Global warming III

OK I am likely to trust this fellow

"Prof. Yohji Uchiyama of Tsukuba University, pointing out that fossil-fuel reserves will be depleted four or five centuries hence if the world's energy demand continues to increase at current rates, made the following statement highlighting the need to focus on the quality of resources: "

http://www.jaif.or.jp/english/aij/2003/47-06.html

or this

"Our climate is warming as the sustained combustion of fossil fuel increases the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHG) that trap solar energy. At the present rate, the complete burn up of the remaining accessible fossil fuel reserves will raise the present average temperature of the globe from 15° to 23°C in the course of the next two centuries."

http://www.nce.gc.ca/nces-rces/arcticnet_e.htm

so 40-120 for the reasonably easy to find / clean fuels and 200-500 for all of the fossil fuels.

Better than I thought.

I suggest that is an opportunity - buy all the dirty fuels NOW (as per my peaceful alternative to the kyoto protocol). But if we dont do that we need to at least figure out a strategy.

the question then is how much of the (lets say) 8 degrees of temerpature rise are we willign to tolerate - if we stop carbon usage in 350 years we can assume we will have had no effect at all. lets say we declare 3.6% as the most we can tolerate. In that case we need to stop all fossil fuel burning by 2100. OR slow fossil fuel burning with a kyoto protocol and buy us some more time to stop it by lets say 2010.
I presume (as you can see by my definition of the target as "the most we can tolerate") we want to be risk adverse and if that is the case one cannot "bet" that during that period a new perfect energy source will emerge - and even if it does we will still have to make fossil fuels illegal. Anyway we need to define our target.