A new analysis by the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank in Washington, D.C., found that since the inception of clean coal programs aimed at capturing
CO2 earlier this decade, $ 3.5 billion has been spent by private companies to develop the technology via 18 projects — just a fraction (1/17) of their profits in 2007 alone, according to researcher Daniel Weiss.
Not exact matches
And as we learn from the Skeptical Science article I linked to
earlier, there is going to be a delay of «
decades» between the effects of the
CO2 emissions in question (i.e., the heating of the atmosphere due to the greenhouse effect) and a corresponding warming of the oceans.
Perhaps the worst aspect of these technical «solutions» is that they give a de-facto green light to continue to put more
CO2 into the atmosphere, Since oil production is expected to peak within
decades if not sooner, nations will turn more and more to coal, which as Figen pointed out in an
earlier post is a very dirty fuel.
For instance, during the last, nearly two
decades the climate has no more been warming, even though the
CO2 content in atmosphere has been increasing like
earlier.
Models have been initiated with climate values from a starting point in an
earlier decade and then allowed to run with or without the anthropogenic input (
CO2, aerosols, etc.).
If the warming trend of the
early 20th century had continued (it didn't) until the end of the 21st century (2099), global temperatures would have increased by +1.92 °C; yet despite the huge modern era
CO2 spike, if the warming trend represented by the last 3
decades continued (it won't), the increase by 2099 would only be +1.72 °C.
If one assumes that the modern decadal warming in reality was simply a cyclical repeat of the
early 20th century
decades of natural warming, then in actuality, at best, the gigantic increases of
CO2 levels were only responsible for maybe a mere +0.14 °C increase (+0.55 °C - +0.41 °C = +0.14 °C) over the 3
decades ending in 2009.
(Note: The
early decades were estimated using
CO2 information from here; for years 1965 and later,
CO2 emissions are from this source.)
If our assumed land use changes occur a
decade earlier,
CO2 returns to 350 ppm several years
earlier; however that has negligible effect on the maximum global temperature calculated below.
Thus Copenhagen just upped the ante, saying it will introduce measures to reduce
CO2 emissions before the 2009 UN Climate Conference (to be held in Copenhagen), and is aiming for
CO2 neutrality more than two
decades earlier, by 2025.
As a result of the thawing permafrost, the land switched from a carbon sink (net
CO2 absorber) to a carbon source (net
CO2 emitter)
decades earlier than it would have otherwise — before 2100 for every DEP.