Yesterday, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels either broke 400 parts per million for the first time in recorded history, or came incredibly close to doing so.
The figure depends on who’s doing the reporting, but either way, it’s not a good milestone. Carbon dioxide from human activities, particularly fossil fuels, is driving global climate change. Leading climate scientists and activists say global levels need to be reduced to at least 350 ppm to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Mauna Loa observatory reported the 400 ppm reading. The reading is of symbolic importance more than it is practical; global atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have been approaching the mark for a while.
The University of California San Diego’s Scripps Institute of Oceanography reported a 399.73 ppm figure. Scripps explains that the difference between what it and NOAA reported basically comes down to the fact that the two organizations measure daily levels using different time zones. Scripps has been posting daily carbon dioxide measurements to keep attention on the fact that global concentrations of the greenhouse gas were/are likely to soon exceed the 400 ppm mark.
This article appears in May 8-14, 2013.
This evening Bill McKibben, founder of climate-change activist group 350.org, spoke at the commencement of UB’s College of Architecture and Planning. He told us that he got word that the 400 level was exceeded this afternoon. Needless to say, we were all deeply disturbed by that, but also very moved by his inspiring speech. These students will never forget what they heard today, and I know that all of them will be very cognizant of the implications of their work on the planet.
People, whether they are elected officials or regular citizens, are remembered for both what they do and what they do not do.
When I remember President Ronald Reagan, only one thing comes to mind. When faced with the emerging HIV/AIDS crisis, he did absolutely nothing.
Just recently, the world was presented with information that the concentration of CO2 in Earth’s atmosphere had reached a distressing milestone of 400 parts per million. The question I have is this: What will YOU do now?
Honestly, I contemplate environmental issues every single day and ask myself what more I can do to help. And honestly, there is not much more I can personally do. My carbon footprint is small. I have been on a self-imposed gasoline limit of 5 gallons per week for over two years.
But there are bigger questions looming right now that must take into consideration the 400 ppm milestone. In light of this milestone, considering development of new fossil fuel resources is nothing short of insane. President Obama needs to stop Keystone XL and Governor Cuomo needs to ban fracking in NY. Elected officials in general need to stop lying. There is not such thing as clean coal. Natural gas via hydrofracking or other means is not a bridge fuel to the future. Natural gas is a detour around efforts to develop and convert to renewable, sustainable and truly clean energy sources. Natural gas is also a U-turn to old thinking. Gas companies and their spokespeople in elected office repeatedly tell us we are sitting on huge reserves of cheap natural gas and this in turn leads back to thinking Americans have energy to waste.
400 ppm is serious. Elected officials and citizens must take decisive action now and demand even more action be taken by all around the world. How we respond to the news of 400 ppm will decide what type of future Earth will have…or whether we have a future.
What will I do now? I will shine a harsh spotlight on the staggering hypocrisy of the moonbats and ideologues who whine about CO2 but at the same time delay the inevitable exploitation of our abundant natural gas resources.
This planet is a trivial dust speck whose only significance is as humankind’s point of departure into the cosmos. As a concession to the weepy sentimentalists, perhaps we can turn it into nice little museum when we’re done with it.
Tom Janowski:
If we can’t use oil, or coal, or natural gas, what do you suggest we use for energy, cow flatulence? By the way, that was quite a clumsy attempt at a completely irrelevant and gratuitous criticism of Ronald Reagan.