Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby dohboi » Thu 30 May 2019, 16:12:18

Glad to agree with Newf on the no expansion point.

Something along these lines might be part of the 'limited renewal' side of the equation, as long as they are modest/house a lot of people per sqft:

Chicago Winter Without a Furnace or Gas Bill: Passive Houses Make It Possible and are Slowly Catching On

https://phys.org/news/2019-05-chicago-w ... -bill.html

Canada allegedly holds claim to the first true passive house, then Europe took the idea mainstream before it eventually returned to the U.S. via the Urbana, Ill., Smith House in 2003.

"In a way it's come full circle," said Mike Knezovich, communications director at the Passive House Institute U.S. (PHIUS), based in Chicago. The organization's co-founder, Katrin Klingenberg, was the brains behind the Urbana prototype.

... Mary Chris Jaklevic and her husband, Roy Schuster, worked with Bassett-Dilley to build their Oak Park home in 2010. The couple didn't opt for official certification, but the home was built using passive methodology and functions as such, including the fact that is has no furnace. Heat comes from lighting, the sun, household appliances, cooking and even the residents' bodies. The house isn't even connected to a gas line, a common practice in passive building.

"I think that's one of the big factors that we underestimated was just how comfortable it would be to live in this house. It's a lot quieter because the walls are so thick and the windows are triple-paned," Jaklevic said. She also noted the high air quality and lack of drafts.

Chicago architect Mark Miller, who recently completed his first true passive build in Gull Lake, Mich., said one of the first questions people ask is whether they should worry about fresh air—are they going to suffocate? On the contrary, he said, because of the specialized ventilation system, the air quality is great, and people with allergies or asthma may even notice improvement in their symptoms.

Miller notes energy reduction as another obvious benefit, saying the savings can be upward of 85%. Or if the house were a car, he said, it would get 200 miles per gallon.

... Chertok thinks cost is a major barrier—builders without passive experience will often come in with high-priced project bids because the labor and materials aren't as familiar. But for architects and builders knowledgeable about the process, the cost is comparable, according to Knezovich. "People wonder if they can afford passive. The answer is yes," he said.

He and Bassett-Dilley agree that additional up-front cost for things like highly efficient windows and insulation (think 5% to 10% reflected in mortgage payments) is made up for in utility bill savings. Currently, passive certification doesn't grant homeowners a premium on their assessment, but various rebate, grant and loan programs exist in Illinois.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby yellowcanoe » Thu 30 May 2019, 16:47:25

Canada allegedly holds claim to the first true passive house, then Europe took the idea mainstream before it eventually returned to the U.S. via the Urbana, Ill., Smith House in 2003.


This has to be a reference to the R-2000 standard that was introduced in 1982 in Canada. I have a friend who built several houses to that standard using different technologies. Aside from the energy savings, these houses are very comfortable because they don't have the drafts and cold spots associated with poorly insulated houses.
yellowcanoe
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 583
Joined: Fri 15 Nov 2013, 13:42:27
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby eclipse » Thu 30 May 2019, 21:56:55

They were making Earthships out of rubbish in the 1970's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthship#History
Dr James Hansen recommends breeder reactors that convert nuclear 'waste' into 1000 years of clean energy for America, and can charge all our light vehicles and generate "Blue Crude" for heavy vehicles.
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/recharge/
User avatar
eclipse
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 425
Joined: Fri 04 Feb 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Sydney

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Fri 31 May 2019, 09:10:43

eclipse wrote:They were making Earthships out of rubbish in the 1970's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthship#History


Based on a PBS documentary I saw a couple of years ago, the majority of Earthship type structures were abandonned after a few years. The problem was excessive Winter humidity from cooking, bathing/showering, and breathing. Toxic mold growths (type depending on the soil used in construction) were the common problem. The "natural convection" ventilation, even when supplemented by wood-fired convection heat, was simply not enough to keep condensation off the buried ventilation piping. The structures are being re-designed to use fan-forced venting with solar PV and lithium batteries and small DC-powered fans.

