Baseline temperatures around here, in the Selkirk Range, used to mean the last frost was sometime in June and the first frost was right about Labor Day first week of September. My 50 yr old apple tree bloomed in March this year… So much for that! Snowpacks were 4 feet solid around the house from Nov-through March into April and May before they really melted down. So much for that, too!
The only baseline that is worth comparing anything to is pre-industrial revolution. But that makes everything look so much worse. Can’t have that now can we? Might make people actually think a little harder and, GASP!, question what they are being told to believe. That would affect corporate profits. GASP again.
sealintheSelkirks
LikeLiked by 1 person
Via Sam Carana on Facadebook.
26 mins ·
IPCC REPORT: BASELINE STRUGGLE
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just released a new report, the Working Group I contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). When reading the report, the question comes up: Is the IPCC seeking to downplay the dire situation we’re in, again? One of the first issues that comes up is the baseline. The IPCC selects 1850–1900 as a baseline, as it did before (in SR1.5). This isn’t pre-industrial. The Paris Agreement calls for pre-industrial as a base.
During 1850 to 1900, more livestock, forest clearing and wood burning resulted in growth in emissions of black carbon, brown carbon, dust, methane and carbon monoxide, which all can temporarily drive up temperatures. Additionally, there was little impact yet of the sulfur aerosols associated with increased fossil fuel burning from 1900. Trends drawn from this base can therefore look flatter than they would have looked if drawn from a genuinely pre-industrial base, or even from the early 1900s as base. The IPCC appears to say that there is only a 50% chance that 1.5°C will be crossed by 2030. Is this a deliberate effort to create the perception that there was enough carbon budget left to be divided among polluters, to let them comfortably keep adding further pollution for another decade or more?
Instead, the IPCC could have concluded that there hasn’t been a carbon budget for a long time and that there are indications that the 1.5°C threshold has long been crossed. When calculating the temperature rise through 2020 and going back one century, NASA data show a 1.29°C rise from 1920, which is a conservative figure, i.e. 0.1°C can be added to translate NASA’s sea surface temperatures into ocean air temperatures and another 0.1°C can be added for higher polar anomalies. So, that already brings the temperature rise up to about 1.5°C and this isn’t the full rise from pre-industrial by a long shot.
The IPCC does mention that from 1750 to 1850–1900 there was a global surface temperature rise of up to 0.3°C, but then excludes this rise, sticking to its selection of 1850-1900 as base. The IPCC also uses seasonally-biased data for the temperature rise before 1750, making it look as if temperatures didn’t rise before 1750, whereas it makes sense to add a 0.29C rise for the period from 3480 BC to 1520, and a further 0.2°C for 1520 to 1750.
Adding up the different elements thus gives a total rise from pre-industrial that could be as high as 1.29°C + 0.1°C + 0.1°C + 0.3°C + 0.2°C + 0.29°C = 2.28°C.
From the post ‘Is the IPCC creating false perceptions, again?’ (pending)
See also the pre-industrial page at:
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/pre-industrial.html
LikeLike
“US support was probably critical to IPCC’s establishment. And why did the US government support it? Assistant Undersecretary of State Bill Nitze wrote to me a few years later saying that our group’s activities played a significant role. Among other motivations, the US government saw the creation of the IPCC as a way to prevent the activism stimulated by my colleagues and me from controlling the policy agenda.”
“I suspect that the Reagan Administration believed that, in contrast to our group, most scientists were not activists, and would take years to reach any conclusion on the magnitude of the threat. Even if they did, they probably would fail to express it in plain English. The US government must have been quite surprised when IPCC issued its first assessment at the end of 1990, stating clearly that human activity was likely to produce an unprecedented warming.”
I’ll post a link to the above quote below, it’s imbedded in a previous post at NBL
The IPCC was designed to fail, part of their mandate it to not make recommendations that would constrict growth.
https://guymcpherson.com/science-update-the-sixth-ipcc-report/
Source of the above quote:
https://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/11/01/ipcc_beginnings/
LikeLike
I’ve also read a bunch (too much!) from numerous sources over the years about who pushed for, designed the format, and initiated the IPCC. The entire process that churns out these reports and funds the pricey paid vacations for these ‘delegates’ who then argue over every single word, sentence, and paragraph in those reports requires one to remain extremely skeptical of anything they say.
That must be kept in your consciousness when you read anything published by this body. Cynical skepticism. Pretty bad state of affairs.
COP 25 and NOTHING has changed by any metric of this disaster or category of what should have/been done except worse and scarier. Off the cliff.
As the climate quicksand closes over our heads all that will happen is…more jets flying in delegates to some lovely vacation spot that I would never be able to afford a meal much less an overnight room. All so they can congratulate one another on how wonderful they are doing their highly-paid job while living the life of luxury.
Worse is to realize that these damned censors AREN’T the scientists who in general are always very conservative in what they say anyway especially when it’s really bad news requiring massive changes to survive. The delegates are political appointees and lobbyists and, just like the term ‘climate CHANGE’ was invented for, designed to distract us from reality. Accomplishing nothing of note but what they were originally expected to do which was of course to continue the wealthy Status Quo. Well, I guess they have done such a wonderful job of that that they can be considered entirely too successful… Oops.
ex-Physicist Manuel Garcia Jr, again in this one:
Climate: Time to Saw Through Our Ankle
https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/08/11/climate-time-to-saw-through-our-ankle/
____
Hoo-boy. Yeah, he’s a pretty dang clear-sighted guy…ouch.
