News 
 National Rural News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 General 
 Global carbon emissions keep rising 

Global carbon emissions keep rising

18 Nov, 2009 05:35 AM
The global financial crisis slightly curbed the output of greenhouse gas emissions in 2008, but the sequestering of emissions by land and ocean sinks is also showing signs of slowing, the Global Carbon Project (GCP) has reported this morning.

According to the GCP’s Global Carbon Budget report, published in Nature Geoscience, atmospheric CO2 is now 38 per cent higher than pre-industrial levels, at 385 parts per million, due to the addition of four billion tonnes of CO2 in 2008.

Carbon dioxide emissions from human activities rose two per cent in 2008—slightly slower than the period 2000-2007—to an all-time high of 1.3 tonnes of carbon per capita per year.

Coal was the main source of CO2 increases, with small decreases reported in emissions from oil-based sources and deforestation.

Deforestation now represents only 12 per cent of global emissions, prompting GCP lead author, CSIRO’s Dr Mike Raupach, to comment that there is "limited scope for rich nations to offset emissions by supporting avoidance of deforestation in tropical countries like Indonesia and Brazil".

"CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion are estimated to have increased 41 per cent above 1990 levels with emissions continuing to track close to the worst-case scenario of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)," Dr Raupach said.

Land and ocean CO2 sinks, which have removed about half the tenfold increase in CO2 emissions over the past century, are showing signs of faltering.

With changes in the ocean occurring over hundreds or thousands of years, this week’s news locks in ocean acidification and saturation well into the future, according to oceanographer Dr Will Howard of the Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems CRC.

"As we increase the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide about a hundred times faster than any time in the past 800,000 years, we outstrip the ability of natural systems to respond," Dr Howard said.

Because of the 2008 La Nina, characterised by cooler and, in some parts of the world, wetter conditions, land sequestration of CO2 was enhanced last year, but is expected to fall off again with the likely onset of an El Nino event late this year.

Professor John Finnigan, a chief research scientist at CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, noted that developing countries like China and India are now increasing their emissions output faster than developed countries.

"…the developed world has exported to the developing world the emissions it would have produced had it met its growing appetite for consumer goods itself for the last two decades," Prof. Finnegan said.

"In one sense, the developed world owns a large fraction of the developing world's emissions."

The coupled nature of global emissions highlights the need for an international agreement on emissions reduction, he said.

More than 30 experts from major international climate research institutions contributed to the GCP’s annual Global Carbon Budget report.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1


RELATED COVERAGE

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
I thought the government told us if we paid more for our power and it came from wind that emisions were meant to fall? Looks like they've conned us again for something that doesn't work.
Posted by dave, 18/11/2009 6:49:50 AM, on Stock & Land
So what, carbon dioxide is harmless. Will an ETS, therefore a tax, alter that or the enviroment? No, but it and KRUDD will send Australia broke.
Posted by Wal, 18/11/2009 7:56:30 AM, on Farm Weekly
Go Nuclear and close the coal mines, problem solved!
Posted by jerangle, 18/11/2009 8:15:44 AM, on The Land
Yeah and the world is cooling - guess CO2 doesn't warm at all.
Posted by alph, 18/11/2009 8:54:30 PM, on The Land
Really Matt, you have been drinking far to much koolaid. What a load of crap.
Posted by hey loc, 18/11/2009 10:43:00 PM, on The Land
"...As we increase the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide about a hundred times faster than any time in the past 800,000 years, we outstrip the ability of natural systems to respond,"... 100 times faster than what ?? And where's the data for 800,000 years ?? The numbers sound scary don't they - that's the thing about this stuff - it's sensational (ized).
Posted by AJ, 19/11/2009 10:05:35 AM, on The Land
If these clowns had just one little toe in the real world they would understand that small blips at the start of a long-term projection do not validate bogus assumptions that pervert the entire process.

Every single one of the IPCC projections assumes that all of Africa (including Zimbabwe and Somalia), all of Latin America, all of the Middle East and all of Asia (including Bangladesh) will overtake the percapita GDP of the OECD nations by 2100. This 1000 to 1 shot is incorporated as a certainty and is used to justify urgent action.

The most extreme projection that these clowns now claim is the most likely would have us believe that all these basket case countries will achieve a 130-fold improvement in GDP over the century. Yet, the best economic take-off ever recorded, the Japanese one, only managed a 20-fold increase over a century. And to make it worse, these climate ponces do not even comprehend that both GDP growth, and emissions, rise quickly at first and then plateau.

The IPCC projections just keep on going out the top of the page. So when will Matt Carwood apply minimum journalistic standards and include both sides of the story?

Posted by Ian Mott, 19/11/2009 10:58:46 AM, on Queensland Country Life
Why is an article about CO2 illustrated with a picture of what looks like steam? The article seems to want us to be alarmed about CO2 production, but doesn't seem to tell us why.
Posted by DMS, 19/11/2009 11:28:41 AM, on Queensland Country Life
These scientists keep the misinfomation going about Global Warming to make their income secure from research grants. To borrow from the journalists, don't let the truth spoil a good income.
Posted by Len, 19/11/2009 12:08:13 PM, on Farm Weekly
Given the readership of this journal, it would be very easy simply to pander to the climate sceptics' point of view. I'm glad Matt Cawood doesn't.

While there is certainly no obligation to agree with his assessment of the status of global CO2 emissions, many of the posts here expose the ignorance of their contributors, without being conducive to a constructive debate.

Could it be that because Matt Cawood's article is factual, there's no way to counter him but through personal attacks?

DMS... yes, that's steam. The emissions of the smoke stacks in the background are invisible– that's just the nature of CO2. But I also happen to think it's a bit misleading.

On the topic of misleading... Ian Mott needs to do a little more work on his research. While you may not like the IPCC, it is Goldman Sachs who, in outlining it's projections for the century, came up with the N-11 countries (including Bangladesh) that along with the BRICs will have the fastest growing economies. Your beef is therefore with the 'ponces' at Goldman Sachs.

Posted by GT, 20/11/2009 10:33:31 AM, on The Land
1 | 2  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
16 November, 2009
17 November, 2009
POLL
Q: Do you believe your farm business can profit from an emissions trading scheme?

Yes
(20.3%)

No
(70.1%)

Undecided
(9.6%)

Total Votes: 606
Poll Date: 15 November, 2009
BLOGS
11 November, 2009
13 November, 2009

Most popular articles

Ray White Rural MON0152
 
IRRIGATION CONFERENCE 2010
 
2010 Beef & Cattle Directory
 
S&L Subscriptions
 
Rural Bookshop
 
S&L Twitter
 
photo gallery
 
S&L Facebook


 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...