Quantitative Carbon Dioxide, Temperature, and Sea Level Relation for the Future of Terrestrial Fossil- Fueled Technology

An Accurate Predictive Model Based on Vostok 420 kY Historical Record By Thomas F. Valone and Jacqueline Panting
Quantitative Carbon Dioxide, Temperature, and Sea Level Relation for the Future of Terrestrial Fossil- Fueled Technology

Ironically, there has been a 30% drop in the publication rate of the phrase “climate change” in U.S. government publications presently, even in the midst of record-breaking glacial melting, massive human migration, new widespread heat records, along with unprecedented worldwide extremes of flooding, fires, and drought. Furthermore, global population entered exponential growth and also has tripled (3x) within less than one lifetime. Concomitantly, global annual CO2 emissions have quadrupled (4x) as global energy consumption has quintupled (5x) in the same period. This 3-4-5 trio has put an unprecedented and severe stress on the environment, which up until now, has not been reliably quantified. In 2006, climatologist James Hansen discovered and published a remarkably linear relationship between CO2 , temperature, and sea level levels in the Vostok ice core data for the past 420,000 years. Therefore, the aim of this work was to formulate a simple equation, based on Hansen’s data and test its validity and range of application, for the carbon dioxide driver, over the past 13 years. It can now be concluded that the equation has a CO2 range of about +200 ppm (up to an atmospheric concentration of about 500 ppm) from the earth’s maximum “preindustrial” carbon dioxide concentration of 290 ppm. Furthermore, quantitative future estimates of indebted temperature and sea level rise are now more easily predictable, since Hansen showed they are intimately connected to a given atmospheric CO2 level. Included are technical details of climate change, along with the social impacts expected by 2100 and beyond.



The unmitigated growth of carbon emissions due to worldwide energy consumption reached a record 37 billion tons of CO2 (for a single year’s total emission) at the end of 2018, with the U.S, India, and China leading the increase. The total carbon emission growth in 2017 was only 1.7 percent while carbon growth for 2018 shown in Fig. 1 increased 2.7 percent. As for China, coal accounts for about 60 percent of China’s total energy consumption [1]. The present authors find the rate of growth to be a vital statistic which can predict longterm behavior of an integrated variable, as in this case, of carbon dioxide emission annual quantity. Fossil fuel carbon emissions are now steadily increasing annually in several major countries in the world, which translates to the rate of growth having an upward slope, also without a predictable peak in the near future.

Recent climate reports suggest a widely accepted range of one and a half (1.5°C) to two degrees (2°C) Celsius as an achievable global limit to climate change [3]. This is in stark contrast to and contradicted by the observationally informed projections of climate science underlying global warming.

Fig. 1. Global annual carbon dioxide emissions 1959-2018 which started a new exponential surge upwards in 2017 [2]

Leading climatologists have published details of the most likely outcome for 2100 of five to six-degree (5-6°C) increase as “most accurate” based on present trends, climate history and models [4]. Average global temperature is found to be tightly correlated to CO2 with a short temporal feedback loop. The Vostok ice core temperature and CO2 values for the past 420,000 years, incorporated into “Hansen’s Graph,” detail a discovery of accurate, predictive numerical values for global average temperature change and delayed sea level rise [5]. These are compared to the latest climate model analysis and observational projections. The best-performing climate change models project more warming than the average model often relied upon [6]. Hansen (1988) also accurately projected levels for 2019. A comprehensive timeline for world atmosphere, temperature, and sea level trends for 2100 and beyond is analyzed. Further policy-relevant climate adaptation, including carbon capture, positive individual action, and zero emissions are reviewed. The amount of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel burning comes from the Open-source Data Inventory for Anthropogenic CO2 (ODIAC) and is based on economic data. Most of the emissions are in the Northern Hemisphere [7].



Not only does increasing carbon pollution stay in the atmosphere about 100 years (CO2 from early Model T Fords still lingers in the air today) but as a major greenhouse gas, there is overwhelming evidence that it directly relates to the documented global temperature increase [8]. Such a steady increase of carbon dioxide can be seen in the global records from Mauna Loa monitoring station in Hawaii, reported and regularly updated at www.CO2.earth.

