[Revi]

I am just reading this book. It's got short chapters, but I am reading just one or two at a time because it's so intense.

Below is an article that was used as the basis for the book which just came out this year.

The reality is that we are headed for around 4 degrees by the end of the century. We are already in a climate crisis.
Most of the plans to keep us under 2 degrees C rely on negative emissions, which don't exist yet.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/07/ ... umans.html

[Cog]

The 7 billion plus who inhabit it now, would disagree with your conclusions about habitability.

[Revi]

Thanks for weighing in Cog. I hope it's habitable in 10 or 20 years.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Most of the plans to keep us under 2 degrees C rely on negative emissions, which don't exist yet.

Thanks for the pointers to the book and article, Revi.

And the longer we screw around and make the problem much worse, the worse the consequences for mitigation (if even possible at some point), get. (I still think "Star Trek" like technology to remove a lot of carbon over time is possible -- but it will be extremely expensive in the amounts and time frame needed, by the time humanity wakes up).

(Not that people will actually care to deal with it (it's expensive and inconvenient, after all), until it's RIGHT IN THEIR FACE with meaningful consequences.

...

None of this surprises me, really. Given how hard it is to get the majority of people to even take their OWN retirement saving seriously (as if aging is uncertain); expecting the majority of people to deal with something that they're uncertain about, especially in their lifetime -- just doesn't seem doable.

[Plantagenet]

Thanks for the links, Revi

Did you see that Trump is putting together a crack team of climate change deniers to advise him? Or maybe that should be a crackpot team....

God help us all.

[Revi]

It's really interesting to think about. We are told that we can't do anything about our own suicidal trajectory because it might hurt the economy. What good is an "economy" when there is no place to spend it? This system helps some of us out, but the lines of refugees aren't going to partake of it.

[KaiserJeep]

It's really interesting to think about. We are told that we can't do anything about our own suicidal trajectory because it might hurt the economy. What good is an "economy" when there is no place to spend it? This system helps some of us out, but the lines of refugees aren't going to partake of it.

The flip side of that same coin: Approximately 3/4ths of those 7.7B humans are completely dependant upon burning FF's to live. The use of FF's for agriculture is the main reason, but FF's are also used to process and transport food, and to refrigerate/freeze fresh foods.

Your prescription for "saving us from Climate Change" would starve approximately six billion humans. Best be prepared to make your case to those same 6 billion that their deaths are necessary to save the planet.

It is popular around here to believe that the 6 billion victims of CC hysteria would be the Western World, and that the "noble poor peoples" of the world will survive because they are more in tune with Nature and better prepared for hardship. This is in fact total claptrap, in a worldwide petroleum marketplace, those with the MOST MONEY eat and the poor starve. The country of Venezuela has huge oil reserves, but can't feed itself without the entire infrastructure of oil refineries and a fuel distribution system it cannot keep running.

The Western World of course is the only one even attempting to do anything about Climate Change. But at the same time, they are exporting oil/coal/natural gas to the Third World, along with food grown with petroleum fuels. India and China are each bringing a new coal power plant online each week on avaerage, I am told. So go tell the Indians and Chinese that they need to starve to save the planet.

Good luck with that.

[AdamB]

I am just reading this book. It's got short chapters, but I am reading just one or two at a time because it's so intense.

Below is an article that was used as the basis for the book which just came out this year.

The reality is that we are headed for around 4 degrees by the end of the century. We are already in a climate crisis.
Most of the plans to keep us under 2 degrees C rely on negative emissions, which don't exist yet.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/07/ ... umans.html

Interesting title...is the author discussing the great warming upon entrance into the Holocene? Or just the minor warmings (and corresponding coolings) that have happened during the current interglacial?

[Cog]

I think we are supposed to believe that humans ended the last glaciation period. That any warming that melted all the ice that was sitting over North America was our fault.

[Outcast_Searcher]

I think we are supposed to believe that humans ended the last glaciation period. That any warming that melted all the ice that was sitting over North America was our fault.

Comments like that DON'T make you at all credible, re the issue.

The time period re AGW discussed is since the industrial revolution started causing serious amounts of global fossil fuel burning. We're talking well under 200 years. And as far as the serious warming, we're talking the last 6 decades or so.

But hey, such ideas will play well for sure on the denier sites, where facts and science are largely ignored.

