Is renewable energy the best solution to tackle climate change?

The answer whether renewable energy is really the best solution to climate change isn't simple, in fact the right answer to this question would be both yes and no. Yes because only renewable energy has the potential to replace fossil fuels and with it reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions and no because transition to renewable energy is not going fast enough.

Time is extremely important factor in our fight against climate change because world is fast approaching the global temperature increase of 2 degrees Celsius seen by many scientists as the tipping point after which we will no longer be able to halt climate change.

The scientists say that if world fails to prevent temperature increase of 2 degrees Celsius we could be in for the worst possible climate change scenario with extreme weather events being the regular thing.

Our only chance to tackle climate change is to make massive cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions. The problem is that none of the world's biggest polluters such ac China and United States wants to oblige to major emission cuts because that would apparently be of great damage to their economies.

They are once again forgetting that climate change is not only doing big environmental but also big economic damage that is already measured in billions of dollars. What this means is that stopping climate change from running away with it also means preventing gigantic economic damage.

This predicted economic damage would be a combined result of huge biodiversity loss, reduced crops, damage done by frequent natural disasters such as hurricanes and flooding, etc.

There's a lot of talk about renewable energy these days but lot of talk doesn't also mean lot of action. Yes, it is true that global renewable energy capacity grows rapidly from the mathematical point of view but in real life renewable energy is at least half of decade away from being able to successfully replace fossil fuels as main energy source.

And there's a really huge doubt whether climate change will give us so much time to make the switch to renewables.

earth hour 2012 Official video

Droughts caused by climate change destroy forests

Our forests store approximately 45 percent of the carbon found on land which means that they are vital in our fight against climate change. However, the increased climate change impact has in the last ten years resulted in frequent droughts that have caused deaths of trees in all continents, except Antarctica.

Dying of trees and lesser forest cover gives extra impact to global warming by reducing the amount of carbon dioxide absorbed from the atmosphere by trees and also by releasing carbon that was locked up in their wood.

The death of forests trees can also have huge impact on biodiversity; rainforests for instance belong to the areas with the richest biodiversity on our planet so increased forest mortality can irreversibly alter many ecosystems.

If droughts continue they will cause major damage to our forests in years to come. Droughts negatively affect transport of water in trees which results in tree deaths and they also cause huge wildfires.

One of the recent examples of what drought is doing to trees comes from Texas where wildfires destroyed around 175 million cubic feet of timber, according to Texas Forest Service economists and analysts. The economic value of all those trees as they stood in the forest was $97 million. The total volume of all that destroyed timber could have produced $1.6 billion worth of different forest products.

Climate change still low on political agenda

Climate change is still low on political agenda and world leaders are yet again more worried about global finances than about global climate, just like this was the case in 2009. Big European debt crisis accompanied by the recent US economic woes are taking away from climate talks in Durban any chance of success.

The scientists have already issued warnings that greenhouse gases are back on rise in the atmosphere which causes faster melting of polar ice caps and increases the global sea levels.

It is almost the same scenario as in 2009, namely financial crisis is once again being used as an excuse to delay any significant climate change action. Because of the financial crisis politicians are once again unwilling to put hands in their pockets and come up with the money needed to adapt to global climate changes.

The three largest polluters in the world -China, United, States and India are extremely reluctant to commit to any significant cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. None of these three countries is ready to sign new climate deal yet none of these countries want to be blamed for failure in reaching new climate deal.

It seems like each of these three major polluters has some conditions under which deal should be signed. They all seem to be forgetting that climate change is global issue which means no conditionality but unity. At this moment in time global political unity certainly looks more like the utopia than actual reality.

If world fails to agree on new climate deal any time soon greenhouse gas emissions will continue to rise increasing global temperature between three and five degrees Celsius by the end of this century. Such temperature increase would forever change the life on our planet.

Let us think about the heritage we will leave to our children and grandchildren.

No optimism about climate change talks in Durban

Copenhagen 2009 – disappointment, Cancun 2010 – disappointment and Durban 2011 - you guessed again disappointment. The climate change talks in Durban, South Africa have started but expectations are very low, in fact many analysts believe that the new climate deal isn't possible in this political climate any time soon.

