Usted no se lo cree

Ir al texto

1. Meinrat O. Andreae et al (2005) – Strong present-day aerosol cooling implies a hot future – Nature 435:1187-1190 doi:10.1038/nature03671 – Max Planck Institute for Chemistry; Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research; Centre for Ecology and Hydrology
   “Strong aerosol cooling in the past and present would then imply that future global warming may proceed at or even above the upper extreme of the range projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”
2. Veerabhadran Ramanathan and Y. Feng (2008) – On avoiding dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system: Formidable challenges ahead – Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences PNAS 105:14245-14250 doi:10.1073/pnas.0803838105 – Published online: 23/03/2008 – Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California at San Diego – http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/Releases/doc/zpq038084771p.pdf
3. Jerry Knox et al (2012) – Climate change impacts on crop productivity in Africa and South Asia – Environmental Research Letters 7 034032 doi:10.1088/1748-9326/7/3/034032 – Cranfield University – http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/7/3/034032/pdf/1748-9326_7_3_034032.pdf
   “Climate change is a serious threat to crop productivity in regions that are already food insecure. We assessed the projected impacts of climate change on the yield of eight major crops in Africa and South Asia using a systematic review and meta-analysis of data in 52 original publications from an initial screen of 1144 studies. Here we show that the projected mean change in yield of all crops is − 8% by the 2050s in both regions. Across Africa, mean yield changes of − 17% (wheat), − 5% (maize), − 15% (sorghum) and − 10% (millet) and across South Asia of − 16% (maize) and − 11% (sorghum) were estimated. No mean change in yield was detected for rice. The limited number of studies identified for cassava, sugarcane and yams precluded any opportunity to conduct a meta-analysis for these crops. Variation about the projected mean yield change for all crops was smaller in studies that used an ensemble of > 3 climate (GCM) models. Conversely, complex simulation studies that used biophysical crop models showed the greatest variation in mean yield changes. Evidence of crop yield impact in Africa and South Asia is robust for wheat, maize, sorghum and millet, and either inconclusive, absent or contradictory for rice, cassava and sugarcane.”
4. Joel B. Smith et al (2009) – Assessing dangerous climate change through an update of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) ‘reasons for concern’ – Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences PNAS 106:4133-4137 doi:10.1073/pnas.0812355106  – Published online: 17/03/2009 – Stratus Consulting, Inc. –  http://www.pnas.org/content/106/11/4133.full.pdf+html  – 15 authors
   “Based on our expert judgment about new findings … compared with results reported in the TAR [IPCC Third Assessment Report], smaller increases in GMT [Global Mean Temperature] are now estimated to lead to significant or substantial consequences in the framework of the 5 ‘‘reasons for concern.’’
5. Katherine Richardson et al (2009) – Synthesis Report from Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions – International Scientific Congress Climate Change – Published online: 12/03/2009 – University of Copenhagen – http://www.climatecongress.ku.dk – 12 authors
   “A 2 ºC guardrail, which was thought in 2001 to have avoided serious risks for all five reasons for concern, is now inadequate to avoid serious risks to many unique and threatened ecosystems and to avoid a large increase in the risks associated with extreme weather events. Third, the risks of large scale discontinuities, such as the tipping elements described above, were considered to be very low in 2001 for a 2 ºC increase but are now considered to be moderate for the same increase. In summary, although a 2 ºC rise in temperature above pre-industrial remains the most commonly quoted guardrail for avoiding dangerous climate change, it nevertheless carries significant risks of deleterious impacts for society and the environment.”
6. Conference of the Parties 15 – Copenhagen Accord – United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – 18/12/2009 –  – http://unfccc.int/home/items/5262.php
   «To achieve the ultimate objective of the Convention to stabilize greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system, we shall, recognizing the scientific view that the increase in global temperature should be below 2 degrees Celsius, on the basis of equity and in the context of sustainable development, enhance our long-term cooperative action to combat climate change. We recognize the critical impacts of climate change and the potential impacts of response measures on countries particularly vulnerable to its adverse effects and stress the need to establish a comprehensive adaptation programme including international support.”
7. Ferran P. Vilar – Las credenciales de Hill & Knowlton, la agencia de PR de la cumbre de Copenhague – Usted no se lo Cree, 18/12/2009 – https://ustednoselocree.com/2009/12/18/credenciales-hill-knowlton/
   “En el centro de esta campaña de desinformación estaba nuestra Hill & Knowlton quien, ya en 1953, diseñó, para toda la industria tabaquera, reunida en cónclave, la estrategia para contradecir la evidencia científica que comenzaba a trascender: la relación causal entre el hecho de fumar y distintas enfermedades. Lo hizo de varias formas, entre las que cabe destacar la contratación de científicos y el encargo de trabajos de investigación (6) a través de la creación de dos institutos, denominados Council for Tobacco Research y Tobacco Research Institute (7).”
