Search

Just over 40 years ago, I wrote a paper entitled 'Climate change: Are we on the brink of a pronounced global warming?' In it, I attempted to explain why despite a rise in the atmosphere's CO2 content there had been no significant warming. I predicted that a natural cooling was about to give way to a warming, and that industrial emissions of CO2 would amplify this warming. The paper published in Science in 1975. Warming did follow in 1976-1977. However, a retrospective look shows that my analysis was flawed. What is more-and to my chagrin-based on the words 'global warming' in my Science paper, I was given the title 'Father of Global Warming.' Not only did I not like this title, I had done little to merit it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The practice of using climate metrics to estimate carbon dioxide equivalent emissions has long been subject to scientific discussion. One strand of this literature has analysed whether the choice of metric affects the relative cost-effectiveness of options for climate change abatement, but there has been little discussion on the effect of metric choices on cost-effective abatement of near-term climate forcers (NTCFs). These NTCFs are air pollutants primarily regulated by policies outside the climate policy arena and their estimated carbon dioxide equivalent emissions are not typically considered in the evaluation of cost-effective abatement. However, the attention to NTCFs as climate forcers has increased during the last decade. The objective of this paper is to identify whether the relative cost-effectiveness of different NTCF abatement options is robust to climate metric choices. We assess nine plausible NTCF abatement options available in Sweden (with negligible effect on long-lived GHG emissions) and evaluate the robustness of the ranking of these, according to their estimated cost-effectiveness. Different metric designs are considered as well as climate impact uncertainty of NTCFs, with corresponding uncertainty in metric values. The results indicate that the choice of metric has little effect on the ranking of the options according to their cost-effectiveness, with options affecting NOx indicated as an exception. This suggests that the choice of metric utilised when calculating cost-effectiveness of NTCF abatement options is likely to have minor effect on which NTCF abatement options should be targeted for policy interventions (if NOx emissions are not significantly affected). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Negative emissions technologies have garnered increasing attention in the wake of the Paris target to curb global warming to 1.5 °C. However, much of the literature on carbon dioxide removal focuses on technical feasibility, and several significant social barriers to scale-up of these technologies have been glossed over. This paper reviews the existing literature on the social implications of rapidly ramping up carbon dioxide removal. It also explores the applicability of previous empirical social science research on intersecting topics, with examples drawn from research on first- and second-generation biofuels and forest carbon projects. Social science fieldwork and case studies of land use change, agricultural and energy system change, and technology adoption and diffusion can help in both anticipating the social implications of emerging negative emissions technologies and understanding the factors that shape trajectories of technological development. By integrating empirical research on public and producer perceptions, barriers to adoption, conditions driving new technologies, and social impacts, projections about negative emissions technologies can become more realistic and more useful to climate change policymaking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper evaluates the effect of future climate change (as per the CSIRO Mk3.5 A1FI future climate projection) on cotton yield in Southern Queensland and Northern NSW, eastern Australia by using of the biophysical simulation model APSIM (Agricultural Production Systems sIMulator). The simulations of cotton production show that changes in the influential meteorological parameters caused by climate change would lead to decreased future cotton yields without the effect of CO fertilisation. By 2050 the yields would decrease by 17 %. Including the effects of CO fertilisation ameliorates the effect of decreased water availability and yields increase by 5.9 % by 2030, but then decrease by 3.6 % in 2050. Importantly, it was necessary to increase irrigation amounts by almost 50 % to maintain adequate soil moisture levels. The effect of CO was found to have an important positive impact of the yield in spite of deleterious climate change. This implies that the physiological response of plants to climate change needs to be thoroughly understood to avoid making erroneous projections of yield and potentially stifling investment or increasing risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]