Greenhouse gas emissions
will have to be eliminated completely to stabilise the
Earth's climate and prevent temperatures from rising.
That’s the conclusion of climatologists in the US who
say that our current efforts to merely stabilise emissions
will not be enough.
Damon Matthews, from Concordia University in Canada,
and Ken Caldeira, from the Carnegie Institution for Science,
Stanford, USA, used a global climate model to study how
greenhouse emissions would need to change in order to
stabilise global temperatures over the next few hundred
years. Previous studies have only looked at what happens
when emissions are stabilised.
Humans have been releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere
in increasing quantities since the industrial revolution.
But to simplify the simulation, Matthews and Caldeira
injected a single pulse of carbon dioxide into a pre-industrial
atmosphere.
Pulse sizes of 50, 200, 500 and 2000 billion tonnes of
carbon were used. The model was set to calculate global
temperatures and atmospheric and ocean carbon dioxide
levels over a simulated 500 years.
CO2 legacy
At the end of that period, Matthews and Caldeira found
that between 20% and 35% of the initial emission pulse
remained in the atmosphere – even for the smallest emission
pulse – with the remainder having been absorbed by land
and ocean carbon sinks.
The lingering carbon dioxide means that global warming
persisted for the entire simulation. For the four different
emission scenarios, global temperatures stabilised at
0.09, 0.34, 0.88 and 3.6 ºC above pre-industrial levels
respectively.
So far industrial emissions total around 450 billion
tonnes. “Even if we eliminated carbon dioxide today we
are still committed to a global temperature rise of around
0.8 ºC lasting at least 500 years,” says Caldeira.
One of the reasons for the persistence is the slow response
of oceans. “It takes a lot of energy to heat them up and
then a long time for them to cool back down,” he explains.
Technical challenge
Roger Pielke, a climate policy expert at the University
of Colorado in Boulder, agrees with the findings. “This
research makes the case that simply stabilising concentrations
is insufficient to stabilise temperatures. Their argument,
if widely accepted, raises the bar on what it means to
mitigate climate change,” he says.
Matthews and Caldeira warn that current emissions targets
for 2050 are insufficient to avoid substantial future
warming. Instead they believe that we need to eliminate
emissions, or find a way of actively removing carbon dioxide
from the atmosphere.
“It is technologically challenging, but not impossible.
The biggest challenge will be to get political consensus,”
says Caldeira. Potential tools to achieve zero emissions
include renewable energy, electric cars and carbon capture
and some countries such as Costa Rica are already aiming
for zero emissions.
Dave Reay, a climate scientist at the University of Edinburgh,
thinks that it is a feasible long-term aim. “If used on
a large enough scale then new technologies like carbon
capture could get us to zero emissions.”
Journal reference: Geophysical
Research Letters (DOI: 10.1029/2007.GL032388)