New Scientists map of what the world will look like under 4 degrees of climate change warming

http://www.newscientist.com/articleimages/mg20126971.700/1-how-to-survive-the-coming-century.html

Obama’s Final Budget Calls for 100% Auction of Carbon Permits

http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/05/08/obamas-final-budget-calls-for-100-auction-of-carbon-permits/

Now this IS good news. A benchmark for the rest of the world!

Green jobs reports

I've just been asked to recommend some Green Jobs reports, so thought I'd post the list here for the record.

The most important US ones were from the Centre for American Progress (half their staff now work for Obama):

- The Nov 2007 paper "Capturing the Energy Opportunity: Creating a Low-Carbon Economy" was by Todd Stern (now Hillary's climate envoy) and John Podesta (former Clinton White House Chief of Staff). See http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/11/energy_chapter.html. This is basically the blueprint Obama used for his jobs policy.

- Podesta commissioned a follow-up report on Green Jobs. came out in Sept 08. Very influential for Obama team.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/green_recovery.html

But the web site that is perhaps most exciting on the topic is
http://apolloalliance.org/. Their green jobs report is at
http://apolloalliance.org/category/new-apollo-program/the-full-report/

- Also very interesting is Blue-Green Alliance's "Job Opportunities for the Green Economy: A State-by-State picture of occupations that gain from green investment."
http://www.bluegreenalliance.org/atf/cf/%7B3637E5F0-D0EA-46E7-BB32-74D973EFF334%7D/NRDC_report_May28.pdf

- Nick Stern's latest work is a co-authored paper for the G20 about a Global Green Recovery is at http://www.pik-potsdam.de/globalgreenrecovery. This was commissioned by the German Govt. The macro argument.

Norway's Finance Minister flies kite on banning new petrol cars from 2015

Now here's a good proposal!

Unfortunately the Australian Government's green car project won't qualify ...

Sean

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25387916-23109,00.html

Ban petrol cars from 2015, says Norway's Finance Minister Kristin Halvorsen
By Alister Doyle, Reuters
April 26, 2009 02:49am

A PROPOSAL to ban sales of new petrol-powered cars in Norway from 2015 could help spur struggling carmakers to shift to greener models, Finance Minister Kristin Halvorsen said.
"This is much more realistic than people think when they first hear about this proposal," she said, defending a plan by her Socialist Left Party to outlaw sales of cars that run solely on fossil fuels in six years' time.

"The financial crisis also means that a lot of those car producers that now have big problems ... know that they have to develop their technology because we also have to solve the climate crisis when this financial crisis is over," she said.

"That is why we would like a ban from 2015."

Under her proposal, carmakers could only sell new cars from 2015 that run fully or partly on fuels such as electricity, biofuels or hydrogen. Hybrids using fossil fuels and electricity, for instance, would still be permitted.

Ms Halvorsen's party is a junior member of Norway's three-party coalition led by the Labour Party. The 2015 proposal is unlikely to be adopted by the cabinet because it is opposed, among others, by Labour Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg.

Still, Ms Halvorsen said she knew of no other finance minister in the world who was even arguing for such a goal.

"I haven't heard about any ministers. I'm not surprised. We are often a party that puts forward new proposals first," she said.

A 2015 ban had backing from many environmental groups around the world
as a way of cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

Useful world map showing agri output changes under Climate Change Bus-as-Usual

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/04/16/business/20080417_WARM1_GRAPHIC.gif.html

You can see a looming food crisis by comparing this with a map on population growth -
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/07/21/business/20080721_ArabFood_Graphic.html

A flash mob dance at Antwerp Central Station to bring a smile to your face

Here is the Sound of Music Train Station Video which has gone viral: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UE3CNu_rtY

200 dancers take over Antwerp Station in Belgium, dancing to Do Re Mi song from the Sound of Music. It's actually a publicity stunt for a Belgium TV show, but the heck, it's fab.

A bit like the T-Mobile TV ad shot in January at Liverpool Street station (see the extended version at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQ3d3KigPQM). For background see
http://www.shallownation.com/2009/01/17/t-mobile-dance-ad-liverpool-street-station-video/

Great source of economic commentary is Vox EU

http://www.voxeu.org/

The site is run by the Centre for Economic Policy Research.

Well worth subscribing to their email feed.

