Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Home › News › Education

Prospects grimmer for reducing greenhouse gases, study shows

By Bill Scanlon, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published December 9, 2008 at 2:41 p.m.
Updated December 9, 2008 at 2:42 p.m.

Text size  

Population and energy use

Percent of population and energy use by the world's "have," "have-not" and "have-some" nations.*

"Haves: 17 percent of global population, 52 percent of energy consumed

Countries include: United States, Japan, Germany

"Have-somes" 50 percent of global population 45 percent of energy consumed

Countries include: China, India, Syria, Iran

"Have-nots" 33 percent of global population 2.8 percent of energy consumed

Countries include: Tanzania, El Salvador, Botswana

*Source: National Center for Atmospheric Research and University of Colorado

More Education

More stories »

Scientists have vastly underestimated the challenge of reducing greenhouse gases in a world where billions are boosting their carbon footprint, an important new report says.

The report throws ice water on projections that global warming can be slowed as energy efficiency helps poor countries develop in a more sustainable way.

China has a chance to do that. But nations such as Colombia, Argentina and Iran don't have the wealth to convert to more efficient energy, even as their economies grow and their citizens demand more electricity and cars, says the report from Colorado atmospheric researchers.

The study by scientists from the National Center for Atmospheric Research and the University of Colorado is expected to be a hot topic of discussion at this week's U.N. Climate Change Conference in Poznan, Poland.

"We always knew that reducing greenhouse gas emissions was going to be a challenge, but now it looks like we underestimated the magnitude of this problem," said Patricia Romero Lankao, an NCAR sociologist who is the lead author of the study in this month's journal Climate Research.

"There is simply no evidence that developing countries will somehow become wealthier and be in a position to install more environmentally friendly technologies."

Technologically advanced nations such as the United States are under pressure to reduce their per capita emissions of fossil fuels. Developing nations are being urged to adopt cleaner technology.

Both goals will be very difficult to achieve, the authors say.

Poor countries are producing more and exporting more, but they're not gaining enough wealth to convert to energy-efficient technologies, they say.

Consequently, the developing world is pumping more fossil fuels into the atmosphere as more people can afford energy-consuming goods for the first time.

And energy efficiency in technologically advanced nations isn't coming close to balancing out the extra fossil fuels emanating from poor countries, the report says.

In fact, despite gains in energy efficiency, the developed world also is increasing its greenhouse gas output, said Lankao, who is with NCAR's Institute for the Study of Society and the Environment.

Their economic growth is outstripping increases in efficiency as demand for more cars, larger houses and other goods keeps bumping up carbon dioxide emissions.

The goods demanded by the advanced nations often come from the Third World, where factories belch dirty coal.

Citizens of the poorer nations aren't driving SUVs, but they are burning and logging their forests, which contribute to the buildup of carbon dioxide in the Earth's upper atmosphere.

"These countries are just now at the stage the United States was at at the beginning of the last century," Lankao said. "They still have very energy-intense industries. The cement industry, for example, is moving from the U.S. and Europe to China and the developing nations."

The current economic slowdown could make things worse, because with demand slipping for oil, and prices plunging, there is no longer an incentive to develop solar, wind and alternative energies that could help developing countries bypass their sooty coal eras, she said.

Researchers divided the world into three types of nations — technologically advanced ones such as the United States, the "have nots" such as Tanzania and Botswana, and the "have somes," such as India and Thailand.

They found that the advanced nations comprise a sixth of the world's population but account for 52 percent of energy consumption.

The have-nots, representing a third of the world's population, consume only 2.8 percent of the energy.

In between are the crucial "have some" nations, which comprise about half the world's population and use about 45 percent of the consumed energy.

In the 1990s, global emissions of greenhouse gases grew at a rate of 1.3 percent a year, the report said.

Between 2000 and 2006, that rate multiplied to 3.3 percent a year.

The authors examined population, wealth and the ratio emissions to unit of gross domestic product.

