Climate Change and California: Struggling with the Apocalypse

When climate change due to fossil fuel consumption and the resultant carbon dioxide (CO2) produced emerged as a public topic, it was posed as a concern of some urgency.  As the buildup of CO2 has continued over the decades, and scientific understanding has improved, the problem has been upgraded to one of potential catastrophe.  Indeed, if one projects humans continuing on the current path, it is within the realm of possibility that our activity could render the planet uninhabitable not only for us but perhaps for all other species as well: a climate apocalypse.  Once elevated temperatures are produced, there enter positive natural feedback mechanisms that accelerate the emission of CO2.  Earth has drifted into environmental situations in the past where nearly all life was extinguished (five times).  It can happen again.

Environmental activists have been calling the nations of the world to task for not addressing the problem with the level of effort it demands.  One governmental entity that is deemed as proceeding with due diligence in reducing its greenhouse gas emissions has been the state of California.  Let us consider CO2 emissions on a global scale and place California’s efforts in perspective.

The Global Carbon Project assembles data on human contributions to the planet’s carbon cycle.

“Emissions in 2018 reached a new record high of 36.6±2 GtCO2 [billion tons CO2] with a share of coal (40%), oil (34%), gas (20%), cement (4%), and flaring (1%). Global emissions in 2019 are projected to increase by an additional 0.6% (-0.2% to +1.5%), a slower growth than in the past two years.”

“In 2018, global CO2 emissions were dominated by emissions from China (28%), the USA (15%), the EU (28-member states; 9%) and India (7%). Growth rates of these countries from 2017 to 2018 were +2.3% for China, +2.8% for the USA, -2.1% for the EU28, and +8.0% for India.”

“Net CO2 emissions from deforestation and other land-use change were 5.5±2.7 GtCO₂ on average during 2009-2018, accounting for about 14% of all emissions from human activity (fossil fuel, industry, land use change).  Together, land use change, fossil fuel and industry emissions, reached 42.1±2.8 GtCO₂ in 2018.”

“Of the total emissions from human activities during the period 2009-2018, about 45% accumulated in the atmosphere, 23% in the ocean and 29% on land.”

 As of 2018, the US and China were the largest contributors at 43%, adding in the 28 nations of the European Union and India brings the subtotal of major nations to 59%.  The other 200 or so nations that are each small players still add up to a significant source of CO2.  Of the major contributors, only the EU has a negative growth rate of emissions, a promising realization.  China and the US are still showing positive growth.  As expected, as a large still developing country, India has a large emissions growth rate, something one would expect for the majority of the countries not listed individually.

The emissions of the US are about 5.5 billion tons of CO2 annually.  From the California Air Resources Board, 

“The transportation sector remains the largest source of GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions in the State. Direct emissions from vehicle tailpipe, off-road transportation mobile sources, intrastate aviation, rail, and watercraft account for 40 percent of Statewide emissions in 2017. The annual increase in transportation emissions in 2017 has slowed down slightly compared to the previous 3 years. Emissions from the electricity sector account for 15 percent of the inventory and show another large drop in 2017 due to a large increase in renewable energy. For the first time since California started to track GHG emissions, California uses more electricity from zero-GHG sources (for the purpose of the GHG inventory, these include hydro, solar, wind, and nuclear energy) than from GHG-emitting sources for both in-state generation and total (in-state plus imports) generation in 2017. The industrial sector has seen a slight emission decrease in the past few years, and remains at 21 percent of the inventory.”  

Back in 2000, California was emitting about 490 million tons of CO2, with other gas emissions converted to CO2 equivalence in terms of a greenhouse gas. About 180 million tons came from transportation, 120 million from electric power generation, and about 98 million tons from industrial processes.  California has been successful in reducing its emissions even though its economic activity and population continue to grow.  Emissions per capita have gone from about 14 tons per person to below 11 tons per person, a reduction of over 20%. 

Most of the emission reductions have come from electric power production, with about a 50% reduction from 120 to about 60 million tons.  Most of the change has occurred in the last ten years.  Unfortunately, transportation and industrial contributions have seen only small decreases.  California seems determined to change that by banning gasoline powered cars eventually.  However, encouraging electric and hybrid vehicles has helped keep transportation emissions at least constant, but has not been able to overcome the effect of population growth. 

The net result is that California has lowered its emissions from about 490 million tons to about 425 million tons, a reduction of about 65 million tons or about 13%.  This decline is a little over 1% of the nation’s annual emissions and about half the anticipated yearly growth in emissions.  California has been doing the best it can without disrupting its economy.  Growth has been good throughout this process.  But is California moving fast enough to make a difference?

If all countries were as aggressive as California, the 35.5 billion tones of CO2 emitted annually would have been reduced to 30.9 billion tons.  But they weren’t, and worldwide emissions are essentially unchanged from its original trajectory.  California will continue to improve its emissions situation over the next few decades, but even if everyone else follows suit, do we have the time to move so slowly? 

The world’s nations have been claiming that they needed to keep temperature rise since the industrial revolution to 1.5 to 2.0 degrees C.  Consider this claim from Mark Lynas in his recent book Our Final Warning: Six Degrees of Climate Emergency.

“If we stay on the current business-as-usual trajectory, we could see two degrees as soon as the early 2030s, three degrees around mid-century, and four degrees by 2075 or so.  If we’re unlucky with positive feedbacks,,,from thawing permafrost in the artic or collapsing tropical rainforests, then we could be in for five or even six degrees by the century’s end.” 

To alert readers to the potential of those positive feedbacks that are so poorly understood, he provides brief sketches of the consequences of reaching those higher temperatures on his book cover. 

“3 degrees: Global food crisis; Amazon rainforest collapse.”

“4 degrees: Much of China and India uninhabitable; Mountain glaciers gone.”

“5 degrees: Mass wipeout of life; Humans reduced to polar refugees.”

“6 degrees: Possible human extinction.” 

One of those positive feedbacks is that warming temperatures effectively dry out forests more rapidly and increase the danger of wildfires.  Climate change is here, and the world should be noticing.  All those wildfires in the news currently, are converting carbon into CO2 and distributing it globally.  

Poor California has worked diligently to lessen its carbon footprint, but its 65 million tons of CO2 savings annually is being overwhelmed by the fires that have been burning in the state the past few years.  This source provides an estimate that fires this year prior to mid-September produced about 90 million tons of CO2.  There has already been significantly more burning since then and there is probably at least another month left in fire season before any significant rain can be expected.  And recall that wildfires are not just a California problem; they are a worldwide problem.

California demonstrated that green policies can be implemented without economic harm.  Nature has demonstrated that California’s efforts are in the noise.  The entire world must get involved in a serious manner.  And they must move quickly.

You can learn a little about a lot of things or you can learn a lot about a very few things. Guess which is the most fun.