Publicising such a "techy" solution to the biggest single problem is unpopular with Earthship fanboys.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby Newfie » Fri 31 May 2019, 11:23:09

dohboi wrote:Glad to agree with Newf on the no expansion point.

Something along these lines might be part of the 'limited renewal' side of the equation, as long as they are modest/house a lot of people per sqft:

Chicago Winter Without a Furnace or Gas Bill: Passive Houses Make It Possible and are Slowly Catching On

https://phys.org/news/2019-05-chicago-w ... -bill.html

Canada allegedly holds claim to the first true passive house, then Europe took the idea mainstream before it eventually returned to the U.S. via the Urbana, Ill., Smith House in 2003.

"In a way it's come full circle," said Mike Knezovich, communications director at the Passive House Institute U.S. (PHIUS), based in Chicago. The organization's co-founder, Katrin Klingenberg, was the brains behind the Urbana prototype.

... Mary Chris Jaklevic and her husband, Roy Schuster, worked with Bassett-Dilley to build their Oak Park home in 2010. The couple didn't opt for official certification, but the home was built using passive methodology and functions as such, including the fact that is has no furnace. Heat comes from lighting, the sun, household appliances, cooking and even the residents' bodies. The house isn't even connected to a gas line, a common practice in passive building.

"I think that's one of the big factors that we underestimated was just how comfortable it would be to live in this house. It's a lot quieter because the walls are so thick and the windows are triple-paned," Jaklevic said. She also noted the high air quality and lack of drafts.

Chicago architect Mark Miller, who recently completed his first true passive build in Gull Lake, Mich., said one of the first questions people ask is whether they should worry about fresh air—are they going to suffocate? On the contrary, he said, because of the specialized ventilation system, the air quality is great, and people with allergies or asthma may even notice improvement in their symptoms.

Miller notes energy reduction as another obvious benefit, saying the savings can be upward of 85%. Or if the house were a car, he said, it would get 200 miles per gallon.

... Chertok thinks cost is a major barrier—builders without passive experience will often come in with high-priced project bids because the labor and materials aren't as familiar. But for architects and builders knowledgeable about the process, the cost is comparable, according to Knezovich. "People wonder if they can afford passive. The answer is yes," he said.

He and Bassett-Dilley agree that additional up-front cost for things like highly efficient windows and insulation (think 5% to 10% reflected in mortgage payments) is made up for in utility bill savings. Currently, passive certification doesn't grant homeowners a premium on their assessment, but various rebate, grant and loan programs exist in Illinois.



I think this is a great PERSONAL solution. I see no way we can move the vast majority of our population to this kind of housing. Maybe 50 years ago but probably too late even then.

But it does bring home the point that living in a temperate zone is a luxury.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby eclipse » Fri 31 May 2019, 19:15:42

KaiserJeep wrote:
eclipse wrote:They were making Earthships out of rubbish in the 1970's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthship#History


Based on a PBS documentary I saw a couple of years ago, the majority of Earthship type structures were abandonned after a few years. The problem was excessive Winter humidity from cooking, bathing/showering, and breathing. Toxic mold growths (type depending on the soil used in construction) were the common problem. The "natural convection" ventilation, even when supplemented by wood-fired convection heat, was simply not enough to keep condensation off the buried ventilation piping. The structures are being re-designed to use fan-forced venting with solar PV and lithium batteries and small DC-powered fans.

Publicising such a "techy" solution to the biggest single problem is unpopular with Earthship fanboys.