Recession wishful thinking on emissions

There's been talk that the seizure of global trade and the contraction of manufacturing production worldwide may have cut greenhouse gas emissions.

It's a plausible theory but, while there's been a slight slowing, it turns out to be wishful thinking.

First, so far there's little impact: according to the US National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration, in the year to February 2009 global emissions grew at a rate of 2.28 ppm per year. The total concentration of CO2 equivalent gases in the atmosphere now stands at 463ppm. Co2 is at 386ppm. (See http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/index.html#global)

Mark Hughes of Climate Risk argues that, because of what's happening with other factors, the economic downturn and GDP deterioration is not likely to get atmospheric CO2 levels down in the future either.

While there's an approximate relationship between global GDP and emissions from energy, this doesn't catch the full greenhouse gas picture by any means and can be misleading.

Essentially, emissions from sources other than energy (e.g. agriculture, land-use, land-use change and forestry etc.) are still growing. Forestry and agriculture alone account for about 31% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Plus, atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations are effected by global carbon sink efficiencies and these have recently been reported to be deteriorating. On top of that positive feedbacks are starting to come into play (e.g. release of previously stored methane from permafrost and deep sea floor deposits).

UK Council using thermal imaging to locate energy efficiency targets

News today of a Norfolk Council using thermal imaging to do aerial
surveys of urban areas to identify priority buildings for energy
efficiency renovation. Great idea!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1164091/Council-uses-spy-plane-thermal-imaging-camera-snoop-homes-wasting-energy.html

Musing on sea level rises

A friend of mine is presenting about climate policy this week, and
wanted some visuals about sea level rises under climate change

Current estimates of total sea level rise are for 2 metres in 100 years
- from all sources in both hemispheres. Will Steffen at ANU has gone on
record saying that, although unlikely, a 4 metre rise cannot be ruled
out; Jim Hansen is saying similar things.

Yet it can be hard to get people to realise the severity of a 2 metre
change. Most westerners are pretty OK (apart from some people in
beachfront suburbs) and have the money anyway to build levees, etc.

The web site http://flood.firetree.net/ has a great mapping tool, but an
average 2 meter rise missed the real danger - tidal surges.

Greater expected volatility of weather means we get bigger tidal surges.
When you combine these with a 2 metre rise in sea levels, you get a lot
of coastal flood stories, with the world's big deltas being regularly
covered in salt water. That will lead to food disasters, as some of the
world's great food bowls are deltas (Nile, Red River, Mekong, Yangtze,
Indus, Ganges/Bramaputra) meaning a disproportionate number of people
are exposed to a small change in sea levels. It is true that we may be
able to adapt crops to more saline conditions (a great hope), but lots
of the deltas will be flooded too frequently for even that.

Plus a lot of big cities will get flooded regularly. Even in London one
forecast is that the Thames Barrier will be breached by 2030, flooding
large areas of East London (and thousands of dwellings have been allowed
to be built behind the Barrier on the basis that they are now protected
from flooding risk!). Translate that to calamities in Guangzhou,
Shanghai, Nanjing, Tianjin, Saigon, Kolkotta, Chennai, Mumbai, Lagos,
Miami, New Orleans - 140 million people just there - and we have some
big disaster issues.

The reason the Arctic sea ice story is so important is ....

1. It's a key "canary in the coal mine". The amazing rapidity of change
in summer sea ice extent is an indicator of climactic changes globally.
With the rate of global greenhouse gas emission increases having gone up
sine the 1990s from an average of 1.1% p.a. to an average of 3.1% this
decade (now 3.4% according to a report I saw today) it's perhaps not
surprising that the whole thing is getting away from us.

2. The sea ice disappearance is one of the most significant tipping
points because of the loss of its albedo effect - a large slab of the
earth goes from being a heat reflector to a heat absorber. Not good.
It's also a harbinger of the mother of all tipping points - the thawing
of clathrates under the Arctic sea and the consequent vast release of
methane gas.

Check out these videos from a leading Arctic researcher that show what
methane gas seepage looks like:
http://www.alaska.edu/uaf/cem/ine/walter/videopage.xml. Sort of amusing
really, but methane gas is, of course, 20 times more potent a greenhouse
gas than carbon dioxide. Swedish scientists are already reporting an
increase in the ocean bubbling you see.

That means a lot more 40+ degree weeks in Australian summers, and a lot
more bushfire.