Fig. 2.Global Temp. (top) and CO2 (bottom) for 420 kY ago to the present,
from left to right, through four ice age minimums. Compare with Fig. 9. [9]

Fig. 2 is a plot of the world average temperature and CO2 data from air bubble analysis of the Vostok Station Antarctica ice core. In 1999, the Vostok ice core 420,000-year record of carbon dioxide was published by Petit [10]. The most striking fact seen in Fig. 2 is the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide over the past 420,000 years. Exhibiting great stability, the CO2 levels clearly have never exceeded 290 ppm worldwide through the last four ice ages. However, in the isolated monitoring station cited above, the latest global carbon dioxide levels have now pushed past 410 ppm. Notice in Fig. 2 the important matching trends of temperature (upper graph) and carbon dioxide (lower graph) for the past 420,000 years, through four ice ages.

Perhaps the most accurate 30-year climate projection that any climatologist has achieved, James Hansen’s famous paper of 1988, was the first to contain predictions of a global “greenhouse effect” from a 3-D model developed at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies but using the objectionable phrase “climate forcing” for the first time [11]. Interestingly, an analysis of the Hansen’s projection reproduced in its original form in Fig. 3 from that 1988 paper (Fig. 3(a), p. 9247), yields an observation of a high degree of accuracy for temperature prediction, with the benefit of present-day global temperature hindsight. The three lines for Hansen’s data projections are Scenario A with an upper -о- line, B being the middle line -Δ-, and C with -□- in the lower line of Fig. 3, with Scenario B found to be right on target for 2019, even thirty-one years later.

Fig. 3. Original James Hansen 1988 temperature projection to 2019 [11]

Fig. 4. Original James Hansen 1988 temperature projection to 2060 [12].

Therefore, an updated assessment actually vindicates Hansen’s 1°C Scenario B middle projection to 2019 in Fig. 3, which provided motivation and just cause for our detailed review. James Hansen’s courageous 1988 paper is the major reason for publication of a review paper this year, in honor of Hansen’s pioneering accuracy in the highly controversial science of climatology and temperature projection to 2019 from three decades ago. Even more impressive is Fig. 4, an astonishing projection to 2060 by Hansen, from the 1988 article (Fig. 3 (b), p. 9247), though it was more speculative during that era, by calculating using NASA’s computer modeling. However, Hansen’s graph in Fig. 4 is presently more likely with today’s climate predictions than any other previously cited climate reports, matching business-as-usual climate projections, with no reductions, e.g., IPCC RCP8.5 [13]. Furthermore, as we shall see, Fig. 6 and Eq. 1 make the case for a climate forcing that is double the climate forcing that worldwide CO2 concentration causes today. Therefore, a realistic projection of our 2060 temperature may actually exceed the Fig. 5 projection from Stanford and add one degree C to reach Hansen’s 1988 projection to 2060.

Probably the most provocative and disturbing for any audience is a composite temperature trend graph which “reduces uncertainty” (says Nature’s editorial introduction) in Fig. 5. The best performing models are shown in dark red, projecting above 5°C. Climate models generally agree that greenhouse-gas emissions will continue to raise global temperatures, but the amount of warming predicted varies considerably. To narrow the field of probability, Patrick Brown and Ken Caldeira at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, California, assessed a plethora of current climate models. They found that some models more accurately simulate the amount of radiation entering and leaving the atmosphere, a flow known as Earth’s energy budget, than others [14].

Fig. 5. Stanford University global temperature projections to 2100 [15].

Thus, an averaging or median is achieved that statistically ensures high reliability and assurance of accuracy [15]. Though it has been subject to a few online climate denialists, the majority of reviewers have embraced Brown and Caldeira’s conclusions, which, as seen from ice core data, is more consistent with the integrated relationship between CO2 and global temperature in the earth’s past. A three-minute summary (2017) video by Patrick Brown is very worthwhile seeing. These findings are a rude awakening. The extreme conditions which we know are inherent in such a five to six degrees (5-6°C) increase have been well documented over ten (10) years ago. A National Geographic 90-minute online video is one of the best, starting with the usual 15°C baseline which was the stable global average up until around 1980 [16].