Wow! Thank you for that. I thought they looked so cool, but after reading this I investigated and if even the hippies over at a permaculture website are recommending other passive solar designs over these, then I'm removing Earthips from my blog!
https://www.thepermaculture.life/permac ... arthships/
Dr James Hansen recommends breeder reactors that convert nuclear 'waste' into 1000 years of clean energy for America, and can charge all our light vehicles and generate "Blue Crude" for heavy vehicles.
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/recharge/
User avatar
eclipse
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 425
Joined: Fri 04 Feb 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Sydney

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby phaster » Sat 01 Jun 2019, 18:46:51

eclipse wrote:
KaiserJeep wrote:
eclipse wrote:They were making Earthships out of rubbish in the 1970's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthship#History


Based on a PBS documentary I saw a couple of years ago, the majority of Earthship type structures were abandonned after a few years. The problem was excessive Winter humidity from cooking, bathing/showering, and breathing. Toxic mold growths (type depending on the soil used in construction) were the common problem. The "natural convection" ventilation, even when supplemented by wood-fired convection heat, was simply not enough to keep condensation off the buried ventilation piping. The structures are being re-designed to use fan-forced venting with solar PV and lithium batteries and small DC-powered fans.

Publicising such a "techy" solution to the biggest single problem is unpopular with Earthship fanboys.


Wow! Thank you for that. I thought they looked so cool, but after reading this I investigated and if even the hippies over at a permaculture website are recommending other passive solar designs over these, then I'm removing Earthips from my blog!
https://www.thepermaculture.life/permac ... arthships/


doh!

guess I'll have to remove an earthship from my bucket list,... personally liked the free form look of the structure and wanted one on a permaculture farm

FWIW there is an artist here in SD county, that builds similar looking structures to earthships w/ out the internal gardens or up-cycled building material

http://ilanlaelfoundation.org/open-house/

https://www.hubbellandhubbell.com/portf ... sidential/

speaking of a permaculture farm,... someone mentioned to me there is a documentary I should to check out,... checked out the "trailer" and the visuals of the landscape are real-estate eye-candy

Telluride Film Review: ‘The Biggest Little Farm’

...With all due respect to former Vice President Al Gore, here is an inconvenient truth about most environmental documentaries: No matter how important the message, it’s kind of a drag to sit through so many alarmist lectures about how the world is going to end and what humans are doing to speed along its destruction. That’s what makes “The Biggest Little Farm” feel like fresh air for the soul — figuratively, of course, although audiences will almost surely breathe a little easier after tuning in to this inspirational story of one couple who made an impact by entirely rethinking their ecological footprint.

https://variety.com/2018/film/reviews/t ... 202922977/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfDTM4JxHl8
Given the great chasm that divides believers
AND non-believers of “man made climate change”
let’s hope that people figure things out, before it’s too late!!!


www.TinyURL.com/HowBigIsTheEarth
User avatar
phaster
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun 15 Jul 2007, 02:00:00

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby eclipse » Sun 02 Jun 2019, 21:09:11

PHASTER DON'T PANIC!

There are stacks of other very very attractive eco-housing options for Powerdowners like yourself. You could even make it look like an Earthship, just don't use tyres in your walls. There are other options. I live in suburbia, but at the height of my own personal peak oil panic back in 2004 bought a bunch of books (down here in Australia) on ecovillages, alternate housing, survival, blah blah blah. Money wasted, especially now that so much of this is for free online. Google around, and if you ever do built it, please send me a PM of the photos! :-)

Also, MOVIE TIME! Here's an aussie permaculture movie associated with Ted Trainer.
http://simplicityinstitute.org/film
Dr James Hansen recommends breeder reactors that convert nuclear 'waste' into 1000 years of clean energy for America, and can charge all our light vehicles and generate "Blue Crude" for heavy vehicles.
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/recharge/
User avatar
eclipse
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 425
Joined: Fri 04 Feb 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Sydney

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby Newfie » Wed 12 Jun 2019, 15:42:20

https://gcaptain.com/u-s-hurricane-seas ... dangerous/

“It’s a start,” Sawislak said. “If we don’t want to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on recovering for disaster, we need to spend tens of billions [on resilience].”
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby Ibon » Fri 14 Jun 2019, 17:26:13

Newfie wrote:https://gcaptain.com/u-s-hurricane-season-is-unnecessarily-dangerous/

“It’s a start,” Sawislak said. “If we don’t want to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on recovering for disaster, we need to spend tens of billions [on resilience].”


