Comment Log Display

I strongly urge the Board, in developing the low carbon fuel
standard, to consider recent research by the NASA Goddard Institute
for Space (GISS) and Columbia University that have found that black
carbon is responsible for 50%, or almost 1 °C of the total 1.9 °C
increased Arctic warming from 1890 to 2007. [Drew Shindell and Greg
Faluvegi of Columbia, published in Nature Geoscience].

This study is the first to quantify the Arctic’s sensitivity to
black carbon emissions from various latitudes, and concludes that
"the Arctic responds strongly to black carbon emissions from the
Northern Hemisphere mid-latitudes, where the emissions and the
forcing are greatest."

Black carbon is an aerosol produced from the incomplete combustion
of fossil fuels and biomass and is estimated to be the second or
third largest contributor to climate change. Its emissions cause
damage in two ways: while in the atmosphere, the dark particulates
absorb sunlight and emit it as heat; when it falls back to earth it
can darken snow and ice, reducing their reflectivity and
accelerating melting.

Arctic warming is the "Canary in Cage" with respect to Climate
Change, with more than twice the observed global average surface
warming of 0.78 °C above pre-industrial levels. According to
another study published by Lenton, et al. in the Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences last year, this increased warming may
soon lead to the disappearance of the Arctic summer ice, which
would in turn accelerate Arctic warming by exposing darker
heat-absorbing water now covered by heat reflecting ice. This would
also increase the risk of releasing methane and other greenhouse
gases from permafrost and from methane hydrates in the ocean, which
could lead to a runaway feedback process.

In addition, because black carbon only remains in the atmosphere
for several days to weeks, reducing it can bring about almost
immediate mitigation of warming, whereas decreases in temperature
lag reductions in CO2 by 1,000 years or more.  The only place that
is worse than the arctic, as a final destination for black carbon,
is the lungs of humans and other animals.  As a result, the net
economic benefits (including human health) of reducing black carbon
emissions from diesel engines and Powerplants, are likely to exceed
all other GHG control measures on a dollar of emission control
expenditures per gram of carbon basis.