8. Kevin Anderson and Alice Bows (2011) – Beyond ‘dangerous’ climate change: emission scenarios for a new world – Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A 369:20-44 doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0290 – Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research + School of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering + School of Environmental Sciences and School of Development, University of East Anglia; Sustainable Consumption Institute, School of Earth, Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences, University of Manchester
   “The analysis suggests that despite high-level statements to the contrary, there is now little to no chance of maintaining the global mean surface temperature at or below 2◦C. Moreover, the impacts associated with 2◦C have been revised upwards, sufficiently so that 2◦C now more appropriately represents the threshold between ‘dangerous’ and ‘extremely dangerous’ climate change.”
9. Brigitte Knopf et al (2011) – Exploring the feasibility of low stabilization targets – Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 2:617–626 doi:10.1002/wcc.124 – Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research – 3 authors
   “For most models, costs grow moderately over a wide range of the carbon budget but increase disproportionately toward higher stringency. This convex behavior suggests the existence of a model-specific ‘feasibility frontier’, i.e. a level of stringency above which mitigation becomes either infeasible or prohibitively expensive. Since this feasibility frontier provides an indication of the attainability of low stabilization targets, it is of great importance to further explore the dependence of the frontier on crucial structural and parameter assumptions of the models.”
10. James Hansen et al (2008) – Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim? – The Open Atmospheric Science Journal 2:217-231 doi:10.2174/1874282300802010217 – NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University Earth Institute – http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2008/2008_Hansen_etal.pdf – 10 authors
    “If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm, but likely less than that.”
11. James E. Hansen and Makiko Sato (2011) – Paleoclimate Implications for Human-Made Climate Change – En: Climate Change: Inferences from Paleoclimate and Regional Aspects. A. Berger, F. Mesinger, and D. Šijački, Eds. Springer (In press) – NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University Earth Institute – http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2011/20110118_MilankovicPaper.pdf
    “We conclude that Earth in the warmest interglacial periods was less than 1°C warmer than in the Holocene and that goals of limiting human-made warming to 2°C and CO2 to 450 ppm are prescriptions for disaster. Polar warmth in prior interglacials and the Pliocene does not imply that a significant cushion remains between today’s climate and dangerous warming, rather that Earth today is poised to experience strong amplifying polar feedbacks in response to moderate additional warming. Deglaciation, disintegration of ice sheets, is nonlinear, spurred by amplifying feedbacks. If warming reaches a level that forces deglaciation, the rate of sea level rise will depend on the doubling time for ice sheet mass loss. Gravity satellite data, although too brief to be conclusive, are consistent with a doubling time of 10 years or less, implying the possibility of multi-meter sea level rise this century. The emerging shift to accelerating ice sheet mass loss supports our conclusion that Earth’s temperature has returned to at least the Holocene maximum. Rapid reduction of fossil fuel emissions is required for humanity to succeed in preserving a planet resembling the one on which civilization developed.”
12. A. Dutton and K. Lambeck (2012) – Ice Volume and Sea Level During the Last Interglacial – Science 337:216-219 doi:10.1126/science.1205749 – Research School of Earth Sciences, The Australian National University + Department of Geological Sciences, University of Florida; Departement des Géosciences, École Normale Supérieure
    “During the last interglacial period, ~125,000 years ago, sea level was at least several meters higher than at present, with substantial variability observed for peak sea level at geographically diverse sites. Speculation that the West Antarctic ice sheet collapsed during the last interglacial period has drawn particular interest to understanding climate and ice-sheet dynamics during this time interval. We provide an internally consistent database of coral U-Th ages to assess last interglacial sea-level observations in the context of isostatic modeling and stratigraphic evidence. These data indicate that global (eustatic) sea level peaked 5.5 to 9 meters above present sea level, requiring smaller ice sheets in both Greenland and Antarctica relative to today and indicating strong sea-level sensitivity to small changes in radiative forcing.»