This is very prescient actually. A resilient forward looking nation would grasp this immediately...... unless they are stuck in the inertia of denial.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Time to stop pretending we can stop climate change

Unread postby Plantagenet » Mon 09 Sep 2019, 00:22:22

Its time to stop pretending we can stop climate change.

Every day there is news of storms, fires, droughts, and floods larger then any seen before. Every year more glacial ice melts then we’ve ever seen before, and the sea level goes ever higher. And this is just the beginning.....its going to get much much worse.

In the last 30 years the world has put as much CO2 into the air as it did in the preceding 200 years, and the amount of CO2 going into the atmosphere increases every year. And its just going to continue to increase. The Chinese alone are adding the equivalent of all US CO2 emissions roughly every 10 years.

We might have had a chance of stopping climate change if the world had taken action in the 20th century, but instead our idiotic “leaders” cobbled together the phony Kyoto Accords, and the CO2 continued to accumulate in the atmosphere. Then we did the same thing with the phony Paris Accords.

And now its too late to stop climate change.

what-if-we-stopped-pretending

Its time to stop pretending we can stop climate change. Its time to think instead about how to retreat from the coasts, how to manage the flood of immigrants climate change is producing, how to minimize the effects of huge fires, and which islands to evacuate before the coming storms destroy the islands and kill hundreds of people.

Its time to stop pretending we can stop climate change.

Cheers!
"The people in power should listen.....its them I'm criticizing" Greta Thunberg, Lisbon, 12/4/19
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22863
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Time to stop pretending we can stop climate change

Unread postby Newfie » Mon 09 Sep 2019, 03:59:05

It good to see such blunt talk in major media. Especially for the Democrats who don’t understand their role in the fiasco.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Time to stop pretending we can stop climate change

Unread postby Cog » Mon 09 Sep 2019, 04:26:51

Embracing global socialism will surely work to prevent this catastrophic outcome. We just have to be willing to destroy freedom and engage in selective genocide and all our problems will go away.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12836
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby Newfie » Mon 09 Sep 2019, 06:59:21

Cog,

No one here is talking about genocide but you and your position will assure MORE people die.

As to the socialization bit, yes I see that, it’s a bias in the authors view point.

The greater point remains.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby Ibon » Mon 09 Sep 2019, 07:06:52

Newfie wrote:Cog,

No one here is talking about genocide but you and your position will assure MORE people die.

As to the socialization bit, yes I see that, it’s a bias in the authors view point.

The greater point remains.


Well moving forward I think we will have our hands full figuring out how to keep capitalism working with a declining resource base and increasing instability of our biosphere rather than seeing the socialist boogey man behind every corner.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby asg70 » Mon 09 Sep 2019, 22:09:27

IMHO, both hard left and hard right are focusing on the wrong things. The hard right is focusing on brown-tech solutions that are making the problem worse. Trump's anti-immigration policy is more of a serendipitous asset to lifeboat ethics than a sign that he gets it. The hard left is running McCarthy-like lynch-mobs and eating their own as they fixate more and more on perfecting virtue-signalling. The left may be environmentalists in theory but they are obsessing on things which are gong to be trivial in the end.

HALL OF SHAME:
-Short welched on a bet and should be shunned.
-Frequent-flyers should not cry crocodile-tears over climate-change.
asg70
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2999
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby Tanada » Fri 06 Dec 2019, 10:29:27

Michael Shellenberger wrote:Why Apocalyptic Claims About Climate Change Are Wrong

Environmental journalists and advocates have in recent weeks made a number of apocalyptic predictions about the impact of climate change. Bill McKibben suggested climate-driven fires in Australia had made koalas “functionally extinct.” Extinction Rebellion said “Billions will die” and “Life on Earth is dying.” Vice claimed the “collapse of civilization may have already begun.”

