Climate 411

This post is by James Wang, Ph.D., a climate scientist at Environmental Defense.

A study by Weaver et al., published this month in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, reports that "All emission targets considered with less than 60% global reduction by 2050 break the 2.0°C threshold warming this century…." (They mean 2.0°C above the pre-industrial temperature, equivalent to 2.3°F above today’s temperature. For more on threshold temperatures, see “How Warm is Too Warm?“) Even more disturbing, they say, "Even when emissions are stabilized at 90% below present levels at 2050, this threshold is eventually broken."

That makes all our efforts seem hopeless. But are they right? In a word, no. Here’s why.

Read More »

This post is by Lisa Moore, Ph.D., a scientist in the Climate and Air program at Environmental Defense.

Yesterday’s New York Times Magazine had an article aptly titled "The Future is Drying Up", about the threats that climate change and booming populations pose to precious water resources in western states. Usually when we think of water and climate change we think of rising sea levels, but climate change is also causing drops in drinking water supplies.

Read More »

This post is by Michael Oppenheimer, Ph.D., the Albert G. Milbank Professor of Geosciences and International Affairs in the Woodrow Wilson School and the Department of Geosciences at Princeton University. He also serves as science advisor to Environmental Defense.

We’re already seeing environmental changes from global warming, and some key ones are occurring more quickly than scientists expected. Consequently, many experts from diverse disciplines are uncomfortable with the slow pace of governments in addressing this issue. The growing sense of urgency arises from two concerns:

• Earth’s climate system may be rapidly approaching a point of no return where large, irreversible and destructive changes, like the gradual disintegration of an ice sheet, become inevitable.
• To achieve any given temperature goal, the longer we delay action, the steeper emissions reductions will need to be. It’s easier to cut emissions gradually than it is to slash them drastically.

Read More »