Global warming notes
Q. - HOW MUCH HAS THE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE RISEN IN THE LAST 100 YEARS?
AGT TEMPERATURE HAS INCREASED 2.5 DEGREES IN THE LAST 100 YEARS
The ten hottest years on record have occurred in the last 15 years.
Global average temperature since 1880. This graph from NOAA shows the annual trend in average global air
temperature in degrees Celsius, through December 2012. For each year, the range of uncertainty is indicated by the gray
vertical bars. The blue line tracks the changes in the trend over time. Click here or on the image to enlarge. (Image
courtesy NOAA's National Climatic Data Center.)
Q. - Over the last 200 years or so, what has happened to carbon dioxide levels in
the atmosphere?
Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Keeling Curve of atmospheric CO2
concentrations measured at the Mauna Loa
Observatory.
The concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2)
in Earth's atmosphere is approximately 392
ppm (parts per million) by volume as of 2011
and rose by 2.0 ppm/yr during 2000–2009.
The concentration with respect to preindustrial concentration of 280 ppm has
increased roughly exponentially with a
growth rate of 2.2% per year in the last
decades.
http://www.worldviewofglobalwarming.org/images/CO2TempChart.jpg
Here’s what we know: Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased significantly. The
average global temperature has increased over 1 degree F. degree in the last hundred years.
Here’s what most scientists suspect, but is difficult to prove: That there is a cause and effect
relationship; carbon dioxide is causing the planet to warm.
The opponents of global warming argue that the planet’s temperature has fluctuated in the
past; this is just a normal temperature variation. Some scientists even go so far as to say
increased carbon dioxide is a good thing, because carbon dioxide is really plant food. The
higher levels will stimulate plant growth.
Q. - What are the sources of carbon dioxide?
Burning fossil fuels – coal – oil – Natural gas, gasoline, wood
Q. - What are other (non-fossil fuels) and what are some of their drawbacks?
Ethanol – burns cleaner, but growing crops (generally corn) requires fossil fuels, and raises food prices.
Wind power – low density – expensive compared to coal – no wind = no power.
Solar – generally more expensive than fossil fuels, but costs are coming down..
days = huge reduction in power output.
Main drawback – Cloudy
Biomass – growing crops to make energy can reduce cropland used to produce food, leading to higher food
costs. Low density energy and expensive compared to coal. Can work well when used to make energy from
waste products such as cow manure, but expensive infrastructure is generally required.
Hydropower – Clean energy, but dams change the habitat of the river. The best example is problems with
salmon spawning on rivers in the Pacific Northwest.
Geothermal – capturing heat from Earth’s internal forces. Only very limited areas have this option. Iceland
has favorable geography, and uses a lot of geothermal energy.
Nuclear – The good side is that no carbon is emitted. The bad side is the nuclear waste is toxic, and no long
term waste site is in operation. Safe, long term storage of nuclear waste is the main concern. Accidental
disasters have occurred in the Soviet Union at Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima, Japan (2011) No new
reactors have been built in the US since 1996. China has 25 new nuclear reactors under construction, and
plans many more.
Q. – How much coal do you use?
America consumes over 1 billion tons of coal per year.
Powder River Wyoming - Produces 1 million tons of coal per day! 35 miles of coal trains each day!
Coal is ½ of all train traffic in the US
600 coal power plants in the US
52% of US electricity comes from coal (2010)
Sheboygan Edgewater Plant: 5 trains (125 cars) per week.
Average US household uses 9.5 tons of coal per year!
Q. – Can coal be burned cleanly? What are the challenges to “clean coal?”
It is possible to convert coal to Natural gas – and then the carbon dioxide would be injected deep in the
ground – but carbon capture (carbon sequestration) has never been tested. And burying carbon in the
ground is expensive, and some parts of the nation have unfriendly subsurface geology.
Q. - Why do presidential candidates generally support coal usage?
Many swing states are coal producers! Candidates need to win these states to get elected.
Q. - What is the current trend in energy usage in China and India?
China builds two new coal power plants each week – Yikes!!
More affluent citizens – More cars, more electric demand
Process of making cement gives off a lot of carbon.
World electric demand could triple or quadruple by 2050 – Yikes!!!
Q. – What are CAFÉ standards? (Corporate Average Fuel Economy)
The federal government has passed laws that require the auto companies to produce more efficient
vehicles. In simple terms, CAFÉ Standards set the minimum average MPG for all cars produced by the
automaker.
What is the History Behind Obama's New CAFE Standards?
Here are a few key milestones in the controversy that led up to the new national standards for vehicle fuel
efficiency and emissions:




In 2002, the State of California enacted a state law regulating both vehicle fuel economy and CO2 emissions.
Because the California standards were higher than the federal standards at that time, the state applied to
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the necessary waiver that would allow the state law to take
effect.
In 2004, automakers sued California in federal court, contending that only the federal government could set
vehicle mileage standards and demanding a consistent, nationwide standard for fuel efficiency.
In April 2007, the US Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that carbon dioxide is a pollutant as defined by the Clean Air
Act and that the EPA has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles and other
vehicles.
In April 2009, the EPA confirmed that CO2 emissions pose a threat to public health and welfare and are
subject to federal regulation under the Clean Air Act.
