For the Record

I posted an item last week about scientist-author Tim Flannery's alarming announcement that we had surpassed the 450ppm threshold for CO2 equivalency. The Christian Science Monitor even quoted me to explain to readers why that mattered. Well, the scientists-bloggers at Real Climate now say that Flannery got it wrong. They write:

The important number is CO2_e (Total) which is around 375 ppmv. Stabilisation scenarios of 450 ppmv or 550 ppmv are therefore still within reach. Claims that we have passed the first target are simply incorrect, however, that is not to say they are easily achievable. It is even more of a stretch to state that we have all of a sudden gone past the 'dangerous' level. It is still not clear what that level is, but if you take a conventional 450 ppmv CO2_e value (which will lead to a net equilibrium warming of ~ 2 deg C above pre-industrial levels), we are still a number of years from that, and we have (probably) not yet committed ourselves to reaching it.

Gavin Shmidt, who wrote the post, adds: "I wish journalists and editors would resist the temptation to jump on leaks like this (though I know it's hard). The situation is confusing enough without adding to it unintentionally."

Uh..., I guess claiming to be just a blogger doesn't let me off the hook. Does it? Thanks to the commenter who alerted me to the Real Climate post. I haven't seen any response to all this from Flannery himself, but as this post on Celsias notes, the IPCC report on which he supposedly based his assertion will be out soon -- November 7th.