Sean

Three sobering facts about climate change

Courtesy of the Environmental Defense Funds
(http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=35792)

35%
Increase in the global carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of
fossil fuels since the Kyoto Protocol was signed in 1992.

1000 years
Length of time changes in the earth's surface temperature, rainfall, and
sea level will remain even after carbon dioxide emissions are completely
stopped.

US$427 million
Amount spent by the (US) oil and coal industries in the first six months
of 2008 in political contributions, lobbying expenditures and
advertising to oppose climate action.

A response to UK Met office fears that 'distorted' climate change claims undermine efforts to tackle carbon emissions

'Apocalyptic climate predictions' mislead the public, say experts
Met Office scientists fear distorted climate change claims could
undermine efforts to tackle carbon emissions

See:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/feb/11/climate-change-misleading-claims
----------------------------

I have the highest regard for the Met Office; this article is a useful
reminder to be careful about making predictions based on immediate
events, and a very useful reminder to remain sober in our deliberations.

The danger, of course, to much sobriety has an enervating rather than
directive influence on political decision-makers.

Vicky Pope doesn't deny the possibility of an ice-free Arctic by 2013
(as suggested by a number of researchers - see
http://www.nature.com/climate/2008/0807/full/climate.2008.63.html, and
Jim Hansen's writings).

Her argument is about people suggesting calamity when there is still
much doubt.

However, for those of us trying to weigh up risks, the question is more
how likely is the fast melt scenario and what does it mean. There is no
doubt that there is a consistent decrease in summer ice cover in the
Arctic (The US National Snow and Ice Data Center, for example, reports a
consistent 3.1% p.a. decrease in Arctic ice cover over the last 30 years).

There is also no doubt that there has been a serious increase in the
rate of summer melting in recent years that, if it kept up, would result
in disappearing summer ice cover in a few short years. There also seems
little doubt that if summer ice disappears entirely we lose an important
climate stabilising factor (the ice's albedo effect) and the risks of
more rapid climate change then increase exponentially.

The debate is about the likelihood of that recent increased rate of
melting being a blip or a trend. From a political decision-makers point
of view, there are enough scientists arguing that it's highly likely (if
only because of the range of ancillary climate indicators that alert us
to more rapid climate changes than expected) that we should treat this
as a significant probability.

If we were flying a passenger aeroplane that would be enough risk for us
to take emergency evasive action. That's what we need to do.

Great Age article on the Australia fires and climate change

Fires the deadly inevitability of climate change
Freya Mathews
The Age
February 10, 2009

The disaster challenges the Government to accept evident truths.

IT IS only a couple of years since scientists first told us we could
expect a whole new order of fires in south-eastern Australia, fires of
such ferocity they would simply engulf the towns in their path. And here
they are.

The fires we saw on Saturday were not "once in a thousand years" or even
"once in a hundred years" events, as our political leaders keep
repeating. They were the face of climate change in our part of the world.

These fires are simply the result of the new conditions that climate
change has introduced here: raised temperatures, giving us hotter days
than we have ever experienced before combined with lower rainfall giving
us a drier landscape. Let's stop using the word "drought", with its
implication that dry weather is the exception. The desiccation of the
landscape here is the new reality. It is now our climate.

Rest of article at ....
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/fires-the-deadly-inevitability-of-climate-change-20090209-8289.html?page=-1

Two useful quotes from Davos 2009

1. Jeremy Oppenheim, global director of climate-change initiatives at
McKinsey: "The transition to a low-carbon economy, if done right, has
the potential to stimulate economic growth, create jobs and bring
benefits to consumers. The 'costs' of this transition are in fact
investments in new, 21st-century infrastructure that will pay off for
generations to come – just as the 'costs' of investments in
electrification, highways, and the internet paid off with very high
returns for the societies that made them in the 20th century."

2. The World Economic Forum's "Green Investing Report" was released at
Davos. It calls for annual global investment of £360 billion in
green-energy infrastructure including wind, solar power, geothermal
energy and biofuels. http://www.weforum.org/en/initiatives/ghg/index.htm

Co-author Michael Liebreich of London-based New Energy Finance:
"Clean-energy opportunities can generate significant economic returns.
The report shows that even after a tumultuous 2008, an index of the
world's 90 leading clean-energy companies had a five-year
compounded-annualised return of almost 10%, unmatched by the world's
main stock indices."

From
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article5627461.ece