13. Harry Dowsett et al (1994) – Joint investigations of the Middle Pliocene climate I: PRISM paleoenvironmental reconstructions – Global and Planetary Change 9:169-195 doi: 10.1016/0921-8181(94)90015-9 – U.S. Geological Survey – 9 authors
    “This reconstruction, developed primarily from paleontological data, includes middle Pliocene sea level, vegetation, land-ice distribution, sea-ice distribution, and sea-surface temperature (SST), all of which contribute to our conceptual understanding of this climate system. These data indicate middle Pliocene sea level was at least 25 m higher than present, presumably due in large part to a reduction in the size of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet. Sea surface temperatures were essentially equivalent to modern temperatures in tropical regions but were significantly warmer at higher latitudes. Due to increased heat flux to high latitudes, both the Arctic and Antarctic appear to have been seasonally ice free during the middle Pliocene with greatly reduced sea ice extent relative to today during winter. Vegetation changes, while more complex, are generally consistent with marine SST changes and show increased warmth and moisture at higher latitudes during the middle Pliocene.”
14. Gerard H. Roe and Marcia B. Baker (2007) – Why Is Climate Sensitivity So Unpredictable? – Science 318:629-632 doi:10.1126/science.1144735 – Published online: 26/10/2007 – Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Washington – http://climatechange.pbworks.com/f/Why+is+climate+sensitivity+so+unpredictable+G.H.Roe+et+al+Science+2007.H.Roe+et+al+Science+2007.pdf
    “We show that the shape of these probability distributions is an inevitable and general consequence of the nature of the climate system, and we derive a simple analytic form for the shape that fits recent published distributions very well. We show that the breadth of the distribution and, in particular, the probability of large temperature increases is relatively insensitive to decreases in uncertainties associated with the underlying climate processes.”
15. Ferran P. Vilar – Cambio climático: ¿cuánto es demasiado? 3: Historia de los 2 ºC – 3.1 Las medidas de temperature – Usted no se lo Cree, 20/5/12 – https://ustednoselocree.com/2012/05/20/cuanto-es-demasiado-31/
    “Todo ello hace que no haya un acuerdo definitivo sobre cuál es exactamente la temperatura media de la Tierra.”
16. Gabriele C. Hegerl and Susan Solomon (2009) – Risks of Climate Engineering – Science 325:955-956 doi:10.1126/science.1178530 – Grant Institute, Edinburgh; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Earth System Research Laboratory
    “Geoengineered changes in the environment could thus lead not only to ‘winners and losers’ but even to conflicts over water resources ( 19) and the potential for migration and instability, making shortwave climate engineering internationally very controversial.”
17. Alan Robock (2008) – 20 reasons why geoengineering may be a bad idea – Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 64:14–18 doi:10.2968/064002006 – Center for Environmental Prediction in the Department of Environmental Sciences, Rutgers University – http://www.thebulletin.org/files/064002006_0.pdf
    “1. Effects on regional climate; 2. Continued ocean acidification; 3. Ozone depletion; 4. Effects on plants; 5. More acid deposition; 6. Effects of cirrus clouds; 7. Whitening of the sky (but nice sunsets); 8. Less sun for solar power; 9. Environmental impacts of implementation; 10. Rapid warming if deployment stops; 11. There’s no going back; 12. Human error; 13. Undermining emissions mitigation; 14. Cost; 15. Commercial control of technology; 16. Military use of the technology; 17. Conflicts with current treaties; 18. Control of the thermostat; 19. Questions of moral authority; 20. Unexpected consequences.”
18. Hayley Stevenson (2012) – Governing Climate Technologies: Is there room for democracy? – Environmental Values, forthcoming – University of Sheffield – http://www.erica.demon.co.uk/EV/papers/Stevenson.pdf
    “Technologies for mitigating and adapting to climate change are inherently political. Their development, diffusion, and deployment will have uneven impacts within and across national borders. Bringing the governance of climate technologies under democratic control is imperative but impeded by the global scale of governance and its polycentric nature. This article draws on innovative theorising in the deliberative democracy tradition to map possibilities for global democratic governance of climate technologies. It is argued that this domain is not beyond the reach of democracy. Civil society has a unique and expanded role to play in generating democratic legitimacy by fostering public deliberation; translating and transmitting concepts, ideas, and messages; and promoting and facilitating deliberative accountability.”
19. Baruch Fischhoff (2011) – Applying the science of communication to the communication of science – Climatic Change 108:701-705 doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0183-9 – Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University
    “However, the science of communication has vastly less organizational coherence than the science it could help to communicate. The US Food and Drug Administration (2009) has a strategic communication plan, jointly developed by social, decision, and natural scientists, and a statutory Risk Communication Advisory Committee. The climate science community deserves as much.”

Ir al texto