****************************************************************************
Obama Administration Finalizes Historic 54.5 mpg
Fuel Efficiency Standards Tuesday, August 28, 2012
http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/2012/Obama+Administration+Finalizes+Historic+54.5+mpg+Fuel+
Efficiency+Standards
Consumer savings comparable to lowering price of gasoline by $1 per gallon by 2025
WASHINGTON, DC – The Obama Administration today finalized groundbreaking standards that will increase
fuel economy to the equivalent of 54.5 mpg for cars and light-duty trucks by Model Year 2025. When
combined with previous standards set by this Administration, this move will nearly double the fuel efficiency
of those vehicles compared to new vehicles currently on our roads. In total, the Administration’s national
program to improve fuel economy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions will save consumers more than $1.7
trillion at the gas pump and reduce U.S. oil consumption by 12 billion barrels.
"These fuel standards represent the single most important step we’ve ever taken to reduce our dependence
on foreign oil,” said President Obama. “This historic agreement builds on the progress we’ve already made
to save families money at the pump and cut our oil consumption. By the middle of the next decade our cars
will get nearly 55 miles per gallon, almost double what they get today. It’ll strengthen our nation's energy
security, it's good for middle class families and it will help create an economy built to last."
The historic standards issued today by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) build on the success of the Administration’s standards for cars and
light trucks for Model Years 2011-2016. Those standards, which raised average fuel efficiency by 2016 to the
equivalent of 35.5 mpg, are already saving families money at the pump.
***************************************************************************************************************************
54.5 MPG CAFE Standards For 2025 Now Confirmed
http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1078810_54-5-mpg-cafe-standards-for-2025-now-confirmed
Following a long political battle, 2025's Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards have
now been confirmed.
Announced last year by President Obama, the standards will require a fleet-wide average of
54.5 mpg by 2025, and will operate on a gradual scale. The new targets are expected to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions by 6 billion metric tons by 2025, as well as near-doubling the fuel
economy of many vehicles.
As mentioned, the scale is gradual, with trucks like the Ford F-150 meeting a lower 30 mpg
target, while small cars will be required to achieve 61 mpg by 2025.
Q. - Have countries been able to cooperate on reducing carbon dioxide levels?
Below is a list of key developments relating to global warming.
1960: Climate science gets a key tool with the "Keeling Curve," a yardstick of rising carbon dioxide
(CO2) levels in the atmosphere.
1988: UN sets up a scientific authority to vet the evidence on global warming, the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
1990: First IPCC report says levels of man-made greenhouse gases are increasing in the atmosphere
and predicts these will cause global warming.
1992: Rio Summit agrees to set up the UNFCCC, a vehicle for addressing climate change. The UNFCCC
today has 194 parties.
1997: Kyoto Treaty: UNFCCC members sign the Kyoto (Japan) Climate Change Agreement. Under its
first commitment period, industrialized countries must cut emissions of six greenhouse gases so they
are 5.2 percent lower than 1990 levels by the end of 2012.
2001: The United States, then the world's biggest carbon emitter, refuses to approve the Kyoto Treaty.
This would have put country-by-country limits on world carbon emissions. Developing nations wanted
to emit more, citing the need to “catch up” to the industrialized nations. The US senate rejected the
treaty – business and labor both opposed. Didn’t achieve a net gain (US emits less, but developing
nations would be able to emit more – a lot more)
2006: China overtakes the United States as the world's No. 1 carbon emitter.
2007: Nobel Peace Prize is awarded jointly to IPCC and former US vice president Al Gore, whose
documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" raised climate change awareness.
2009: UNFCCC summit in Copenhagen, intended to seal a post-2012 deal, nearly ends in disaster. To
save face, a small group of leaders sets a broad goal of limiting warming to 2 C (3.6 F) and sketches
financial provisions for poor countries. But it identifies no staging posts for reaching the target, nor
requires emissions curbs to be binding.
Nov 24, 2010: UN's World Meteorological Organisation says greenhouse-gas concentrations reached
record levels in 2009. Higher temperatures could unleash methane emissions from the Arctic, creating
a vicious circle of warming.
Nov 29-Dec 10, 2010: Annual conference of the UNFCCC in Cancun sets sights on incremental
approach, with progress on climate finance, technology transfer and deforestation.
Dec. 2011: The 2011 United Nations Climate Change Conference was held in Durban, South Africa,
from 28 November to 11 December 2011 to establish a new treaty to limit carbon emissions.[1] The
conference agreed to a legally binding deal comprising all countries, which will be prepared by 2015,
and to take effect in 2020. While the president of the conference, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane,
declared it a success,[3] scientists and environmental groups warned that the deal was not sufficient to
avoid global warming beyond 2 °C as more urgent action is needed.[4]
Sept. 2014: United Nations Climate change held in New York City.
The New York summit did yield important news. Three observations:
1. A movement to fight climate change has real people power.
a. 400,000 people marched in the streets of Manhattan to advocate for
awareness and action. Similar marches occurred in other world cities…
2. More companies are recognizing that halting deforestation is good PR.
3. There's growing pressure to help the world's most vulnerable
countries.
French President Francois Hollande announced that his country will pour
$1 billion (U.S.) into the so-called Green Climate Fund. He called
on other nations to follow his example.
Five years ago, rich countries promised to assemble a big pot of money
to help poor countries invest in clean energy and mitigate their
risks from climate change. The idea was that rich countries
created the problem of global warming by burning fossil fuels, and
so are responsible for the resulting risks to poor countries.
The Green Climate Fund is just starting to get organized. Germany has
offered $1 billion, and in addition to France's pledge at this week's
summit, South Korea promised to increase its contribution to $100
million. Denmark, Norway, Mexico, Luxembourg, and Indonesia
also made pledges.