The question is often asked by the public if CO2 is going to level out or ‘peak’ soon? The 9th UN Emissions Gap Report (ref. 3) states there is “no sign of peaking” and emphatically issues a warning that carbon emissions are actually increasing. In Fig. 6, the A2 line for CO2 levels is “business as usual” and most likely by economists and policy makers, according to the University of Washington [17]. It is estimated that humans have emitted about 550 gigatonnes of carbon (multiply by 3.67 for CO2 gas amount) from 1870 – 2013 [18]. In addition to this global atmospheric volume of human-created CO2, the world adds about 40 gigatons of CO2 emissions each year to the atmosphere, which stays there [19]. All three recent climate reports cited earlier (ref. 3) acknowledge the Paris limits are not happening. No major country is willing to reverse its longstanding use of fossil fuels with a carbon tax, even if the entire tax goes to funding more renewable energy.

Fig. 6. Carbon dioxide projection models in close agreement, with a range of
550 ppm to 950 ppm anticipated for 2100, under various climate scenarios [20].

The aforementioned trend of nonaction in the face of a climate crisis is a disturbing societal retreat to a comfort zone of denial worldwide. As global energy demand from a growing world economy and related carbon emissions keep increasing (2.3% last year), as they are projected to do, a compounding factor in all societies worldwide is the need for extra heating and cooling in regions hit by the predicted heating the earth’s climate as it seeks a new equilibrium level [21]. The residential cooling problem is also a contributor to global warming with window AC units set to more than triple by 2050. “RMI.org estimates that the amount of energy that will be required to power the new 4.5 billion window air conditioners expected by 2050 is equivalent to the current electricity demand of the United States, Germany and Japan combined, or at least 135 Quads (45 PWh) in new energy demand. Growth in the market for air conditioning is already outpacing growth in solar power, with new residential air conditioning units worldwide consuming approximately 100 GW of energy in 2017, compared to 94 GW of new solar energy generation [22].” Besides hydrofluorocarbon emissions, up 54% with air conditioning and leaking from such AC units, with methane from various sources, the single most important and most potent driver of global warming is still the increasing CO2 level worldwide.

Fig. 7. Solomon projection of temperature based on 2009 CO2 25 gigatons/year (Gt/yr) emission rate
but today carbon dioxide is up to 40 Gt/yr [23].

Fig. 7 is the geologists’ view of the finite amount of time for the global system to balance the input solar absorption (radiative forcing) with output heat radiation. Since the earth’s atmospheric system is so large (estimated at 4 billion cubic kilometers by a difference in two spheres), there is a significant delay of several decades in the earth’s comparable upward slope of the heat absorption curve to reach a comparable leveling off which would signify an equilibrium level of a system-wide temperature. However, humans worldwide now seem more determined than ever to dramatically increasing global CO2 levels rather than stopping at a certain CO2 partial pressure to allow the earth’s temperature to level off and thereby reach a corresponding equilibrium level of input and output heat. Regarding Fig. 7, Solomon explains that we have to discontinue fossil fuel usage worldwide to reach first base. Only then, “After emissions cease, the temperature change approaches equilibrium with respect to the slowly decreasing carbon dioxide concentrations” which she calls “irreversible climate change [23].” This is based on a 7 billion ton carbon (25 gigatons of CO2) annual emissions in 2009 which has now increased to a 40 gigaton CO2 level annually, a decade later, so the leveling off long term temperature is more realistically projected to be around 6°C, as seen elsewhere in this review, and expected to last thousands of years before decreasing to present day levels, unless a breakthrough in gigaton carbon capture is implemented.

The increasing rate of CO2 buildup in the atmosphere (Fig. 1) follows a similar Malthusian exponential curve for world population (Fig. 8). However, as the world population will quadruple by 2100 from its previous mid-century level of 2.5 billion to more than 11 billion (Fig. 8), so the CO2 level worldwide seems to be headed for a tripling amount from the 290 ppm by 2100 [24]. The notable difference is the rate of growth. While the world population rate of growth reached a peak of 2.1% around 1970 and has decreased ever since, the world’s population has a projected leveling out by 2100 around 11 billion people. In comparison, the carbon emission rate of growth continues to increase (Figs. 1 and 25), which is even more disconcerting since statistically, such a trend will force a continued CO2 level increase for at least another hundred years, into the 10 and 15°C range, before the rate will peak and decrease, so about 100 years later, the CO2 level will peak, similar to the disconnect between growth rate and quantity of the world population.