The Kyoto protocol expires next year and it certainly doesn't look like world leaders are ready to revive it. This is because two world's largest polluters, China and United States, the countries that hadn't even signed Kyoto protocol do not agree to carbon emission cuts.

China is still classed as a developing country and United States feels that China should oblige to same cuts as developing world. China, on the other hand, believes that United States and the rest of the developing world have mainly contributed to climate change issue and so they must oblige to larger cuts in emissions.

The fact that scientists are constantly issuing warnings that the world needs to drastically reduce the emissions of planet-warming greenhouse gases doesn't seem to be giving too many sleepless nights to world leaders.

World's largest polluters are running away from new climate deal and a swift action to stave off the catastrophic effects of global warming is still nowhere on the radar.

Optimism is certainly not the word associated with the climate talks in Durban. The major players have already clearly announced their unwillingness to negotiate their positions so any hope to reach new climate deal any time soon seems to be totally lost.

Climate change will cause more extreme weather events

When thinking about the worst possible climate change scenario extreme weather events are really the first thing that comes to my mind. There are many scientists across the globe who would agree that if we fail to significantly decrease global level of carbon emissions this scenario will become our everyday's reality.

The latest UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on climatic extreme events also shares this opinion. According to UN heatwaves will become significantly longer, hotter and increase in frequency, and rainfall will be heavier during the 21st century, all because of the increased climate change impact.

It was also concluded that there is an increased risk from hurricanes and cyclones as wind speeds in hurricanes and tropical cyclones were likely to increase though there is still not enough evidence to draw firm conclusions for each region.

There is also a chance of an increase in danger in high mountains from landslides and the bursts of glacial lakes. All these phenomena will account for not only major environmental but also major economic damage measured in billions of dollars.

There's a very little chance that this newest report will have any effect at international climate talks that will soon begin in Durban, South Africa. World leaders apparently still believe we have all the time in the world to tackle climate change issue.

And the carbon emissions continue to grow, increasing global temperatures and bringing us very close to a global temperature increase of two degrees Celsius which is seen by many scientists as the point of no return in our fight against climate change.

Only united world can find solution to climate change

Climate change is by all means the greatest environmental threat of our time. Since climate change is a global issue it requires solution on global level which means that all countries of the world must be involved. However the unity of the world is highly questionable topic particularly when you consider almost no success in international climate talks up to this date.

The best solution to tackle climate change is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions on global level. However, many countries of the world are reluctant to commit to major carbon cuts because they fear this will have seriously negative economic impact. Don't be surprised, economy still heavily outweighs ecology, despite living in the 21st century.

Even if world eventually agrees on new climate deal it might be too late to stop climate change from running away with it. We have already witnessed to higher incidence of extreme weather events in many parts of the world with much more to come in years ahead.

In order to reduce carbon emissions on global level world will need to make a rapid transition to clean, renewable energy. The currently dominant fossil fuels when burn produce carbon emissions so the more fossil fuels gets replaced with renewable energy sources the better it will be in fight against climate change.

The transition to renewable energy is still not fast enough even despite the recent record growth of installed renewable energy capacity. Renewable energy sources are still more expensive energy option compared to fossil fuels which means that many countries, especially developing countries, still prefer them as a main driving force of their economies (this mostly refers to coal, the cheapest but also the dirtiest energy source).

World also needs to stop deforestation. Forests, especially rainforests, absorb large quantities of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. In fact our forests are together with our oceans the largest carbon sinkers.

The climate change has already reached the point where we have to think how to best adapt to it. Many scientists will tell you that term „tackling climate change“ no longer refers to completely stopping climate change but to make sure climate change does not cross the point of no return ( seen by many scientists as the global temperature increase of two degrees).

Climate change is really the first major issue that will test the unity of this world. Judging by the most recent reports regarding climate change talks, world is anything but united.

World needs to make switch to zero-carbon economy

We can still stop climate change from totally running out of control. However in order to do so we have to make sure to stop global temperatures' increase of two degrees. Many climate change scientists are convinced that this decade could well be our last chance for decisive action against climate change.

