I think that wevets has the best answer to the OP’s question. It is probably not worth getting hung up in worrying about the “last little bit”…The bigger challenge is the weaning of us off of fossil fuels [or implementing carbon sequestration] so that we cut emissions substantially by 2050. (The numbers that I have seen, as I vaguely recall, to be on the path of stabilizing CO2 levels are something like 450 or 500 ppm are something like a 50%-60% cut in worldwide emissions, which realistically will probably mean a 70-80% cut for those of us in the industrialized world given that it is likely that nations like China will not be able to make as substantial a cut.)
When we have done that, my guess is that the technologies developed may largely make it moot exactly how we get rid of the last little bit. Besides which, you should note that over the 200 years from 1750 to 1950, the total rise in CO2 levels was only a fraction of what it has been since 1950…so the last little bit isn’t that much of an issue.
Every one of the estimates that I’ve heard have turned out to be overly optimistic, which is what concerns me. Even the most aggressive plans don’t seem to be adequate, if it is true that things are worse than how they appear. I suggest listening to NPR’s Environment podcast as well as those offered by Grist.org for some real drawer browning news.
We can do what we like about G.W.,pollution,loss of habitat,extinction of flora and fauna and famine but nothing will work effectively just so long as we keep trying to cure the symptons instead of the cause.
This is a prime example of the ludicrous, irresponsible, and just plain unscientific fear-mongering that the liberal media has been subjecting us to for the last couple decades. Eight years after 2013, and what do we find?
The Northern Sea Route along the Russian coast is not yet ice free, and not really even close; as shown in the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer 2 (AMSR-2) imagery from the University of Bremen (Figure 1b), a substantial area of high concentration ice persists north of the Taymyr Peninsula and west of the Severnaya Zemlaya islands (the traditional “choke point”). The Northwest Passage through the channels of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago also remains choked with ice.
Actually it is the “liberal” media playing all sides and the right wing media ignoring most of what the scientists say.
When all else fails, bash the BBC!
Rose then goes on a bit of a BBC-bashing spree, a popular pastime at the Mail. He cites a December 2007 report on the BBC News website, writing:
The BBC’s 2007 report quoted scientist Professor Wieslaw Maslowski, who based his views on super-computer models and the fact that ‘we use a high-resolution regional model for the Arctic Ocean and sea ice’. He was confident his results were ‘much more realistic’ than other projections, which ‘underestimate the amount of heat delivered to the sea ice’. Also quoted was Cambridge University expert Professor Peter Wadhams. He backed Professor Maslowski, saying his model was ‘more efficient’ than others because it ‘takes account of processes that happen internally in the ice’. He added: ‘This is not a cycle; not just a fluctuation. In the end, it will all just melt away quite suddenly.’
Oddly, some might think, Rose left out another part of the same BBC piece: I wonder why?
The US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) collects the observational data on the extent of Arctic sea ice, delivering regular status bulletins. Its research scientist Dr Mark Serreze was asked to give one of the main lectures here at this year’s AGU Fall Meeting. Discussing the possibility for an open Arctic ocean in summer months, he told the meeting: “A few years ago, even I was thinking 2050, 2070, out beyond the year 2100, because that’s what our models were telling us. But as we’ve seen, the models aren’t fast enough right now; we are losing ice at a much more rapid rate. “My thinking on this is that 2030 is not an unreasonable date to be thinking of.” And later, to the BBC, Dr Serreze added: "I think Wieslaw is probably a little aggressive in his projections, simply because the luck of the draw means natural variability can kick in to give you a few years in which the ice loss is a little less than you’ve had in previous years. But Wieslaw is a smart guy and it would not surprise me if his projections came out.”
That seems, to me at least, quite balanced (the BBC piece, I mean). One scientist makes a prediction and whilst another does not rule it out entirely, he suggests that it is an unlikely scenario. But through the cherrypicking eyes of David Rose, the predictions were made by the BBC:
“THERE WON’T BE ANY ICE AT ALL! HOW THE BBC PREDICTED CHAOS IN 2007”
Hmmm… and there was me thinking it was a broadcasting organisation - I never realised they did climate predictions too. They don’t, of course.
Sea ice loss continued at a brisk pace through the first two weeks of July. On July 13, Arctic sea ice extent stood at 7.95 million square kilometers (3.07 million square miles). This is 1.98 million square kilometers (764,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 average. This extent is also just below the 2012 record and very close to 2020, the years with the lowest and second lowest (tied with 2007) minimum in the satellite record, respectively.