Fig. 8. World population growth rate (red line) and total world population (blue shaded area),
showing how a rate peak can anticipate a quantity peak by over 100 years [24].

The earliest father of climate change, Nobel Prize winner Svante Arrhenius, published a paper in 1896 after studying the earth’s ice age history and the effect of accumulated CO2 level to temperature. His conclusion was that if the CO2 level doubled, the global temperature would go up by about 5 to 6°C [25]. This is still a fairly reasonable prediction based on a Hansen three-variable interrelation discovery between CO2, temperature, and sea level which we will examine next.

Fig. 9. Condensed, annotated version of James Hansen’s 2006 graph for global CO2, temperature, and sea level data for the past 400,000 years, together with present global CO2 level indication [26].

Fig. 10. Hansen table for Fig. 9 graph [26]

Today, his prediction is heralded as matching the business as usual projections but as we have seen from the Hansen analysis, this temperature projection has been linked to a 410 ppm concentration which is quite short of doubling the CO2 level back in 1896. However, the best compilation was provided by James Hansen in 2006, including the off-the-chart famous “hockey stick” data point of 377 ppm of CO2 level in 2006, up to past 410 ppm in 2019. The CO2 data point of the present day is extremely far above the maximum CO2 in Fig. 2(b), equaling a huge 45% increase in worldwide carbon dioxide levels since 1850 [26].

All cited climatologists are in agreement with the same temperature projections of a corresponding 6°C temperature increase for 2100 seen in my condensed version of James Hansen’s climate graph (Fig. 9), from the original NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies analysis. Hansen used the 1999 Vostok data, to add temperature data with calculated historic sea levels, along with concurrent carbon dioxide levels for the same period, matching maximum and minimum level perhaps in order to provide a similar visible range of the three variables on the same graph [27]. Thus, Fig. 9 is a further development of an entrainment correlation between temperature and GHG forcing, since sea level also shows a tight correlation to both variables. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is given credit for the editorial choice of the Technology Review journal to include the Fig. 10 Table of Vostok data points for the three variables (CO2, temperature, sea level or “CTS”). It is quite rare that such a Table of data points is included in journal articles anymore but here it was essential for conveying the exacting relationship between the three variables, which is unexpectedly linear. The present authors have also found that the linearly proportional CTS relationship with whole numbers, in black, red, and blue, that the Table data can be summarized as a “Key” seen at the bottom of Fig. 9. To further clarify the tight correlation between the three tabulated variables in Fig. 10, the linear mathematical relationship can be written as:

+/- (20 ppm CO2 ≡ 1 °C ≡ 20 m sea level) change. (1)

This Eq. 1 also predicts a 6°C temperature increase for the present 410 ppm of CO2 by subtracting the zero baseline of 290 ppm in Fig. 9 from 410 ppm to get the 120 ppm increase and multiply by the above-mentioned proportionality of 1°C/20ppm CO2 to equal 6°C of temperature increase, which matches the best climate projections (Fig. 5) for 2100. Eq. 1 seems to be reasonably linear even into the 400-500 ppm range therefore. Beyond 2100, the relationship becomes less linear since the A2 line in Fig. 6, will yield an unprecedented high temperature even at 800 ppm (800-290=500 approximately, and 500/20=25°C). To review, the inhabitants of the earth are now pumping up the CO2 level worldwide at a rate that averages about 100 ppm increase every twenty (20) years for the foreseeable future (see A2 line in Fig. 6), so as we allow business as usual to continue for only a few more decades to come, the earth easily surpasses 800 ppm around 2100 and the earth will necessarily and inevitably repeat the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) with temperatures in the range of 10 to 15°C hotter than the baseline that occurred 56 million years ago. At that time, alligators started living in the Arctic, as explained by the Smithsonian Museum’s Dr. Scott Wing. The only hope is (1) carbon emissions become negligible worldwide soon, and (2) a revolutionary, drastic carbon capture of 400 to 3,000 gigatons of CO2 is achieved. The amount of excess CO2 is 400 gigatons presently but even at the present rate of 40 Gt/yr, which is actually still rising, the excess CO2 in the world’s air will easily reach a minimum of 3,200 gigatons (3.2 trillion tons) of excess CO2 by 2100. This can only be called a Maltusian catastrophe, which is becoming increasingly difficult each year for an international effort to implement any control and reversal of such a huge, ballooning accumulation of carbon floating in the earth’s atmosphere.



