dannio3

I have read scattered reports about different measures that need to be taken for stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions. Some scientists say we have less than 10 years to act, while others mention that reducing emissions by 90-100% by 2050 will reduce the worst effects. It is unclear what some scientists and policymakers are saying. For instance, Al Gore proposed a reduction of greenhouse gases to 90% below current levels by 2050 to Congress in 2007, but recently proposed an energy plan to have 100% renewable energy within 10 years (this might only reduce total emissions by a third or more though, so he seems to be proposing this for pushing us to begin the long process of lowering and ultimately stabilizing emissions.)

I guess my question is, how much time do we have to really stabilize emissions so that atmospheric concentrations can stay below a certain threshold? Are there any sources or websites that really lay out the science?

I have read sections of the Stern Report, written in 2007, that state emissions must reach a tipping point within the next twenty years to stabilize at 500 or 550 ppm. Is this goal too modest?

rhsaunders

Roughly a billion years. The evidence that mankind is responsible for climate change is ambiguous at best, and the cost of trying to do anything significant about it is more than we can afford. The UN proposed a program; the price tag: $557,000,000,000,000 -- more than the total value of every asset on the planet. The CO2 level during the dinosaur era was more than four times what it is now.

rhsaunders

Roughly a billion years. The evidence that mankind is responsible for climate change is ambiguous at best, and the cost of trying to do anything significant about it is more than we can afford. The UN proposed a program; the price tag: $557,000,000,000,000 -- more than the total value of every asset on the planet. The CO2 level during the dinosaur era was more than four times what it is now.