Few have underscored the threat more than student climate activist Greta Thunberg and Green New Deal sponsor Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The latter said, “The world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change.” Says Thunberg in her new book, “Around 2030 we will be in a position to set off an irreversible chain reaction beyond human control that will lead to the end of our civilization as we know it.”

Sometimes, scientists themselves make apocalyptic claims. “It’s difficult to see how we could accommodate a billion people or even half of that,” if Earth warms four degrees, said one earlier this year. “The potential for multi-breadbasket failure is increasing,” said another. If sea levels rise as much as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts, another scientist said, “It will be an unmanageable problem.”

Apocalyptic statements like these have real-world impacts. In September, a group of British psychologists said children are increasingly suffering from anxiety from the frightening discourse around climate change. In October, an activist with Extinction Rebellion (”XR”) — an environmental group founded in 2018 to commit civil disobedience to draw awareness to the threat its founders and supporters say climate change poses to human existence — and a videographer, were kicked and beaten in a London Tube station by angry commuters. And last week, an XR co-founder said a genocide like the Holocaust was “happening again, on a far greater scale, and in plain sight” from climate change.

Climate change is an issue I care passionately about and have dedicated a significant portion of my life to addressing. I have been politically active on the issue for over 20 years and have researched and written about it for 17 years. Over the last four years, my organization, Environmental Progress, has worked with some of the world’s leading climate scientists to prevent carbon emissions from rising. So far, we’ve helped prevent emissions increasing the equivalent of adding 24 million cars to the road.

I also care about getting the facts and science right and have in recent months corrected inaccurate and apocalyptic news media coverage of fires in the Amazon and fires in California, both of which have been improperly presented as resulting primarily from climate change.

Journalists and activists alike have an obligation to describe environmental problems honestly and accurately, even if they fear doing so will reduce their news value or salience with the public. There is good evidence that the catastrophist framing of climate change is self-defeating because it alienates and polarizes many people. And exaggerating climate change risks distracting us from other important issues including ones we might have more near-term control over.

I feel the need to say this up-front because I want the issues I’m about to raise to be taken seriously and not dismissed by those who label as “climate deniers” or “climate delayers” anyone who pushes back against exaggeration.

With that out of the way, let’s look whether the science supports what’s being said.

First, no credible scientific body has ever said climate change threatens the collapse of civilization much less the extinction of the human species. “‘Our children are going to die in the next 10 to 20 years.’ What’s the scientific basis for these claims?” BBC’s Andrew Neil asked a visibly uncomfortable XR spokesperson last month.

“These claims have been disputed, admittedly,” she said. “There are some scientists who are agreeing and some who are saying it’s not true. But the overall issue is that these deaths are going to happen.”

“But most scientists don’t agree with this,” said Neil. “I looked through IPCC reports and see no reference to billions of people going to die, or children in 20 years. How would they die?”

“Mass migration around the world already taking place due to prolonged drought in countries, particularly in South Asia. There are wildfires in Indonesia, the Amazon rainforest, Siberia, the Arctic,” she said.

But in saying so, the XR spokesperson had grossly misrepresented the science. “There is robust evidence of disasters displacing people worldwide,” notes IPCC, “but limited evidence that climate change or sea-level rise is the direct cause”

What about “mass migration”? “The majority of resultant population movements tend to occur within the borders of affected countries," says IPCC.

It’s not like climate doesn’t matter. It’s that climate change is outweighed by other factors. Earlier this year, researchers found that climate “has affected organized armed conflict within countries. However, other drivers, such as low socioeconomic development and low capabilities of the state, are judged to be substantially more influential.”

Last January, after climate scientists criticized Rep. Ocasio-Cortez for saying the world would end in 12 years, her spokesperson said "We can quibble about the phraseology, whether it's existential or cataclysmic.” He added, “We're seeing lots of [climate change-related] problems that are already impacting lives."

That last part may be true, but it’s also true that economic development has made us less vulnerable, which is why there was a 99.7% decline in the death toll from natural disasters since its peak in 1931.

