Peak Oil is You
Warning: Trying to access array offset on false in /var/www/peakoil.com/public_html/wp-content/plugins/random-image-widget/random_image.php on line 138
Warning: Trying to access array offset on false in /var/www/peakoil.com/public_html/wp-content/plugins/random-image-widget/random_image.php on line 139
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on May 11, 2024
Did we inadvertently speed global warming?
A paper published late last year by climate scientists James Hansen and colleagues claims that the rate of global warming is poised to increase by 50% in the coming decades.
Disclaimer: James Hansen has a bit of a checkered reputation within the climate community. There is a faction that discounts much of what he says. However, he has some stellar credentials and at one time was a leading voice on greenhouse gas emissions.
Here’s what I know.
Climate science is not always correct. Over the course of human history many outspoken scientists with contrary views have been labeled as quacks. Galileo may be the most famous. The question becomes: is James Hansen’s somewhat contrary view correct? You need to judge for yourself. As for me, I’m no scientist so I’m guided by logic and rationale arguments.
Back to the research.
Hansen’s view is that an increase in the amount of heat energy trapped within the planet’s system – referred to as the “energy imbalance” – will accelerate warming. The pace of warming did in fact speed up in or around 1970.
Between 1880 and 1969 warming occurred at a rate of around 0.07 degrees Fahrenheit (0.04 C) per decade. In the early 1970s warming accelerated to 0.34 F (0.19 C) per decade.
However, scientists who disagree with Hansen and his colleagues say that there is insufficient evidence to make a definitive conclusion.
So what happened in or around 1970?
There was a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions. But there was another contributory change: aerosols. Countries attempting to reduce air pollution started banning certain substances in aerosols. One of those substances was sulfate. It was a good thing because aerosol pollutants adversely affect people’s health.
Except that sulfate aerosols can – at least temporarily – also offset warming because they reflect sunlight back into space and help form reflective clouds. A study published in 2022 in the Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, found that in the 1980s these aerosol particles offset approximately 80% of climate warming.
According to Hansen, the more aerosols in the atmosphere the slower the planet will heat. He calls this environmental “Sophie’s Choice” a “Faustian bargain.”
The reality is that no one can know with certainty who is on the right side of this argument. It is something that clearly warrants monitoring, although it is unclear even if Hansen is proven correct, what a good solution would be.
The moral of this story is action-reaction. So much of what we’re doing (both good and bad) has never been done before. That means that the opportunity for outcomes with unintended consequences is relatively high. In my opinion, at this point, climate science should not be viewed as definitive but as a singular tool in formulating a strategy to fight climate change.
We should also understand that the banning of certain aerosol particles may not be the last environmental “Faustian bargain” we need to make.
114 Comments on "Did we inadvertently speed global warming?"
スプランキー on Fri, 1st Aug 2025 12:21 am
This discussion on hydrocarbon depletion is critical. For a fun way to express creativity, check out スプランキー and explore music production!
Hans on Thu, 7th Aug 2025 3:24 am
Thanks for the share! This post raises a thought-provoking point about how reducing air-polluting aerosols may have unintentionally hastened global warming, Ozone Treatment Company
roof replacement on Mon, 18th Aug 2025 8:53 am
It’s good to see an informative article.
chif on Wed, 17th Sep 2025 5:54 am
I came across this article on the site here. As I read your article, I felt like an expert in this field. Ottawa Retaining Wall
Quantity Takeoff on Wed, 24th Sep 2025 7:22 am
Interesting perspective
Jade on Tue, 7th Oct 2025 11:58 am
Really grateful for this community and the knowledge shared. concrete slab
Concrete Abilene on Thu, 16th Oct 2025 10:14 am
If you’re looking for top-quality concrete services, be sure to check out abilene concrete for reliable and professional solutions!
soothatshdlvs on Wed, 22nd Oct 2025 2:39 am
龍角散水蜜桃味清喉顆粒：溫柔守護敏感喉嚨
龍角散水蜜桃味清喉顆粒以其方便的使用方式和美味的口感，成為許多人喉嚨痛舒緩的首選。這款產品不僅能快速紓解不適，還能讓您享受清新的水蜜桃風味。
水蜜桃味的溫和特性
龍角散水蜜桃味清喉顆粒採用粉紅色包裝設計，溫和的甜香能有效掩蓋草本成分的氣味，讓服用過程更加愉悅。這種潤喉配方特別適合兒童、孕婦或對強烈薄荷味不適的族群使用。顆粒劑型入口即化，無需配水即可服用，能快速紓解喉嚨乾癢不適。喉嚨藥通過嚴格安全檢驗，3歲以上兒童即可在家長監督下使用。
水蜜桃顆粒的適用場景
龍角散水蜜桃味喉嚨痛特效藥特別適合會議、演講前，能舒緩喉嚨不適而不留下強烈氣味。對於夜間喉嚨乾癢的狀況，溫和的水蜜桃味也不會影響睡眠品質。產品獨立包裝設計便於攜帶，每包剛好是成人一次用量，衛生又方便，隨身攜帶幾包能及時紓解喉嚨消炎，是敏感族群的貼心選擇。
聰明使用水蜜桃顆粒的方法
使用喉嚨痛成藥時直接將顆粒倒入口中，讓其自然融化後嚥下，無需配水即可發揮效果。建議每次使用間隔2小時以上，每日最多使用6包。喉嚨痛藥不含嗜睡成分，白天使用不會影響工作精神。需要注意的是，雖然味道溫和，但仍應按照建議劑量使用，正確的使用觀念能讓產品發揮最佳效果，溫柔守護您的喉嚨健康。
結語
龍角散水蜜桃味清喉顆粒以其溫和特性與優雅風味，成為敏感族群的喉嚨護理首選日本藥妝。從配方設計到使用體驗都展現貼心考量，確實是值得推薦的優質產品。
Corey Green on Wed, 22nd Oct 2025 3:46 am
It’s fascinating how the history of science has shown that many groundbreaking ideas were initially dismissed or criticized. Your reference to Galileo resonates with me, as it reminds us to question the status quo. Speaking of challenges, have you tried the Geometry Dash platform? It’s a brilliant way to tap into logic and strategy while having fun. I think it’s a great outlet for creativity and problem-solving.
Supreme Capital on Tue, 4th Nov 2025 1:41 pm
The points raised here about climate acceleration are both alarming and eye-opening. It’s interesting to see how every sector, including commerce and entrepreneurship, is starting to reflect on sustainability. Even professionals like business brokers in Coral Gables are noticing how environmental awareness is influencing business decisions and long-term planning. A really insightful article that connects economics and ecology in a meaningful way.
Leah on Fri, 21st Nov 2025 3:59 pm
Very alarming. My friend Allison always talks about the global warming effects that are irreversible by 2030.
David on Fri, 16th Jan 2026 12:35 pm
It is both fascinating and terrifying to see how a positive action, such as reducing air pollution for health reasons, can have a boomerang effect on the climate. This perfectly illustrates the complexity of the planetary balance and those famous unintended consequences you mention.
Marie on Wed, 28th Jan 2026 1:04 am
Très bonne analyse sur le rapport action-réaction. On agit souvent sur un paramètre en oubliant que tout est lié. C’est un rappel nécessaire que la science climatique est en constante évolution.
Marie on Wed, 28th Jan 2026 1:05 am
The comparison with Galileo is very apt. In science, opposing voices sometimes end up becoming the norm. The concept of “learned helplessness” in the face of unforeseen consequences really makes you think.