Open letter to parliament and climate experts
Honourable Member of Parliament or Climate Expert,
My new book is out today.
It will also apperar in english very soon.
Background: at the start of the 2008 Global Forum in Stockholm, with many of the world's leaders gathered,
Since I have spent decades making complex thermodynamic calculations about new innovations and built data simulations, it was natural to look at the climate as well.
Thanks to the Global Forum, I got in touch with Mohan Munasinghe, described my findings about the climate and thus alerted the top management of the IPCC in May 2008.
From the email to him, it is warned that the Earth continues to gain 0.023 C/year until +8C is reached if all emissions are stopped by 2010.
These emails are briefly available here
that the earth will continue with 0.035 C/year (=NASA) until +25C is reached 700 years later if all emissions are stopped by 2021.
It is quite easy to understand that the IPCC is wrong. The Earth has 3000 Gt "too much" CO2 in the atmosphere
or 400 tonnes per person on Earth. It is this colossal amount that our
earth to +25 C in a process that lasts 25/0.035 = 700 years. On the way up, scientists are now discussing
whether catastrophe occurs at +1.5 or +2C. My book leads in proving that these temperatures are reached in 2027 and 2034 respectively.
Theresults can only be obtained if the correct climate sensitivity = 36 is assumed.
The IPCC and SMHI cannot even calculate this because they have not yet recognised true climate sensitivity=36
The world's total annual emissions correspond to about 1% of this colossal amount. Moreover, it takes
700 years for a change to have its full temperature impact. Whatever we do between now and 2050
change will be barely measurable. Therefore, Zero Emissions 2045is ineffective and the IPCC presents
a false and dangerous curve. If we are fooled by this, it will be too late to correct
when everyone sees that the policy will not work in a few years. We can easily figure out a true picture now.
The only workable solution lies in taking a completely different approach. If 200 Gt of CO2 or
2 Gt of methane is sucked out of the atmosphere per year, we will just meet the Paris Agreement
and then have completely repaired the atmosphere within 20 years. The amount of methane
that needs to be removed is the best possible fuel with an economic value that is
100 to 1000 times higher than Norway's oil revenues. The countries that participate can easily double
Using simple rules of thumb, it can be roughly estimated that the revenue from methane
pay the entire bill for cleaning up all the CO2.
400,000 per person in the world. If Sweden is to assume its responsibilities in relation to its wealth
then the debt to the climate is about 4 million SEK per person. This debt can be solved in an elegantway.
When the atmosphere is repaired in 2040, every home will have free energy from the atmosphere's methane.
and the best fuel imaginable for the car. Super-entrepreneur Vinod Khosla gets
right when he predicted in 2014 that electric cars won't leave a significant mark
in the history books. We need solutions that are infinitely better and also
cheap. The future could be absolutely fantastic, or a bottomless misery if we follow Zero Emissions 2045.
Unfortunately, it is forbidden to discuss all the fantastical ways out that exist.
That's because all such solutions, which will be our salvation, lie outside Groupthink.
and are furiously opposed by Groupthink academics, scientists and politicians.
The above extraction of CO2 and Methane was discussed in April 2015 at Chalmers / Graphene
and scientists gave the thumbs up for how graphene could be used to separate gases.
All this was at the behest of the Swedish Government, to find Sweden's main direction
In my opinion, this could be the most important nanotechnology research
most important project in Sweden. It could solve the ENTIRE climate crisis and the entire country's energy supply.
and it could provide an unprecedented economic boost. Everything was swept under the carpet by
TheSwedish Energy Agency, which was present during the conference and made a lot of notes.
Repeated requests to the Energy Agency have not resulted in a response.
If we are to survive the climate crisis, thinking must change quickly and decisively.
NASA's latest alarm that the oceans will absorb twice as much energy in 14 years
When you factor in this very latest from NASA, the forecast for the coming years looks like this.
If we emit twice as much or nothing at all, the curve looks almost exactly the same.
That's because next year's emissions are so small compared to what's already there and
the time between CO2 change and full temperature response is 700 years. The IPCC and SMHI cannot
even calculate this because true climate sensitivity=36
I made a prediction in 2008 with the correct climate sensitivity=36 and it turned out perfectly
until 2021, while the IPCC failed completely for this period *Ref)
Shall I beat the IPCC once again with the above forecast until 2040 ?
He who lives will see.
Thus it is clear that Zero Emissions 2045 is a policy that can only solve
it is outside of GroupThink.
Zero Emissions 2045 is an ineffective cheat-solution and an insult to our children.
More than 230 journals warn 1.5°C of global warming could be 'catastrophic' for health
TheGuardian today. Tipping point may be closer than we think. Current plans aren't working.
Sweden must reach political agreement on a workable climate policy well before Glasgow.
The action plan is a quality solution. It's expensive, but we can do this.
Three scientists have, in my opinion, written the best climate article ever,
Together, we three authors of this article must have spent more
These scientists were probably the first in the world to see these connections. Now it's time
We prefer saving our young people to saving our prestige.
We are in good company with the three very eminent scientists who have shown the way
to the truth. Now we can start working on solutions that really work."
The age of wishful thinking is over.
IPCC forecast for the same period based on wrong climate sensitivity=3.
A forecast (high confidence !) - blue sign - that everyone knows by heart and that
shaped bill 2016/17:146 and climate law 2017:720:
Hard to beat this - miscounting 60 years on a 100-year period
and to achieve that nobody talks about it and that the press does not write about this.
Black: NASA real temperature Red: everyone probably agrees today that this is a pretty accurate forecast
I've been saying since 2008: everyone will be happy if I'm wrong, even me. But banning all discussion can't be forgiven. Now the discussion has to start.
Don't listen to me ! Listen to the laws of nature.
The end of the book proves my assertions mathematically. Here we follow the laws of nature with mathematical precision.
To the experts: point out any errors or change climate policy quickly.
The laws of nature are stronger than the laws of climate. The laws of nature do not negotiate. We must humbly submit.