|Meet the UK's "Committee on Climate Change", A balanced response to the risks of dangerous climate change, Independent, evidence-based advice to the UK Government and Parliament|
Yes, Minister? It's one of those delightfully dry UK civil service productions. Some entertaining reading in there. Especially the last entry in the FAQ. Can you see the fnords?
12) Despite reports of falling UK emissions, hasn’t our real carbon footprint actually risen?
The fall in emissions within the UK is real, reflecting- for example – reductions in emissions from power generation. But if we look at consumption emissions, then yes, our analysis suggests that our carbon footprint has increased since 1993, as growth in imported emissions has more than offset the reduction in emissions produced within the UK.
This increase in imported emissions is largely a result of rising incomes, with associated increased demand for consumer goods, many of them imported. This emphasises the need for policies globally to reduce emissions. It is very encouraging in this respect that countries, including China and the US*, have made ambitious commitments to reduce emissions. There is now widespread coverage by low-carbon policies of major emitting sectors around the world. The UK is not acting alone.
*China and US together made up about 45% of world CO2 emissions in 2011.
They're recommending to the Government to target 57% reduction in carbon emmissions by 2030
Meanwhile the BBC is reporting that global public support for any action at all is falling.
And the UN thinks that all the pledges so far should only result in a warming of 2.7C in 2100 down from 3.1C. Which is not enough.
Although, really, the scientists are lying to themselves and us by being publicly overly optimistic even while in private they are deeply pessimistic. Here's a meta analysis of what they're saying and an aggregation of how their models look.
Anderson’s case, in summary, is that most of us, whether scientists, policy makers or citizens, are suffering from cognitive dissonance. We acknowledge the mathematics of carbon budgets compatible with the 2°C target, yet are unable to face the revolutionary implications of what we need to do to get there. Put simply, our entire way of life for most of us in rich countries—and for an increasing number of rich people in poor countries—has to change radically, starting now.
There's that 1000Gt figure again, except this time it's 1000GtCO2 to stay under 2C of which 300GtCO2 is probably already gone. That's 0.3TtC. Much more likely is that mankind blows the full 1TtC #terafart of accessible fossil fuels over the next 100 years.
Thre was no pause. And warming is accelerating again.
Support your local artists
Go on the March on Sunday. It'll make you feel better.
Committee on Climate Change | Independent, evidence-based advice to the UK Government and Parliament »
A balanced response to the risks of dangerous climate change. Independent, evidence-based advice to the UK Government and Parliament. Search for: Skip to content. Home · About us · News · Tackling climate change · Publications · Blog · FAQs · Charts & data · Contacts ...
[from: Google+ Posts]
[ << Stanford and MIT reckon we can ditch fossil fuels globally and go 100% renewable by 2050. ] [ Happy Winter Day! The first day of UK meteorological winter. >> ]
[ 27-Nov-15 7:47am ]