In 1931, 3.7 million people died from natural disasters. In 2018, just 11,000 did. And that decline occurred over a period when the global population quadrupled.

What about sea level rise? IPCC estimates sea level could rise two feet (0.6 meters) by 2100. Does that sound apocalyptic or even “unmanageable”?

Consider that one-third of the Netherlands is below sea level, and some areas are seven meters below sea level. You might object that Netherlands is rich while Bangladesh is poor. But the Netherlands adapted to living below sea level 400 years ago. Technology has improved a bit since then.

What about claims of crop failure, famine, and mass death? That’s science fiction, not science. Humans today produce enough food for 10 billion people, or 25% more than we need, and scientific bodies predict increases in that share, not declines.

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) forecasts crop yields increasing 30% by 2050. And the poorest parts of the world, like sub-Saharan Africa, are expected to see increases of 80 to 90%.

Nobody is suggesting climate change won’t negatively impact crop yields. It could. But such declines should be put in perspective. Wheat yields increased 100 to 300% around the world since the 1960s, while a study of 30 models found that yields would decline by 6% for every one degree Celsius increase in temperature.

Rates of future yield growth depend far more on whether poor nations get access to tractors, irrigation, and fertilizer than on climate change, says FAO.

All of this helps explain why IPCC anticipates climate change will have a modest impact on economic growth. By 2100, IPCC projects the global economy will be 300 to 500% larger than it is today. Both IPCC and the Nobel-winning Yale economist, William Nordhaus, predict that warming of 2.5°C and 4°C would reduce gross domestic product (GDP) by 2% and 5% over that same period.

Does this mean we shouldn’t worry about climate change? Not at all.

One of the reasons I work on climate change is because I worry about the impact it could have on endangered species. Climate change may threaten one million species globally and half of all mammals, reptiles, and amphibians in diverse places like the Albertine Rift in central Africa, home to the endangered mountain gorilla.

But it’s not the case that “we’re putting our own survival in danger” through extinctions, as Elizabeth Kolbert claimed in her book, Sixth Extinction. As tragic as animal extinctions are, they do not threaten human civilization. If we want to save endangered species, we need to do so because we care about wildlife for spiritual, ethical, or aesthetic reasons, not survival ones.

And exaggerating the risk, and suggesting climate change is more important than things like habitat destruction, are counterproductive.

For example, Australia’s fires are not driving koalas extinct, as Bill McKibben suggested. The main scientific body that tracks the species, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, or IUCN, labels the koala “vulnerable,” which is one level less threatened than “endangered,” two levels less than “critically endangered,” and three less than “extinct” in the wild.

Should we worry about koalas? Absolutely! They are amazing animals and their numbers have declined to around 300,000. But they face far bigger threats such as the destruction of habitat, disease, bushfires, and invasive species.

Think of it this way. The climate could change dramatically — and we could still save koalas. Conversely, the climate could change only modestly — and koalas could still go extinct.

The monomaniacal focus on climate distracts our attention from other threats to koalas and opportunities for protecting them, like protecting and expanding their habitat.

As for fire, one of Australia’s leading scientists on the issue says, “Bushfire losses can be explained by the increasing exposure of dwellings to fire-prone bushlands. No other influences need be invoked. So even if climate change had played some small role in modulating recent bushfires, and we cannot rule this out, any such effects on risk to property are clearly swamped by the changes in exposure.”

Nor are the fires solely due to drought, which is common in Australia, and exceptional this year. “Climate change is playing its role here,” said Richard Thornton of the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre in Australia, “but it's not the cause of these fires."

The same is true for fires in the United States. In 2017, scientists modeled 37 different regions and found “humans may not only influence fire regimes but their presence can actually override, or swamp out, the effects of climate.” Of the 10 variables that influence fire, “none were as significant… as the anthropogenic variables,” such as building homes near, and managing fires and wood fuel growth within, forests.

Climate scientists are starting to push back against exaggerations by activists, journalists, and other scientists.