They found that the economic disparity between the haves and have nots has grown since 1960 and is likely to grow for at least two more decades.

The authors predict that even as the poor nations grow somewhat wealthier by producing more goods for the developed world, there will continue to be a hierarchy among nations.

The poor nations will adopt more environmentally friendly means to produce products, but at a much slower rate than projected by the International Panel on Climate Change, the group that won this year's Nobel Peace Prize.

The brightest hopes the authors see are the initiatives by cities around the world to impose emission restrictions, and the prospect that the Obama administration will push for a national strategy to develop green energies.

"We see prospects for hope, but we need to go deeper and go faster," Lankao said.

Comments

  • December 9, 2008

    3:34 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    pak writes:

    Man caused global warming is a hoax. Follow the money, it is a ploy to redistribute wealth from the rich countries to the poor. Man caused CO2 is only 00.04% of total global CO2 from all sources, a negligible amount. 450,000 years of ice core data show that warming is a natural climate event and increased CO2 is a lagging indicator not a leading indicator of warming. We are coming out of the mideval warming period and the increased CO2 is a natural event resulting from the natural warming cycle. The last decade has shown cooling rather than warming and 2007 and 2008 will be a couple of the coolest years on record. We have an energy crisis not a climate crisis. We need to use alternative energy to help end our dependence on countries that don't like us very much. We need to use nuclear, CTL, coal to liquids to end our dependence on foreign oil and imported gas (15 % of the total gas we use). Our economy is based upon cheap, available reliable energy, not expensive, unreliable renewables that work only less than 33% of the time.

  • December 9, 2008

    3:41 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    fencergal writes:

    Man cannot change what he did not create.

  • December 9, 2008

    3:48 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    mzbmommy writes:

    Pak sounds very scientific and in-the-know, except for misspelling "medieval." I'm sure the rest of the facts are right on the money though, right?

  • December 9, 2008

    3:51 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    History writes:

    Pak - Good Post - while I disagree with your opinion on global warming, it does not matter, we need green energy -however you get to this conclusion does not matter - what does matter is that you get there.

  • December 9, 2008

    4:26 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    ILoveChipotle writes:

    "don't have the wealth to convert to more efficient energy" Actually hydrocarbons are the most efficient form of energy. The amount of energy contained in oil and natural gas far exceeds the efficiency of wind, solar, etc...

  • December 9, 2008

    4:48 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Andy writes:

    pak:

    Sources? Any supporting data whatsoever? Lay 'em on us. I can't wait to see them.

  • December 9, 2008

    6:16 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    LesterGovernment writes:

    Iran doesn't have the money to reduce their carbon footprint? They have the third largest proven reserves of oil on the planet; that's a heck of a lot of money! I guess their nuclear program isn't for peaceful purposes after all.

  • December 9, 2008

    6:29 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    spyder writes:

    I shoveled several inches of this darn "global warming" this morning and drove through several inches of this darn "global warming" , getting home last night.
    The 'newest "scientific research" for 'global warming' states that because of 'global warming', it will be colder for the next 15 years.
    And algore will be there selling his 'indulges', all the way to his bank acct. in Sweden.

  • December 11, 2008

    3:04 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    SEG writes:

    What a sloppy piece of "journalism".
    -"...the developing world is pumping more fossil fuels into the atmosphere...". So is that what they do with their fossil fuels?
    - "...balancing out the extra fossil fuels emanating (sic) from poor countries, the report says". What?? The report actually said just that?
    - "Citizens of the poorer nations aren't driving SUVs, but they are burning and logging their forests, which contribute to the buildup of carbon dioxide in the Earth's upper atmosphere." Really? CO2 is relatively heavy and tends to reside in the LOWER atmosphere. How are they getting it getting up there?
    - "The goods demanded by the advanced nations often come from the Third World, where factories belch dirty coal." I'd like to see these coal-belching factories. Most countries have to dig for it.

    Oh well...the primary source is apparently a "social scientist".