NEW SCIENCE PAINTS GRIM PICTURE

GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS
VOL. 34, L19703, doi:10.1029/2007GL031018, 2007

Long term climate implications of 2050 emission reduction targets
Andrew J. Weaver, Kirsten Zickfeld, Alvaro Montenegro, and Michael Eby

Received 15 June 2007; revised 27 August 2007; accepted 7 September
2007; published 6 October 2007.

Abstract: A coupled atmosphere-ocean-carbon cycle model is used to
examine the long term climate implications of various 2050 greenhouse
gas emission reduction targets. All emission targets considered with
less than 60% global reduction by 2050 break the 2.0 threshold
warning this century, a number that some have argued represents an
upper bound on manageable climate warming. Even when emissions are
stabilized at 90% below present levels at 2050, this 2.0 threshold is
eventually broken. Our results suggest that if a 2.0  warming is to
be avoided, direct CO2 capture from the air, together with subsequent
sequestration, would eventually have to be introduced in addition to
sustained 90% global carbon emissions reductions by 2050.

========================================

—————————————————————————————————
“Eighty years from now warming temperatures will shift climatic
conditions up to seven degrees in latitude, Aitken says. So trees in
Prince George, B.C., for example, will weather summers and winters
indigenous to places like Idaho with potentially harmful effects.”

“We want to plant trees that will be healthy and grow well, but
conditions are going to change throughout their lifetime,” Aitken
says. “If you move trees north early on, the seedlings will die from
cold-related injury. But if you plant them where they’re well adapted
as seedlings now, in 60 years where it’s four degrees warmer, mature
trees may not be well-adapted. We don’t know how to target that yet.”
—————————————————–

The London Free Press (Canada)
October 28, 2007

Moving targets a challenge
By VIVIAN SONG, NATIONAL BUREAU

YELLOWKNIFE — When Kevin Kennedy saw the unfamiliar four-legged
animal saunter past his living room window, he went through a mental
checklist of what it could have been.

“My mind went through all the possibilities,” said the seven-year
Yellowknife resident and city councillor.

The animal was a coyote, a normally south-dwelling animal that, up to
a few years ago, was a stranger to these parts. But sightings of
animals never seen in Yellowknife before have been on the rise, like
white-tailed deer, cougars and magpies which are migrating further
from their traditional habitats.

Experts warn that climate change could push Canada’s tree line north
by as much as 750 km in some areas, and bring with it new species
while pushing old ones out.

“That will reduce the space for tundra and the wildlife it supports,”
points out Stewart Cohen, a senior researcher at Environment Canada.
“Alpine trees may also be squeezed out if trees move to higher and
higher elevations.”

An increasing frequency of fires is expected to cut swaths through
the fir, jack pine, and black and white spruce trees which dominate
the boreal forest. Meanwhile, deciduous species like the leafy aspen,
birch and poplar are projected to succeed their needly predecessors
and change the face of the largely coniferous boreal forest in the
next 50 years.

“As trees become more dense because a warmer climate allows them to
grow taller, it will shift the ecosystem and plant species,” explains
Tom Lakusta, forest manager with the government of the Northwest
Territories.

Subspecies of the black and white spruce, which grow in northern
Alberta and Ontario, may also become better suited to the soils of
their northern cousins, Lakusta says, and creep farther north.

According to Environment Canada, warmer temperatures will force sugar
maple production in Quebec to shift northwards by two degrees of
latitude over the next century. Already, sap flow has started up to
one month earlier over the last decade and production seasons are
shorter.

“One of the big challenges is we’re trying to hit a moving target,”
says Sally Aitken, director of the Centre for Forest Gene
Conservation at the University of British Columbia.

Eighty years from now warming temperatures will shift climatic
conditions up to seven degrees in latitude, Aitken says. So trees in
Prince George, B.C., for example, will weather summers and winters
indigenous to places like Idaho with potentially harmful effects.

