Renewable Revolution

In the run-up to COP 21 in Paris, more than 150 countries have now submitted their post-2020 national climate plans, known as “intended nationally determined contributions,” or INDCs.   

Puff piece full of optimistic  happy talk at link:  



They would not publish my comment but RealClimate, a site run by climate scientists, did. Here it is for your viewing pleasure. 

Russell says: 2 Nov 2015 at 1:51 PM Have Mark Steyn’s minions drunk an unwitting toast to the success of the Paris COP ?

Geoff Beacon says: 2 Nov 2015 at 2:11 PM I’ve been struggling with the the idea that “Green Growth” may not be possible. That’s because the carbon intensity of production may not be reduced fast enough to allow anything but negative economic growth – if we are to keep within the remaining carbon budget. The crude model I assumed is a simplification of the Kaya Identity: Carbon_emissions = Economic_production * Carbon_intensity. Anyone here have any thoughts? (My piece is at http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/is-green-growth-a-fantasy/)


A. G. Gelbert says: In reply to Russell and Geoff Beacon:

The fossil fuel industry is pulling out all the stops on their corruption and/or threats modus operandi to sabotage or water down any reforms to be proposed In the COP21 Climate Conference in Paris. I have written an article where this is detailed in the 3rd part of the 3 part article that I link at the end of this post.

If they succeed, as they have done in the past, there is no hope whatsoever of preventing a ΔT = PLUS 4 degrees centigrade world within the next 85 years. Even the IPCC RCP-8.5 scenario is too conservative with 400PPM (and increasing at over 3PPM per year) of CO2.

Whether “Green growth” is possible or not then becomes academic. You need a global civilization based infrastructure of manufacturing with a secure supply chain in order to transition quickly to 150% Renewable Energy. The excess above 100% to power civilization is sine qua non in order to get back to 350PPM with carbon sequestering technologies. 400PPM of CO2 is not going away in less than a few centuries, even if we stopped all CO2 emissions today.

That means, according to Professor Peter D. Ward, an American paleontologist and Professor at Sprigg Institute of Geobiology at the University of Adelaide, 25% of all arable land (which happens to be located near sea level and coasts) lost due to salt water table intrusion and trillions of dollars in port facilities and infrastructure also lost.

We do not have the resources or the money to replace all that land and all those facilities. The Precautionary Principle is not just prudent; it is sine qua non to human civilization. At present, there is a pipe dream the fossil fuel industry propagandists are putting out there that we can reduce the PPM of CO2 from 400PPM to 350PPM.

Nuclear submarines cannot go below 4000PPM of CO2, even with high tech scrubbing, after they have been submerged for a few days. They routinely run at 8000PPM CO2. We do NOT have the technology, at present, to get back to 350PPM while continuing to burn ANY fossil fuels whatsoever.

The multi-century persistence of CO2 in the atmosphere has been evidenced in the geological record. The predicted turbulence in the oceans in the Hansen et al study and the rapid sea level rise predicted in the Dutton et al study will threaten global civilization.

That is why COP21 may be our last chance to stop the degrading of democracy worldwide and our biosphere by the fossil fuel industry - See more at: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/11/unforced-variations-nov-2015/#sthash.ac6aQqC4.dpuf