If only world leaders would share their opinion and agree on new climate deal. At this moment however new climate change deal looks anything but possible.

World needs to significantly reduce carbon emissions at global level and there are several possible solutions to achieve this- transition to renewable energy, increased energy efficiency as well as different other carbon-free technologies.

The temperatures will grow as long as we keep emitting carbon emissions therefore the perfect solution to tackle climate change would be for world to switch to zero carbon economy.

The first step to zero-carbon economy would no doubt be ambitious renewable energy targets and a quick transition to renewable energy sources as the primary sources of energy.

The zero-carbon economy scenario wouldn't sit well to powerful fossil fuel lobbies and since these lobbies still have huge influence over politics it is no surprise all major political decisions go their way.

The global politics needs to look above the individual interests because climate change is global threat which means that only united world has the chance to tackle it.

Why is climate change a major threat to Africa?

Africa is a continent most vulnerable to climate change. Already very hot and dry Africa will soon become even dryer and hotter due to climate change. More droughts will cause even more hunger in the Black Continent and Africa will find it extremely hard to cope with the climate change impact in years to come.

Africa's economy will take a massive hit by climate change, especially since Africa doesn't have enough money or the adequate policies to adapt to climate change. Without the help of rich countries Africa's future will look anything but bright.

African economy is still mostly based on agriculture despite the fact that there is a growing trend for industrialization in many African countries. The industrialization of Africa might worsen already serious climate change issue in Africa because most developing countries rely on coal as major fuel to boost their economies, which leads to more carbon emissions.

Africa needs to adopt green economy based on sustainable development and renewable energy but this is lot easier to said than done, especially with the high level of poverty in Africa.

The rich countries need to help Africa to come up with solutions that would ensure economic growth but at the same time avoid further harming the climate with more greenhouse gases.

Climate change is already shrinking animals and plants?

Climate change has already brought many animal and plant species at the very brink of extinction while other plants and animals are shrinking in size because of warmer temperatures.

Jennifer Sheridan and David Bickford at the National University of Singapore have studied climate-change episodes in the distant past as well as experiments and observations in recent history. Their conclusion was that climate change has already begun to shrink dozens of animal and plants species with many more likely to follow.

Fossil records from the past clearly show that past periods of rising temperatures had led both marine and land organisms to gradually shrink in size. During a warming event 55 million years ago many species such as beetles, bees, spiders, wasps and ants shrank by 50 to 75 percent in size over a period of several thousand years.

The most worrying fact is that the current warming trend is lot faster than the one of 55 million years ago. In the worst possible scenario if food crops and animals continue to shrink this will in years to come lead to severe food shortages and more hunger in the world.

The scientists have calculated that the each degree of warming reduces by 0.5 to 4 percent the body size of marine invertebrates and 6 to 22 percent of fish. Not only that, frequent droughts also lead to smaller offspring.

The additional problem in the whole climate change story is the fact that our planet is warming really fast which doesn't leave much room for plants and animals to adapt quickly enough.

And the carbon emissions still continue to grow…

Will EU be able to meet its climate targets?

EU's main climate goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2020. After a 7% drop in greenhouse gas emissions in 2009 many thought that EU will achieve this goal with relative ease. But 2009 was anything but a representative year in terms of emission cuts because of global recession.

According to the latest data European greenhouse gas emissions rose by 2.4% in 2010 boosted by an economic recovery and the increased use of heating fuels due to a very cold winter.

The European Environment Agency (EEA) said that this increase in emissions in 2010 does not mean that EU is no longer at the right track to achieve its climate target. What this really means is that the existing measures are not enough and that some EU countries will have to put lot more efforts in order to cut their greenhouse gas emissions.

For instance, EU countries like Austria, Italy and Luxembourg will fail to achieve their Kyoto targets which will have negative effect on collective EU climate target.

One thing is sure, namely that EU will need different policies that would ensure further cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. These policies will have to put lot more emphasis to renewable energy, energy efficiency and pollution reduction.

Jacqueline McGlade, EEA executive director said that "we (EU) can reduce emissions further if we consider the climate impacts of various policies more systematically."