While the global increase in average temperature has reached 1 degree Celsius, an analysis of more than a century of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration temperature data across the lower 48 U.S. states and 3,107 U.S. counties has found that major areas are nearing or have already crossed 2-degree Celsius increase in average temperature, thus representing “hot spots” around 4°C above average temperature. Today, more than 10% of Americans, or about 34 million people, are living in rapidly heating regions, including New York City and Los Angeles. Alaska is the fastest-warming state in the country, but Rhode Island is the first state in the Lower 48 whose average temperature rise eclipsed a 2-degree Celsius increase already. Scientists say fading winters and very warm water offshore are the most likely culprits. That’s because climate change is a cycle that feeds on itself. Daniel Pauly, an influential marine scientist at the University of British Columbia, says the 2-degree Celsius hot spots are early warning sirens of a climate shift. “Basically,” he said, “these hot spots are chunks of the future in the present [28].”

A. An Ice-Free Iceland is not an Isolated Phenomenon

Glaciers are melting all across the world, contributing enormously to rising sea levels. Himalayan glaciers help regulate the water supply of a quarter of humankind. Natural systems will be disrupted. The great accelerated thaw is also unfreezing vast areas of permafrost, releasing methane, a potent greenhouse gas, presently causing fires all across Siberia. The melting of ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica will, even in the short term of a century or two, result in dozens of feet (several meters) of sea-level rise [29]. However, Eq. 1 predicts the necessary conclusion that CTS is reversible. In our present century, the world has made carbon dioxide the major climate change driver and leader of the CTS triad, so a gigaton carbon capture technology needs to be implemented now, or a teraton CO2 capture in mid-century, if a runaway hothouse earth is to be avoided. The unique observation and insight gained from the previous analysis is that after CO2 emissions finally get under control and begin to decrease, somewhere in the 22nd century, an advanced gigaton carbon capture and conversion process will directly cause CO2 to be decreased globally. Such a scenario should be widely advertised and politically promoted since the reward, according to our insight and emphasis of the +/- nature of Hansen’s Graph, is that his discovery predicts both temperature and sea level can also be reversed through such action and may be the only natural way that global warming and sea level rise can be reversed reliably.

B. Greenland holds the second largest store of land-locked ice

A major reason for including Greenland’s ice loss is that upon comparison to Antarctica, it becomes abundantly clear that Greenland is losing twice as much ice mass as Antarctica, in the same time frame [30]. Such a major influx of fresh water from Greenland into the Atlantic Ocean, with less density than saltwater, has also been connected to the decrease in flow of the North Atlantic Conveyor System (NACS) by about 20% in the past few decades. This has major implications for Scandinavia which, along with the UK, receives returning NACS warm sea water current northward from the Mediterranean. Greenland has also made the news recently because rain-associated melting became twice as frequent in summer and three times as frequent in winter, for the past several years. “Rain now seems to account for 28 per cent of the [Greenland’s] ice sheet melt [31].”

C. Widely Accepted Consequences of the Extreme Conditions

There are generally foreseen results outlined above as 4 degrees to even 10 degrees Celsius are anticipated in various areas of the globe, whether “hot spots” or “cool spots,” accompanying the projected average global increase of about 6 degrees C in the next several decades. These include the inundation of coastal cities; increasing risks for food production potentially leading to higher malnutrition rates; many dry regions becoming dryer and wet regions wetter; unprecedented heat waves in many regions, especially in the tropics; substantially exacerbated water scarcity in many regions; increased frequency of high-intensity tropical cyclones and hurricanes; irreversible loss of biodiversity, including coral reef systems, as carbonic acidity decreases oceanic pH. Increasing aridity and drought are likely to increase substantially in many developing country regions located in tropical and subtropical areas, as well as in the central and midwestern United States (ref. 16).