____
This is also one good but fairly long screed against the Status Quo. It cannot be said with enough emphasis, we are in deep doo-doo. Some paragraphs that nail IPCC about 1/8th into it…
Roaming Charges: Ain’t That America, Something to See, Baby
https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/08/13/roaming-charges-22/
____
Weather/climate here:
Still under heavy smoke, as always it seems. N95 masks are a must as is eyewash every time I go outside for more than a couple of minutes. My eyes feel like I’ve been pounded in shorebreak while bodysurfing. Gritty scratchy crap in the eyes immediately.
Temp at 102’F yesterday, 104’F the previous day. The ‘unhealthy’ air alert continues unabated with a sky of such dense nastiness that I can’t see the Huckleberry Range whose ridges start lifting up just three miles west. Often I can’t even see the ridges! The Colville Rez is freaking burning again like 2015’s huge blazes. As has the Spokane Rez to the southwest. Passed a fire station sign yesterday screaming ‘Fire Danger EXTREME.’ Ya think?
Day after day of pm 2.5 particulate trying to get through the mask and into the lungs. The world burns off my porch. How the hummingbirds can handle it I have no idea but there are still a few hanging around demanding that I keep at least one feeder full and fresh for them. Rufous and Calliope still coming to eat which is very unusual this time of year but I’ve got food…and everything they eat is dead from the heat. Keeping the suet feeders stocked on the old apple tree, too. Bats were out last night again late as the temps dropped over 50 degrees to…50’F! Helps that the air goes cold I think. Shit floating in the flashlight beam like it’s snowing those tiny flakes one sees in very cold snowstorms.
Dealing with this as the radically infectious Delta mutated variant screams through the US un-vaxxed population that is so well adapted that inoculated people are getting overwhelmed with the virus in closed indoor spaces where it is present from the unvaxxed. I haven’t stopped wearing a mask when out around anybody much less in a building but people listened to Biden and the politicized CDC and stopped in May. I thought that move was insane. Turns out it was. But the vaxxed aren’t, for the most part, dying of it. The Trump voters are. Now it’s filling hospitals with kids. 10 month olds to teens. Just like 1919, the 2nd Wave has hit the world.
At least we aren’t nearly as bad as OZ is! 20% vaxxed? Holy shit! What I read from NSW was amazingly ignorant.
sealintheSelkirks
LikeLiked by 1 person
Another appalling mis-representation of the severity of the crises we face from one of the delinquents in the IPCC.
Lesley Hughes states that that we are at 1.2C above baseline and at current emissions we will hit 2C in a decade, patent nonsense using 1750 as a baseline.
She like the IPCC generally are lying ( not simply mistaken) about how much warming we have triggered. She conveys zero sense of urgency.
These people are carefully chosen apparatchiks of capitalism.
As I’ve mentioned thousands of times before the IPCC was set up to fail and protect infinite growth on a finite planet.
LikeLike
LikeLike
I love it. This obviously can apply to every country in the world. In most ways it isn’t funny at all, is it?
sealintheSelkirks
LikeLiked by 1 person
This one popped up. It may be ‘stunning’ some climate scientists but for the ‘alarmists’ that nobody has been listening to for 30 freaking years the rapid increase is no surprise at all. Nor to those of us that have been paying attention even though all one hears is negative derogatory labels designed to dismiss anyone who can think out of the box.
An oops moment for this climate scientist. Does he truly have a grasp of just how much worse it’s all going to get in the VERY near future? I think not if he’s acting this way with, you know, just a little rain…
sealintheSelkirks
Climate Scientist: This is a Dystopian Moment
I think I can speak for many of us when I say we’re stunned.
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2021/09/05/climate-scientist-dystopian-moment
LikeLike
[…] https://kevinhester.live/2017/05/18/survivable-ipcc-projections-based-on-science-fiction/?fbclid=IwA… […]
LikeLike
“Policymakers are betting the future of life on Earth that someone will invent some kind of whiz-bang tech to draw down CO2 at a massive scale.”
They gambled the biosphere on fantasy technology and lost.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/10/net-zero-2050-deadly-procrastination-fossil-fuels?fbclid=IwAR00V70wrlzWk1LL9KJ8gvUmj9RPMTcWEhnESjtdlUSv_2r8eoxaejJyq7E
LikeLike
When the brightest and most likely budding scientists are siphoned off to the military and/or corporate world of for-profit everything, one can’t really expect much from scientists but more deadly weapons, ya know? Pure science research is a dead economic road for corporation CEOs who don’t keep the quarterly profit income up for the shareholders.
Do you just keep shaking your head at all this, too, Kev? There’s a down side to having this new DSl high speed internet now. I can read more because I’m not playing a game of solitaire waiting for dial-up to load. Even more worse news is the result.
Bummer, dude.
Raining since yesterday afternoon. Very welcome though it isn’t putting on the ground the water amounts expected. Not a steady rain by any measurement but any is better than none.
Latest from Hunziker:
What’s Up With COP26?
https://www.counterpunch.org/2021/09/17/whats-up-with-cop26/
____
And the IPCC sure the hell isn’t talking about this:
The Rate of Global Warming During Next 25 Years Could Be Double What it Was in the Previous 50, a Renowned Climate Scientist Warns
Former NASA climate scientist James Hansen urged Congress decades ago to act on climate change. Now he says he expects reduced aerosol pollution to lead to a steep temperature rise.
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/15092021/global-warming-james-hansen-aerosols
sealintheSelkirks
LikeLiked by 1 person