Some policies are more efficient than others, some give better short-term some better long-term results, some can be applied only in certain EU countries while others can be used everywhere. EU must be aware of all these details if it wants to successfully reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help tackle climate change on global level.

World is taking huge gamble with climate change issue

The difference in opinion between the developed and the developing world is still main stumbling block in climate change talks any by the current looks of it world is still extremely far from agreeing the Kyoto successor. The failure to reach new climate deal will mean that countries will have to commit to only voluntary steps which are unlikely to halt climate change impact.

By delaying the necessary climate change action in form of new legally binding international climate deal world is taking a huge gamble. The result of this risky policy could very easily be manifested in extreme droughts, floods, storms, crop failures, and even new diseases.

The emissions still continue to grow and world is heating up, particularly because fast developing countries like China and India need more coal and other fossil fuels to drive their economies forward.

Developing world doesn't give up on its stand that rich countries need to commit to tougher carbon cuts while rich nations believe that all big polluters need to be equally included in carbon cuts, including the likes of China and India.

In the meantime climate change has already started showing its scary face as according to the US National Weather Service extreme weather events (together with floods) have already accounted to $35 billion in damage in the first seven months of this year. This projected damage doesn't include billions in losses coming from the hurricane Irene which struck the United States in August.

The climate change is constantly moving forward, strengthening its impact while world leaders haven't moved an inch in their negotiations.

And what about the most vulnerable countries such as for instance low-lying islands? Sea levels are rising very fast and the quick climate action is the only way to stop them from rising even higher.

World still hasn't matured enough to realize that climate change issue is not a good place to fortify individual political wills. Climate change is global threat that is already affecting the lives of millions people around the globe and things can only become worse if we remain ignorant about it.

If climate change issue can't unite the world what can? The stakes can't be higher because we are gambling here with the destiny of our future generations. Is this risk really worth to take just because of different political interests?

Renewable energy still cannot halt climate change

Renewable energy is growing at a record level in many countries around the globe and also the use of energy sources is becoming more and more efficient. But how much does this actually count in our fight against climate change? Very little, because carbon dioxide emissions still continue to grow even despite these measures. Why is that?

The main reason why renewable energy and improved energy efficiency aren't able to halt the growth in carbon emissions is the ever-increasing demand for power and transport, which is the strongest in developing countries such as China and India.

The economic boom in developing countries craves for more power and transport to keep it going and most of this power and transport comes from the fossil fuels because renewable energy, despite its remarkable growth in the last ten years, is still a minor source of energy when compared to coal, oil and natural gas.

Something needs to change in global climate policy but this so much needed change in global climate policy is nowhere to be seen on the horizon because world leaders still cannot agree on new climate deal. The climate talks have so far been anything but successful because there is still no consensus between the developed and the developing world about what our next step should be.

All eyes are set on US and China, two largest carbon emitters in the world. China is overall leader in carbon dioxide emissions while US is the largest CO2 emitter per capita by emitting 16.9 tonnes CO2 per capita, two and the half time as much as China at 6.8 tonnes per capita.

The transition to renewable is still not going as fast as it should go. Not only that, the majority of energy analysts agree that fossil fuels will remain dominant energy sources till at least 2050, which in business as usual scenario means that the climate change will reach the point of no return (the global temperature increase of two degrees Celsius).

This will account for frequent extreme weather events such as tsunamis and hurricanes, cause global sea level rise, drought, floods, hunger, new diseases and millions of refugees.

World leaders are still not taking the threat of climate change seriously. It seems like they believe they have all the time in the world to do something about it. The truth is that the time for action has almost run out. No more talks, give us the necessary action. Please.

Entering the era of climate change refugees

Climate change has many scary faces so it's really no surprise that many environmentalists refer to climate change as the biggest environmental threat of our time. Climate change however doesn't have only negative environmental impact but also negative economic and social impact because it will very likely cause huge migrations of people in years to come.

The cocktail of extreme weather events and environmental disasters will be too difficult to swallow for many people and they will be forced to become (climate change) refugees and leave their homes in search for more habitable areas.

According to the latest report coming from Asia more than 30 million people across Asia were displaced by environmental disasters and weather-related events in 2010 as the region becomes increasingly vulnerable to effects of climate change.