D. Extremely Severe Risks for Vital Human Support Systems

There are a number of major calamities that are immanent in various parts of the world due to global warming. One example of such a change would be the collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, which would lead to much larger, sudden sea level rise than projected in the present analysis. A gigantic cavity – two-thirds the area of Manhattan and almost 1,000 feet (300 meters) tall – growing at the bottom of Thwaites Glacier in West Antarctica is one of several disturbing discoveries reported this year, in a new NASA-led study of the disintegrating glacier shelf, whose ice alone can raise sea levels over 2 feet (65 cm) [32]. Extreme temperatures, new invading pests and diseases that can take over in areas where it was too cold for them to thrive in the past are to be expected, especially in the northern latitudes.

E. A World with a 4°C Temperature Increase on Average

Thus, concerning the full nature and scale of impacts reviewed above, there is also no certainty that worldwide, human adaptation even to a 4°C temperature increase is possible, which Hansen predicts is only about 40 years away (Fig. 4). A 4°C world is likely to be one in which communities, cities and countries would experience severe disruptions, damage, and dislocation, and civil unrest, with many of these risks spread unequally. It is likely that the poor will suffer the most and the global community could become more fractured with a dramatic increase in border wars and migration. This is most apparent in India, where the Himalayan glaciers are rapidly melting, which is the source of the Ganges River. The largest warming will occur over land and range from 4°C to 10°C by 2100. Increases of 6°C or more in average monthly summer temperatures would be expected in large regions of the world, including the Mediterranean, North Africa, the Middle East, with business as usual into the 22nd century. The warmest July in the Mediterranean region may be 9°C warmer than today’s warmest July, even while the rest of the globe is about half of that higher temperature. With social pressures increasing as the global heating progresses toward 4°C combined with economic and population stresses, the risk of crossing critical social system thresholds will grow [33]. At such tipping points, the existing global governments would likely become much less effective at supporting the needed social remedies, governing the population of the country, or could even collapse.



Contrasting the past, ancient history of CO2 with the present exponential increase in carbon emissions leads our investigation to the conclusion that (1) the CTS variables are chained together; (2) stretching one of the CTS brings the other two along, sooner or later, up to the same relative level of the leader (such as CO2); and (3) driving one of the three CTS downward will inevitably drag the other two back down to the same relative level. It is further concluded that the 21st century has launched a new, extremely rapid pumping rate (which is easily calculated to be 3 ppm increase per year and growing) of carbon dioxide into the earth’s atmosphere, which has never been exhibited in any past known age or epoch on earth. Even though the PETM period reached 10 to 15°C higher, it did so over thousands of years. With the grand perspective of geological time and the lithosphere interacting with the hydrosphere, humans are only a large portion of the many different species that inhabit the planet. Furthermore, our findings emphasize that trillions of tons of carbon going into the biosphere will normally last for at least a few thousand years, as clearly projected by NOAA scientist Susan Solomon in Fig. 7. Our conclusion, similar but more robust than “A 30-year to-do list” from Time magazine (September 23, 2019, Special Climate Issue), is to create an urgency in the minds and hearts of all people, so that global atmospheric carbon capture by the teraton will begin in earnest, in parallel with extensive implementation of carbon-neutral fuels, zero carbon emissions, renewable energy, and even negative carbon emissions worldwide. Otherwise, strong evidence exists for a culling of the increasing human population, which could be widespread in just a few decades. Therefore, a conclusion can be drawn that carbon dioxide must necessarily be declared a pollutant in every major country immediately to alert everyone to the immanent but possibly avoidable future horror that awaits the entire world.

One ray of hope for carbon capture and conversion, among many recent so-called climate solutions, is the recent discovery of a mixture made from an alloy of gallium, indium, and tin that is liquid at room temperature and conducts electricity. By spiking the silvery mixture with a sprinkling of catalytically active cerium and placing it inside a glass tube, along with a splash of water, scientists have now proven a room temperature method to convert CO2 to carbon, instead of the usual high temperature procedure. Chemists Dorna Esrafilzadeh and Torben Daeneke at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia, turned to a new class of catalysts made from metal alloys that are liquid at room temperature [34]. Discovered in 2019, this is a breakthrough process that can be scaled up and may someday offer a novel and inexpensive method for capturing trillions of tons of atmospheric carbon that can immediately begin the highly desirable reversal of the CTS relationship that is so tightly correlated. Our insight into the Hansen Graph enables the present authors to predict a causally connected way out of the impending doomsday scenario, with the reversing and negating of Eq. 1, which necessarily will cause the natural lowering of the world’s average temperature and the refreezing of the glaciers. Such a scenario, embraced globally, may lead to a new appreciation of the Gaia Principle in terms of human ecology [35]. With the implementation of gigaton or teraton carbon capture (depending on which future decade it starts working), more time will be allowed for the world to convert to 100% renewable energy and thus begin to drastically reduce its global carbon emissions to zero, in order to survive.



