Comments on: Pielke, Jr.: "The Collapse of Climate Policy and the Sustainability of Climate Science" http://www.masterresource.org/2009/02/pielke-jr-the-collapse-of-climate-policy-and-the-sustainability-of-climate-science/ A free-market energy blog Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:41:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Ed Reid http://www.masterresource.org/2009/02/pielke-jr-the-collapse-of-climate-policy-and-the-sustainability-of-climate-science/comment-page-1/#comment-425 Ed Reid Wed, 11 Feb 2009 14:12:54 +0000 http://masterresource.org/?p=821#comment-425 Stabilization requires reduction of annual emissions to below the emissions rates at which the atmospheric concentration began to rise (+/-). The atmospheric concentrations began to rise in about 1750, when emissions rates were about 1/2000th of current rates. Therefore, stabilization requires a GLOBAL reduction of emissions rates of about 99.95%. There is little wonder the AGW alarmists have chosen not to share that reality with the "great unwashed". I suspect they believe they can achieve their political objectives with less draconian reductions. However, even those reductions (eg.: 80% by 2050) would hardly be inexpensive or painless. There is currently great hand wringing over a ~$1 trillion "porculus" bill. Achieving "80% by 2050" would require about that much each year over the period. For what? Stabilization requires reduction of annual emissions to below the emissions rates at which the atmospheric concentration began to rise (+/-). The atmospheric concentrations began to rise in about 1750, when emissions rates were about 1/2000th of current rates. Therefore, stabilization requires a GLOBAL reduction of emissions rates of about 99.95%.

There is little wonder the AGW alarmists have chosen not to share that reality with the “great unwashed”. I suspect they believe they can achieve their political objectives with less draconian reductions. However, even those reductions (eg.: 80% by 2050) would hardly be inexpensive or painless.

There is currently great hand wringing over a ~$1 trillion “porculus” bill. Achieving “80% by 2050″ would require about that much each year over the period. For what?

]]>