The extreme weather events and different environmental disasters are becoming more frequent driving people away from these areas. Floods, droughts and major storms will continue to grow in frequency and strength in years to come leaving many millions more without a roof over their head.

The Asian Development Bank estimates that tens of millions more people across Asia and the Pacific will be forced to migrate to other regions driven away by the ever-growing climate change impact.

The countries need to give much more thoughts to adaptations to changes in climate such as building sea walls and restoring the mangrove swamps to reduce storm surges. These measures that are necessary will cost billions of dollars and poor countries won't be able to introduce them without the help of the rich world.

Population migrations as well as displacement of people are really another disaster waiting to happen because they will lead to economic volatility, regional conflict, and even wars.

Climate change – Current outlook and research

Arctic’s see summer ice has experienced the new record low according to the European scientists. Since the measurement first started back in 1972 Arctic ice never covered such a small amount of area as it did this year, at only 4.24 million square kilometers. The second lowest year at record was 2007 when Arctic's summer ice covered an area of 4.27 million square kilometers.

The US scientists from the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) have calculated that the rate of melting in Arctic is now twice as big as it was first measured back in 1972.

At the same time the international team of scientists led by Stephen Barker of Cardiff University has studied the samples from Greenland's ice sheets. According to these samples climate is very capable to create rapid and abrupt changes because this has been a case of Earth's climate for hundreds of thousands of years.

In other climate news US scientists have also discovered that the polar ice caps currently are melting rapidly and that the sea level is rising at a rate of about 30 centimeters per century. If the current warming trend continues this will in years to come create huge threat to world's population that lives in coastal zones.

It is still impossible to predict future climate because of large number of different factors all of which need to be taken into account while making future climate predictions, not to mention that there is also a very complex interaction between these factors which makes future climate models even more difficult.

But science is at least trying, measuring, collecting various data and samples all in hope to provide world leaders with possible solutions that would halt the impact of climate change. Climate change is the biggest environmental threat of our time, an environmental threat that could even in the worst possible scenario threaten the existence of our future generations.

Soot emissions - Important factor in global warming

Soot emission (black carbon emission) refers to dust-like carbon particles resulting from the incomplete combustion of a hydrocarbon and is one of the most important factors adding to a global warming and climate change.

American chemist Mark Z. Jacobson, Ph.D. believes that reducing soot emissions could significantly slow down melting of Arctic's sea ice.

He, in fact, believes that controlling soot and reducing soot emissions would reduce warming above parts of the Arctic Circle by almost 3 degrees Fahrenheit within the next 15 years. This scenario would be enough for Arctic to experience the temperatures of 100 years ago and erase all the warming that has happened since that time.

This is the quickest fix to Arctic's melting issue that could have an almost immediate effect. Soot emissions are the second most contributing factor to climate change behind carbon dioxide. Up to recently soot has been largely overlooked in climate models though soot emissions contribute to around 17 percent of global warming.

The major sources of soot emissions include exhaust from different diesel vehicles, agricultural machines, and also the wood/animal dung fires that hundreds of millions of people in developing countries use for cooking and heating.

Soot particles once released into atmosphere become suspended and absorb sunlight and then radiate that heat back into the air around it. Not only that, soot can also add to warming by absorbing the light reflected from Earth's surface.

Jacobson believes that implementing technologies for controlling soot emissions is lot easier compared to technologies that aim to reduce carbon emissions because the costs are much lower. For instance, diesel particulate filters, can remove soot from car and truck exhaust.

Not only that, soot doesn't stay for a very long time in atmosphere like carbon dioxide does. Soot disappears within a few weeks while carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for years.

How to ensure adequate protection from major sea level rise?

Climate change will completely change our way of life and future generations will have their hands full in dealing with different climate change threats. Among the most talked about climate change threats is also a major sea level rise.

Sea levels are already increasing very fast and in years to come several areas of the world might completely disappear from the global map of the world, being completely swollen by water. This is the reason why people need to adapt very quickly to these changes, and who knows, the way things are currently going, maybe in years to come, floating homes will become a common sight in many countries of the world.