Thanks to Dr. James Hansen for his courageous and unprecedented announcement in 1988 that “the greenhouse effect is here” at a Congressional hearing. Even thirty years later, the political wind still opposes such an inconvenient awakening, only made more objectionable with his 2006 quantitative, intercausal relationship between carbon dioxide, temperature, and sea level change.



[1]   Dennis, Brady and Chris Mooney. “‘We are in trouble.’ Global carbon emissions reached a record high in 2018”, Washington Post, December 5, 2018

[2]   Muyskens, John. “The unmitigated growth of carbon emissions”, source: Global Carbon Project, Washington Post, Dec. 5, 2018.

[3]   UNEP Emissions Gap Report 11/27/18, https://www.unenvironment.org/resources/emissionsgapreport2018 ; NCA4 11/23/18, https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/; IPCC Report 10/8/18, https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ ; COP24 KATOWICE 12/2/18, https://cop24.gov.pl/ .

[4]   Brown, Patrick and Ken Caldeira, “More Severe Climate Model Predictions Could be the Most Accurate”, Carnegie Science Press Release, December 6, 2017, http://carnegiescience.edu .

[5]   Bowen, Mark. “The Messenger”, Technology Review, July 1, 2006, https://www.technologyreview.com/s/406011/themessenger/ .

[6]   Sherwood, Steven, University of New South Wales, as quoted in “We will get roasting with shock rise in warming”, New Scientist, December 9, 2017.

[7]   “Trends in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide”, Earth System Research Laboratory, Global Monitoring Division, USDC, NOAA, https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/.

[8]   Hansen, Kathryn and Andrew Lacis. “Carbon Dioxide Controls Earth’s Temperature”, NASA’s Earth Science News Team, https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/co2-temperature.html

[9]   “Vostok Temperature & Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Data”, Climate Change, Four Peaks Technologies, Scottsdale, Arizona, http://www.climatewarmingcentral.com/climate_change_page.html

[10]  Petit J.R., Jouzel J., Raynaud D., Barkov N.I., Barnola J.M., et al. 1999, Climate and Atmospheric History of the Past 420,000 years from the Vostok Ice Core, Antarctica, Nature 399: 429-436

[11]  Hansen, J., I. Fung, A. Lacis, D. Rind, S. Lebedeff, R. Ruedy, G. Russell, and P. Stone, 1988: Global climate changes as forecast by Goddard Institute for Space Studies three-dimensional model. J. Geophys. Res., 93, 9341-9364,doi:10.1029/JD093iD08p09341. https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1988/1988_Hansen_ha02700w.pdf

[12]  Gavin (2018) “30 years after Hansen’s testimony” RealClimate, 21 June 2018,http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2018/06/30yearsafterhansenstestimony/

[13]  Riahi, Keywan, et al., “RCP 8.5—A scenario of comparatively high greenhouse gas emissions”, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), 2361 Laxenburg, Austria, Climatic Change (2011)109:33–57, DOI 10.1007/s10584-011-0149-y, open access at Springerlink.com

[14]  Climate Change, “A warning of greater warming on the horizon”, Nature, December 6, 2017

[15]  Brown, Patrick and Ken Caldeira, “Greater future global warming inferred from Earth’s recent energy budget,” Nature 552, December 7,2017, p. 45-50, doi:10.1038/nature24672

[16]  “Six Degrees Could Change the World”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_pb1G2wIoA , National Geographic Society, http://natgeotv.com/asia/sixdegrees

[17]  “Projections of Climate Change: 2100 and Beyond”, part 2, University of Washington, https://atmos.uw.edu/academics/classes/2011Q1/101/Climate_Change_2011_part2.pdf

