Additional Global Warming from Keystone XL

Unlikely that it can be measured.The additional CO2-e (CO2 equivalent) is estimated to be 1.15 billion tons over the 50 year life of the pipeline.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/aug/23/tar-sands-keystone-xl-climate

One estimate of temperature increase is 0.0000000000015°C/tonne

http://globalwarmingwatch.blogspot.com/2009/06/1-tonne-of-co2-equals-00000000000015.html

The estimate is 0.0016°C in 50 years or 0.00003°C/year.  If I’m off by an order of magnitude, I still don’t think it is measurable.

About these ads

6 responses to “Additional Global Warming from Keystone XL

  1. But you left out feedbacks which are an order of magnitude. Oh. You already covered that.

  2. 0.0016°C? The HORROR! That be “Game Over” for the climaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH !!!

  3. In a few years we are going to be worried about rapidly declining Carbon Dioxide levels as the worlds oceans start to cool and reabsorb most of the released Carbon Dioxide. Can hardly wait to see what the next panic brings.

  4. 1. You are discussing influence of a single pipeline, not the total emission of CO2 from fossil fuels (estimate of total emission will be given below).
    2. In the very article that YOU ARE CITING about impact of CO2 emission on change of avg. temperature author refers to article in Nature [1] in which Matthews et al. write:
    “Given total CO2 emissions until now of approximately 0.5 Tt C from fossil fuels and land-use change, this implies that total future carbon emissions consistent with 2C of warming must be restricted to a best estimate of about 0.8 TtC.”
    which means that if we will keep on emitting CO2 we will soon cross the given value of 0.8 TtC (trillion tonnes of carbon). Finally they conclude:
    “Furthermore, we are unable to exclude the possibility of higher values of CCR* (and consequently lower values of allowable emissions), owing particularly to poorly quantified uncertainties in historical land-use change emissions and structural uncertainties in the simulated sulphate aerosol response.”

    So please! Before you write another comments on global warming read the scientific sources of “breaking news”.

    If you want to know the influence of CO2 on climate I recommend you, for example, an article:

    https://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-co2-enhanced-greenhouse-effect.htm

    [1] Matthews, H. Damon, et al. “The proportionality of global warming to cumulative carbon emissions.” Nature 459.7248 (2009): 829-832.

    * carbon–climate response

    • The additional GHG is from operating the pipeline, mostly from pumping stations. As I’m sure you are well aware, the oil is going to be extracted, moved and refined, whether it is through this pipeline or the western pipeline or, as currently being done, by rail. Sections of the pipeline have, or are being built, so we can actually talk about the unconstructed part.
      As for the amounts of carbon (or do you mean CO2?) to get to the mystical 2°C increase in the fictional global temperature, I’ve seen nothing to convince me the world will end.
      Thanks for the reference to skepticalscience and all about CO2. I notice they believe they have the ability to predict the future and have their science at the precision of nuclear physics but haven’t gotten any better than Arrhenius. The expert climateers’ predictions have been somewhat less than sterling. I guess predictions are hard, especially about the future.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s