“While many species are threatened with extinction,” said Stanford’s Ken Caldeira, “climate change does not threaten human extinction... I would not like to see us motivating people to do the right thing by making them believe something that is false.”

I asked the Australian climate scientist Tom Wigley what he thought of the claim that climate change threatens civilization. “It really does bother me because it’s wrong,” he said. “All these young people have been misinformed. And partly it’s Greta Thunberg’s fault. Not deliberately. But she’s wrong.”

But don’t scientists and activists need to exaggerate in order to get the public’s attention?

“I’m reminded of what [late Stanford University climate scientist] Steve Schneider used to say,” Wigley replied. “He used to say that as a scientist, we shouldn’t really be concerned about the way we slant things in communicating with people out on the street who might need a little push in a certain direction to realize that this is a serious problem. Steve didn’t have any qualms about speaking in that biased way. I don’t quite agree with that.”

Wigley started working on climate science full-time in 1975 and created one of the first climate models (MAGICC) in 1987. It remains one of the main climate models in use today.

“When I talk to the general public,” he said, “I point out some of the things that might make projections of warming less and the things that might make them more. I always try to present both sides.”

Part of what bothers me about the apocalyptic rhetoric by climate activists is that it is often accompanied by demands that poor nations be denied the cheap sources of energy they need to develop. I have found that many scientists share my concerns.

“If you want to minimize carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in 2070 you might want to accelerate the burning of coal in India today,” MIT climate scientist Kerry Emanuel said.

“It doesn’t sound like it makes sense. Coal is terrible for carbon. But it’s by burning a lot of coal that they make themselves wealthier, and by making themselves wealthier they have fewer children, and you don’t have as many people burning carbon, you might be better off in 2070.”

Emanuel and Wigley say the extreme rhetoric is making political agreement on climate change harder.

“You’ve got to come up with some kind of middle ground where you do reasonable things to mitigate the risk and try at the same time to lift people out of poverty and make them more resilient,” said Emanuel. “We shouldn’t be forced to choose between lifting people out of poverty and doing something for the climate.”

Happily, there is a plenty of middle ground between climate apocalypse and climate denial.


LINK
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15569
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby asg70 » Fri 06 Dec 2019, 13:13:31

"no credible scientific body has ever said climate change threatens the collapse of civilization much less the extinction of the human species. "

That's BS, and largely revolves around the subjective term "credible".

Here is National Geographic, for instance:

https://youtu.be/O8qmaAMK4cM?t=39

There are many others like this. Here's one from Sky News:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWoiBpfvdx0

It's pretty clear that beyond a certain point, people are gonna die one way or another due to AGW.

HALL OF SHAME:
-Short welched on a bet and should be shunned.
-Frequent-flyers should not cry crocodile-tears over climate-change.
asg70
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2999
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 06 Dec 2019, 17:27:06

Why Apocalyptic Claims About Climate Change Are Wrong

“If you want to minimize carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in 2070 you might want to accelerate the burning of coal in India today,” MIT climate scientist Kerry Emanuel said.

“It doesn’t sound like it makes sense. Coal is terrible for carbon. But it’s by burning a lot of coal that they make themselves wealthier, and by making themselves wealthier they have fewer children, and you don’t have as many people burning carbon, you might be better off in 2070.”


MIT Climate scientist Kerry Emanuel is a moron, if thats actually what he said.

CO2 has a residence time of 700-1000 years in the atmosphere. Once coal is burned and the CO2 released into the atmosphere, it is going to stay there for hundreds of years.

Accelerating the burning of coal is just going to release more CO2 into the atmosphere even faster. There is no way that burning more coal results in less CO2 in the atmosphere.

Instead of encouraging India to burn more coal, the world should be penalizing India for burning more coal and pushing them to shift to wind and solar power and nuclear power, all of which release zero CO2.

SHEESH!

Cheers!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22863
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaption

Unread postby Newfie » Fri 06 Dec 2019, 18:27:01

AND adopting policies to limit population growth.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

PreviousNext

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

cron