[18]  Levin, Kelly, “Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Fossil Fuels and Cement Reach Highest Point in Human History”, World Resources Institute, Nov. 22, 2013, https://www.wri.org/

[19]  CBS News, “Carbon dioxide emissions rise to 2.4 million pounds per second”, Dec. 2, 2012, CBSNews.com

[20]  “Projections of Climate Change: 2100 and Beyond”, part 2, University of Washington, https://atmos.uw.edu/academics/classes/2011Q1/101/Climate_Change_2011_part2.pdf

[21]  Temple, James, “The two key reasons the world can’t reverse climate emissions”, Technology Review, March 28, 2019 www.technologyreview.com

[22]  McKenna, Phil, “Fast-Rising Demand for Air Conditioning Is Adding to Global Warming. The Numbers Are Striking”, Inside Climate News, Nov. 12, 2018, https://insideclimatenews.org/news/

[23]  Solomon, Susan et al., “Irreversible climate change due to carbon dioxide emissions”, PNAS February 10, 2009 106 (6) 1704-1709; first published January 28, 2009 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0812721106

[24]  World Population from 1750 to 2100, Our World in Data, Revision 2019, https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2019/06/2019-Revision-%E2%80%93-World-Population-Growth-1700-2100.png. See also World Energy Consumption, 1800-2015, https://ourworldindata.org/energy-production-and-changing-energysources

[25]  Sample, Ian. “The father of climate change”, The Guardian, June 30, 2005, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2005/jun/30/climatechange.climatechangeenvironment2

[26]  Bowen, Mark. “The Messenger”, July 1, 2006, MIT Technology Review, https://www.technologyreview.com/s/406011/the-messenger / with David Talbot, “CO2 and the Ornery Climate Beast Chart”, NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies, Technology Review, July/Aug., 2006, p. 40-41, https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.technologyreview.com/p/pub/legacy/articlefiles/climatechart.pdf

[27]  Hansen, James, with David Talbot, “CO2 and the Ornery Climate Beast Chart”, NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies, Technology Review, July/August, 2006, p. 40-41,https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.technologyreview.com/p/pub/legacy/articlefiles/climatechart.pdf

[28]  Mufson, Steven, et al. “2°C: Beyond the Limit, Extreme climate change has arrived in America”, Washington Post, August 13, 2019

[29]  Jakobsdottir, Katrin. “Iceland’s Prime Minister: ‘The Ice Is Leaving’, Climate change is melting glaciers worldwide. Only we can stop it.” New York Times, August 17, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/17/opinion/iceland-glacier-climatechange.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

[30]  Global Climate Change, Vital Signs of the Planet, “Ice Sheets”, https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ice-sheets/

[31]  Vaughan, Adam, “Winter rains melts Greenland’s ice”, New Scientist, March 16, 2019, citing The Cryosphere, doi.org/c3f7, https://www.newscientist.com/article/2195972‐rain‐may‐be‐causing‐aworrying‐amount‐of‐ice‐to‐melt‐in‐greenland/

[32]  Harbeck, Jeremy, “Huge Cavity in Antarctic Glacier Signals Rapid Decay”, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology News, January 30, 2019, https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=7322

[33]  “Impacts of a 4°C global warming”, Green Facts, Facts on Health and the Environment, Green Facts Scientific Board, Cogeneris sprl. 2012, https://www.greenfacts.org/en/impacts-global-warming/l-2/index.htm#0

[34]  Service, Robert F., “New way to turn carbon dioxide into coal could ‘rewind the emissions clock’”, Science, Feb. 26, 2019, https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/02/liquid-metal-catalyst-turnscarbon-dioxide-coal

[35]  Lovelock, James, Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth, Oxford University Press, 2000, p. 115


Thomas F. Valone
Research Dept., Integrity Research Institute, Beltsville MD, United States
Email: IRI@erols.com

Jacqueline Panting
Bioenergetics Dept., Integrity Research Institute, Beltsville MD, United States
Email: Jackie@IntegrityResearchInstitute.org



Or using ePRNews Account

Don't have an account ? Sign Up

Register New Account

Already have an account ? Login

Reset Password

Already have an account ? Login