[Newfie]

KJ,

Either way we are looking at a significant population drop. Which path would produce less drop? That’s my question to you.

[Cog]

I think we are supposed to believe that humans ended the last glaciation period. That any warming that melted all the ice that was sitting over North America was our fault.

Comments like that DON'T make you at all credible, re the issue.

The time period re AGW discussed is since the industrial revolution started causing serious amounts of global fossil fuel burning. We're talking well under 200 years. And as far as the serious warming, we're talking the last 6 decades or so.

But hey, such ideas will play well for sure on the denier sites, where facts and science are largely ignored.

I'd say I'm more credible than Al Gore who predicted in 2008 that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2013, or John Kerry who predicted in 2009 that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2014. But I'm not a smart Democrat politician like they are. I'm just a deplorable not worthy of consideration.

[Newfie]

I’m smart enough to not make silly predictions as above. And yes they are political, they should shut their traps because they give folks like you ammo. And I agree that opportunists have latched into AWG to use it for their own ends. If AOC wants to assitnthe AGW movement she should see her mouth shut.

But there is a good chance you will see an ice free ocean in your lifetime. You have already seen Antarctic ice shelf’s disintegrate and glaciers are in full retreat. Artic ice continues to have less exten, be thinner, and now almost all multi year ice is gone. Waters that were traditionally blocked by ice until late June/Mid July are now open in May. 1st hand experience.

[Revi]

I'd say I'm more credible than Al Gore who predicted in 2008 that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2013, or John Kerry who predicted in 2009 that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2014. But I'm not a smart Democrat politician like they are. I'm just a deplorable not worthy of consideration.

Try Kevin Anderson at the Tyndall Center. He may be more to your liking.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BW-8ea8LWG8

[Newfie]

Cog,

Your pity party wears old. Folks here are trying to discuss some technical matters, not politics.

It would be nice to have you join the conversation.

[jedrider]

The 7 billion plus who inhabit it now, would disagree with your conclusions about habitability.

Of Insects and Men
https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/02/26/of-insects-and-men/

Industrial farming seems to be wiping out life that surrounds it.

Thank God we still have industrial petroleum farming.

We are certainly losing biodiversity at a rapid rate, which is usually essential for adaptation to a changing environment.

[Outcast_Searcher]

I think we are supposed to believe that humans ended the last glaciation period. That any warming that melted all the ice that was sitting over North America was our fault.

Comments like that DON'T make you at all credible, re the issue.

The time period re AGW discussed is since the industrial revolution started causing serious amounts of global fossil fuel burning. We're talking well under 200 years. And as far as the serious warming, we're talking the last 6 decades or so.

But hey, such ideas will play well for sure on the denier sites, where facts and science are largely ignored.

I'd say I'm more credible than Al Gore who predicted in 2008 that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2013, or John Kerry who predicted in 2009 that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2014. But I'm not a smart Democrat politician like they are. I'm just a deplorable not worthy of consideration.

And what, pray tell, does that have to do with the last ice age? What's next, jingling keys?

The fact that some short term predictions by laymen (who shouldn't be making such predictions, I'd agree) were wrong doesn't change the science or the overall trend.

[Revi]

The end of the book is a all about the psychology of climate change. Those of us who tried to get people interested in peak oil understand the various different forms of denial or nihilism. It's a natural reaction to the huge predicament that we have put ourselves in. Read one or two chapters a night of the first 12. Otherwise it will be overwhelming. The whole end of the book can be read in one sitting however!

[Revi]

I'd say I'm more credible than Al Gore who predicted in 2008 that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2013, or John Kerry who predicted in 2009 that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2014. But I'm not a smart Democrat politician like they are. I'm just a deplorable not worthy of consideration.

I scared myself with a little thought experiment the other day. It takes 80 calories to melt one gram of ice. That same 80 calories takes that now melted ice to 80 degrees celsius, or almost boiling. Once that ice melts, it's off to the races for the arctic! It could be as warm as it is around here on a sunny summer day once that ice melts.

I really didn't understand how dangerous climate change could be until I understood this.

We boil maple sap and it can go from a frozen pan to boiling really quickly. Now I know why. It takes a lot of energy to get the sap unfrozen, but then can go quickly to boiling with the same amount of heat energy.

[Newfie]

Those little thought experiments can be devilish. Sometimes wrong, it sometimes profound. Good on you, that’s a sweet one.