44 research outputs found
Attributing ocean acidification to major carbon producers
No full text© The Author(s), 2019. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Licker, R.; Ekwurzel, B.; Doney, S. C.; Cooley, S. R.; Lima, I. D.; Heede, R.; Frumhoff, P. C. Attributing ocean acidification to major carbon producers. Environmental Research Letters. 14(12), (2019): 124060, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab5abc.Recent research has quantified the contributions of CO2 and CH4 emissions traced to the products of major fossil fuel companies and cement manufacturers to global atmospheric CO2, surface temperature, and sea level rise. This work has informed societal considerations of the climate responsibilities of these major industrial carbon producers. Here, we extend this work to historical (1880–2015) and recent (1965–2015) acidification of the world's ocean. Using an energy balance carbon-cycle model, we find that emissions traced to the 88 largest industrial carbon producers from 1880–2015 and 1965–2015 have contributed ~55% and ~51%, respectively, of the historical 1880–2015 decline in surface ocean pH. As ocean acidification is not spatially uniform, we employ a three-dimensional ocean model and identify five marine regions with large declines in surface water pH and aragonite saturation state over similar historical (average 1850–1859 to average 2000–2009) and recent (average 1960–1969 to average of 2000–2009) time periods. We characterize the biological and socioeconomic systems in these regions facing loss and damage from ocean acidification in the context of climate change and other stressors. Such analysis can inform societal consideration of carbon producer responsibility for current and near-term risks of further loss and damage to human communities dependent on marine ecosystems and fisheries vulnerable to ocean acidification.The approach of using equation (1) benefited from discussions with Myles R Allen (University of Oxford) and Inez Fung (University of California, Berkeley). M W Dalton provided insights for the incorporation of the updated carbon producers data. Chloe Ames provided support for references. S Doney acknowledges support from the US National Science Foundation and the University of Virginia Environmental Resilience Institute. R Licker, B Ekwurzel and P C Frumhoff acknowledge the support of the Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment, Wallace Global Fund, and Rockefeller Family Fund to the Union of Concerned Scientists. R Heede gratefully acknowledges the financial support of Wallace Global Fund, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and Union of Concerned Scientists. We thank two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments, which greatly improved our manuscript
Towards legitimacy of the solar geoengineering research enterprise
No full textMounting evidence that even aggressive reductions in net emissions of greenhouse gases will be insufficient to limit global climate risks is increasing calls for atmospheric experiments to better understand the risks and implications of also deploying solar geoengineering technologies to reflect sunlight and rapidly lower surface temperatures. But solar geoengineering research itself poses significant environmental and geopolitical risks. Given limited societal awareness and public dialogue about this climate response option, conducting such experiments without meaningful societal engagement could galvanize opposition to solar geoengineering research from civil society, including the most climate vulnerable communities who are among its intended beneficiaries. Here, we explore whether and how a solar geoengineering research enterprise might be developed in a way that promotes legitimacy as well as scientific credibility and policy relevance. We highlight the distinctive responsibilities of researchers and research funders to ensure that solar geoengineering research proposals are subject to legitimate societal review and scrutiny, recommend steps they can take to strive towards legitimacy and call on them to be explicitly open to multiple potential outcomes, including the societal rejection or considerable alteration of the solar geoengineering research enterprise.
This article is part of the theme issue ‘The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels'.</jats:p
Confronting Climate Change in the U.S. Northeast: Science, Impacts, and Solutions
No full textThis is 2007 report on climate change in the Northeast U.S. by the northeast Climate Impacts Assessment (NECIA) Synthesis Team. In October 2006, the NECIA released a report titled Climate Change in the U.S. Northeast, the product of a collaborative research effort that drew on recent advances in climate modeling to assess how global warming may further affect the Northeast's climate. Using projections from three state-of-the-art global climate models, the report compared the types and magnitude of climate changes that will result from two different scenarios of future heat-trapping emissions. The first (the higher-emissions scenario) is a future where people - individuals, communities, businesses, states, and nations - allow emissions to continue growing rapidly, and the second (the lower-emissions scenario) is one in which societies choose to rely less on fossil fuels and adopt more resource-efficient technologies. This 2007 report builds upon and extends these findings. NECIA collaborators have used the NECIA climate projections to assess the impacts of these two very different future Northeast climates on vital aspects of the region's life and economy: coastal areas, marine fisheries, forests, agriculture, winter recreation, and human health. They also describe actions that can be taken today in the Northeast to reduce emissions and help avoid the most severe impacts of global warming and to adapt to the unavoidable changes that past emissions have already set in motion.Prepared by the Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment Synthesis Team (NECIA)NECIA is collaborative effort between the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and a team of independent expertsPurpose: To 2007 report the findings of the Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment (NECIA
Confronting Climate Change in the U.S. Northeast: Science, Impacts, and Solutions: Executive Summary
No full textThis is the executive summary of a 2007 report on climate change in the northeast U.S. by the Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment (NECIA) Synthesis Team. In October 2006, the NECIA released a report titled Climate Change in the U.S. Northeast, the product of a collaborative research effort that drew on recent advances in climate modeling to assess how global warming may further affect the Northeast's climate. Using projections from three state-of-the-art global climate models, the report compared the types and magnitude of climate changes that will result from two different scenarios of future heat-trapping emissions. The first (the higher-emissions scenario) is a future where people - individuals, communities, businesses, states, and nations - allow emissions to continue growing rapidly, and the second (the lower-emissions scenario) is one in which societies choose to rely less on fossil fuels and adopt more resource-efficient technologies. This 2007 report builds upon and extends these findings. NECIA collaborators have used the NECIA climate projections to assess the impacts of these two very different future Northeast climates on vital aspects of the region's life and economy: coastal areas, marine fisheries, forests, agriculture, winter recreation, and human health. They also describe actions that can be taken today in the Northeast to reduce emissions and help avoid the most severe impacts of global warming and to adapt to the unavoidable changes that past emissions have already set in motion.Prepared by the Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment Synthesis Team (NECIA)NECIA is collaborative effort between the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and a team of independent expertsPurpose: To summarize the findings of the Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment (NECIA) in 200
USING PHYLOGENIES TO TEST HYPOTHESES OF ADAPTATION: A CRITIQUE OF SOME CURRENT PROPOSALS
No full text