“The problem with climate change is that tree species are going to be
in the wrong places … there’s going to be a big mismatch between
the trees and their local environment,” Aitken says.

That presents a conundrum for forest conservationists.

“We want to plant trees that will be healthy and grow well, but
conditions are going to change throughout their lifetime,” Aitken
says. “If you move trees north early on, the seedlings will die from
cold-related injury. But if you plant them where they’re well adapted
as seedlings now, in 60 years where it’s four degrees warmer, mature
trees may not be well-adapted. We don’t know how to target that yet.”

=====================================================================

Catastrophic “Climate Security” bill in US Senate is biggest corporate giveaway in history

See below for a press release from Friends of the Earth on the bill.

———————————–
Rising Tide North America opposes all forms of Carbon Trading, but this bill is especially bad since it GIVES AWAY (rather than auctions) the right to pollute the atmosphere to the fossil fuel industry, which it can then trade or sell, making record profits.

For more background on Carbon Trading we recommend:
1. Carbon Trade Watch’s “The Sky Is Not the Limit” http://www.carbontradewatch.org/pubs/skyeng.pdf
2. Rising Tide UK’s “The Case Against Carbon Trading” http://risingtide.org.uk/resources/factsheets/carbontrading
3. The Corner House’s many resources: http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/subject/climate/
———————————–

Lieberman climate bill could have record corporate giveaways

October 17, 2007

For Immediate Release

For more information contact:
Nick Berning, 202-222-0748

Legislation’s allocation of permits to polluters could be worth trillions, says analysis from Friends of the Earth, and the coal industry stands to be the biggest winner

WASHINGTON — Global warming legislation expected to be introduced tomorrow could provide giveaways worth hundreds of billions or even trillions of dollars to polluting industries, according to an analysis of a draft of the legislation conducted by Friends of the Earth.

The cap-and-trade legislation, sponsored by Senators Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Va.), would attempt to limit U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by setting annual emissions limits for each industry. Under this legislation, a set amount of greenhouse gas pollution would continue to be allowed — and the way in which these transferable allowances, or permits, would be allocated could richly reward the country’s largest global warming polluters, as each permit could be sold or traded for cash just like a stock or a bond.

“What we’re looking at is the potential for corporate giveaways that are orders of magnitude larger than anything environmentalists have ever faced — potentially the biggest corporate giveaways in American history,” said Erich Pica, one of the authors of the Friends of the Earth analysis of the August draft of the legislation. “Polluters should have to pay for their pollution, not be rewarded for it.”

The Friends of the Earth analysis found that the coal industry in particular stands to benefit from this legislation, precisely because it is currently the industry most responsible for global warming pollution. Depending on market conditions, the coal industry could receive permits worth up to $231 billion in the first year alone, 48 percent of the total permit allocation. It could then sell or “trade” its permits to others for their cash value, or it could emit at no cost carbon that less fortunate industries would have to pay to emit.

“If Congress is going to implement a cap-and-trade system, it should auction off 100 percent of permits so that taxpayers reap the financial rewards. We could use that money to help Americans adjust to higher energy costs, and to subsidize clean, alternative forms of energy,” Pica said. “Instead, Senators Lieberman and Warner have proposed auctioning off only 24 percent of permits at the outset of this legislation, setting up a rigged market in which most permits are handed out to polluting industries for free. If you see a lot of polluters lining up in support of this legislation, that’s why.”

While the specific language of the legislation being introduced tomorrow could differ somewhat from the draft circulated in August, permit allocations will reportedly continue to be a problem. Friends of the Earth will update its analysis after the legislation is introduced to reflect the final numbers in the bill.

Friends of the Earth’s analysis of the Lieberman-Warner draft can be found at http://foe.org/globalwarming/Coal%20Rush.pdf.

Our August statement responding to the initial release of the Lieberman-Warner draft can be found at http://action.foe.org/dia/organizationsORG/foe/pressRelease.jsp?press_release_KEY=250.

###