Some countries are more vulnerable to sea level rise than other, and some countries are also technologically much more superior to tackle this threat as compared to some other, mostly developing countries.

However, the lives of people should be equally valued in both developing as well as developed world which means that developed countries should create massive funds so that poor countries could develop adequate flood engineering solutions to tackle the sea level threat.

Many densely populated areas could experience problems with huge sea level rise, even before the end of this century, and world leaders need to start thinking right away about the possible technologies that could protect these areas from massive flooding.

Failure to do so will not only create millions of refugees but also millions of deaths. We must avoid this scenario, no matter what.

Connection between glaciers and climate change

Glaciers, or to be more precise glaciers melting, is one of the most obvious indicators of climate change. The main reason behind the rapid melting of glaciers in many part of the world has been the significant increase in temperatures.

The warmer temperatures cause glaciers to retreat, and the only thing that can compensate for the rapid melting of glaciers is increase in snow precipitation. In many parts of the world snow wasn't enough to compensate for warmer temperatures which has resulted in massive shrinking of many glaciers on our planet.

Glaciers need to be observed for at least a decade before science can speak of retreat or expansion of certain glacier and this is usually done by observing satellite images in a longer period of time.

The special organization called the World Glacier Monitoring Service collects each year a different data on glacier retreat and glacier mass balance. According to their latest reports in period from 1980 till now there has been a trend of serious glacier retreating after a stable period from 1920-1970.

The majority of scientists also predicts that glaciers will continue their retreat unless world comes to a global climate change agreement that would significantly reduce carbon emissions on global level.

By the current looks of it world is still very far from reaching the legally obliging international climate deal which spells huge danger for glaciers on our planet. Rapid melting of the glaciers will in years to come not only cause big sea level rise but also a serious water shortage because glaciers are a key source of water for many areas around the world.

A decade long period of stability for Arctic's summer sea ice?

The large number of climate change scientists agree that the Arctic ice will eventually disappear completely during summer months if climate change continues at current pace. Some believe such scenario will very likely happen before the year 2050.

The several different studies have showed that in the last thirty years Arctic summer ice has shrunk by more than a third driven by unusual warm climate which cannot be only explained by natural causes.

One of the most interesting recent studies about the melting of Arctic ice comes from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). According to this study the Arctic ice may temporarily stabilize or even somewhat expand at times over the next few decades.

This was a rather interesting conclusion and the scientists were somewhat surprised by the results of computer simulations which showed a temporary stop to the loss of the Arctic ice.

The results of computer simulations showed that Arctic could well see a 10-year period of stable ice or even a slight increase in the expansion of the ice.

However, long-term speaking we are still in for a total loss of Arctic's summer sea ice. One of the leading NCAR scientist Jennifer Kay said that "when you start looking at longer-term trends, 50 or 60 years, there's no escaping the loss of Arctic's ice in the summer."

Which country is most vulnerable to climate change?

Climate change will affect whole planet but some countries will be more affected than others. For instance if sea levels are about to rise according to scientific predictions then Bangladesh could soon disappear under the sea, and the same destiny could await some richer countries, like for instance Netherlands. When we talk about world's most powerful countries then many scientists see China as the country most vulnerable to climate change.

China is currently world's biggest polluter heavily dependent upon fossil fuels, most notably coal to keep its economic growth up and running. Despite big investments in renewable energy sector like wind energy and hydropower China is likely to remain heavily dependent upon fossil fuels, for at least couple of decades. The Current situation that China is in is really a tricky one because Chinese are aware that they have to curb greenhouse gas emissions but they do not want to sacrifice their economic boom to do so.

What is the impact of methane to climate change and global warming?

The greenhouse gas that mostly contributes to global warming and climate change is carbon dioxide (CO2). The second most harmful greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming is methane(CH4). Methane is mostly emitted by agriculture(the most famous source comes from cows burping), though methane is also released from fossil fuels burning (coal and natural gas). Currently widely accepted conclusion is that methane is 25 times as potent as carbon dioxide, meaning it is 25 times better at trapping heat in the atmosphere than CO2. However some latest studies imply that methane is much more potent than most scientists agree, up to 33 times better at trapping heat in the atmosphere than CO2, at least this is what Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies said in its latest report.

