Test - reason

We are on Track for a 6 Degree Rise in Temperature

According to a new analysis released on November 5 and reported in the Guardian, the world is on track for "at least six degrees of warming" by the end of the century. The new research was conducted by consultancy giant PwC. Their investigation concluded that we will need a "5.1 per cent annual cut in global emissions per unit of GDP, known as carbon intensity, through to 2050 if the world is to avoid the worst effects of climate change and meet an internationally agreed target of limiting average temperature increases to just two degrees above pre-industrial levels."

The growth of GHG emissions in emerging countries represent one of the biggest challenges to combating climate change. Specifically nations like China, India, Brazil, Mexico, Russia, Indonesia and Turkey, whose cumulative 7.4 percent annual increase in emissions. However emerging nations are not alone, the research indicates that industrialized countries must also accelerate their carbon reduction efforts.

The report concludes that "governments and businesses can no longer assume that a two-degree warming world is the default scenario", and urges greater planning to cope with the disruptive effects that more unpredictable and extreme weather will have on supply chains, long-term assets, and infrastructure, particularly in coastal or low-lying regions.

Meanwhile, businesses in carbon-intensive sectors must also anticipate "invasive regulation" and the possibility of stranded assets, said Jonathan Grant, director of sustainability and climate change at PwC.

"Resilience will become a watchword in the boardroom – to policy responses as well as to the climate," he said. "More radical and disruptive policy reactions in the medium term could lead to high-carbon assets being stranded.

According to National Geographic, a 6 degree rise in temperature will radically change our world.

To avert the worst effects of climate change we must imediately begin to radically reduce emissions. The focus should be on cleaner power generation, energy-efficiency, transport and industry, as well as forest preservation (REDD).

Related Articles
The Dramatic Implications of Melting Arctic Sea Ice
The Safe Upper Limit of Atmospheric Carbon is 350 PPM
Arctic Monitoring Stations Report High Levels of CO2
Melting Arctic Ice is Releasing Massive Amounts of Methane
Debunking CO2 Myths and The Science of Climate Change
Primer on CO2 and Other GHGs
The Green Economy is the Right Solution for our Troubled Times
Action on Climate Change
The Effects of Global Warming
Natural Gas is Not Clean Energy
Whats the Fracking Problem?
Coke and the WWF's CO2 Eating Billboard

New York Times Inadvertently Supports Denial

In May 2012, the New York Times published an article by Justin Gillis titled, "Clouds' Effect on Climate Change Is Last Bastion for Dissenters." This article lends legitimacy to the climate deniers subterfuge by unwittingly casting doubt.The article seems to infer that if you cannot predict with certainty the way clouds will behave you cannot predict that the earth will keep warming. The article explains that scientists cannot predict future temperature, so the inference is that we cannot predict global warming. "The result is a big spread in forecasts of future temperature, one that scientists have not been able to narrow much in 30 years of effort."

Deniers whose views are shaped by reason and science acknowledge that the Earth is warming and the climate is changing. These literate deniers have adopted a new strategy focused on the unpredictability of clouds and the mistaken believe that although the planet is warming it will not be catastrophic.

There are already climate induced catastrophes taking place all around the world. Apparently deniers do not believe that deadly extreme weather or mass starvation due to drought is catastrophic.

Dr. Richard Lindzen is a climate denier from MIT, he also gave the Heartland 2010 keynote address. Lindzen thinks we should not invest in emissions reduction, "If I'm right, we'll have saved money" by avoiding measures to limit emissions, Dr. Lindzen said in the New York Times interview. "If I'm wrong, we'll know it in 50 years and can do something." If only we had that much time.

Inevitably, even the deniers will be forced to acknowledge the catastrophic effects of climate change just as they are being forced to accept that the Earth is warming. In the interim, these slow learners cannot be allowed to impede progress towards a more environmentally sustainable world.