How will climate change affect organisms on Earth?

Many scientists will agree that climate change is already happening, and that we cannot stop it. The only thing we can do is to make sure we do not give more impact to climate change, and this can be done by significantly decreasing global greenhouse gas emission levels. This is what most scientists agree upon but the one thing where there are still many different theories among scientists is how will climate change affect organisms on Earth. This is still in the sphere of theories and predictions, though most agree that climate change will have extremely negative impact on most organisms that live on our planet.

How much of carbon dioxide can oceans and forests absorb?

Brand new research from Bristol university team found rather surprising results that are in contradiction with similar researches done over the past years. According to this research the absorbed amount of carbon dioxide has stayed approximately constant since 1850, despite the rise of emissions of carbon dioxide from about 2 billion tons a year in 1850 to 35 billion tons a year now. Does this mean that oceans and forests have much larger CO2 sinking ability than we previously thought they have?

Canada will fail to reduce greenhouse gas emissions

According to the Environment Canada, the country’s major environmental agency, Canada will fail to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and achieve its 2020 targets because of emissions from tar sands. 

The rapid development of tar sands in Canada which injects steam into thick oil deposits to produce oil will account for 62 million metric tons of CO2 emissions from 2005 to 2020, almost dwarfing 31 million metric tons in planned CO2 reductions as Canada’s power plants switch from burning coal to natural gas. 

The recent study by Canada’s Pembina Institute estimates that by 2020 Alberta’s tar sands will account for 12 percent of Canada’s total CO2 emissions. 

Tar sands will be the main reason why Canada will likely exceed its 2020 CO2 emissions reductions target by gigantic 178 million metric tons. 

The Canadian fossil fuel industry, as expected, has denied these reports claiming they are far blown out of proportion because new technologies being employed in tar sands will help significantly reduce emissions in the upcoming years. 

One thing is sure though, Canada has a very difficult task in reducing the amount of greenhouse gas emissions in years to come.

Russia's permafrost melting will add to global climate change impact

Russia's permafrost melting could further increase global climate change impact as according to the latest scientific estimates Russia could lose 15-30 percent of its permafrost by the year 2050.

Permafrost refers to the soil that has been permanently frozen and it currently covers around 63% of Russia's territory. Once permafrost melts it will release massive amounts of greenhouse gas methane currently stored in the frozen soil which will add more impact to climate change.

Not only that, thawing of permafrost will also give huge problems to transportation, building, and energy extraction infrastructure, accounting also for huge economic damage.

The temperatures in western Siberia territories will rise by up to two degrees Celsius to just three or four degrees below zero which will result in shifting of the boundary of the permafrost to the north-east by 150-200 kilometres.

This negative news have come from the Andrei Bolov, the head of the ministry's disaster monitoring department. He also added that "the negative impact of permafrost degradation on all above-ground transportation infrastructure is clear.

There are no easy solutions for climate change

The ideal solution to solve the climate change issue would be turning carbon dioxide (CO2) into something useful such as fuel and plastics but the current scientific reports claim that this solution is years off, mostly because of very high construction costs.

Some pilot projects showed great promise such as manufacture of concrete, plastics and oils from carbon dioxide but the main drawbacks of all these pilot projects were high construction and operational costs.

Carbon capture and storage solutions that aim to store and bury carbon dioxide underground are also connected with relatively high costs but are currently receiving more attention than technologies that aim to transform CO2 into some useful products. However, these technologies have so far been used only in some regional pilot projects, still lacking global character.

This means that at this moment the only possible solution to tackle climate change is to significantly reduce global level of greenhouse gas emissions and this sadly cannot be achieved without the international climate deal.

International climate deal also looks to be years off because there is still a huge difference in opinion between developed and the developing world. The world leaders continue with their talks and promises but there's nothing concrete coming out of it. Hope for new climate deal seems to be fading away with each new disappointing talk.

At this moment there doesn't seem to be some easy solution to tackle climate change. There's no magic trick that will return climate back to the normal, the only solution at this time is to make a drastic cut in greenhouse gas emissions.