• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories

[Continuation] Global warming discussion V

A new report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) finds that the world may warm by 1.5°C by the early 2030s, much earlier than previously estimated. It’s terrible news for the Pacific. With temperatures rising above 1.5°C, Pacific communities are likely to experience increasingly devastating climate change impacts.

The key takeaway from the IPCC report is that the more we know, the worse it looks. The planet is now already between 0.8°C and 1.3°C warmer than in pre-industrial times – moving frighteningly close to the 1.5°C threshold.
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-a-decade-thats-terrible-news-for-the-pacific
 
macdoc said:
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-a-decade-thats-terrible-news-for-the-pacific
Click to expand...
Don't be so sure. This article from RealClimate

We are not reaching 1.5ºC earlier than previously thought

Basically to sum it up, we are actually pretty close to the models. The main difference is the relative certainty. Confidence is increasing as the new data comes in.

Probably this means the "lukewarmers" who were looking through rose colored glasses can't really do that anymore without being in complete denial, but as far as the models go, most are still right on track, certainly the average.
 
Amid the abundance of abysmal readings and projections from the latest global climate report was one frightening forecast that didn’t make the cut.

In the run-up to the release on Monday of the latest instalment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was a leaked prediction that the Six Assessment Report (AR6) would bring forward the time the planet crossed 1.5 degrees by a decade to the early 2030s.
Click to expand...
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/...or-1-5-degrees-got-nixed-20210809-p58h6t.html

I'm not in the least optimistic given the pace of change in the last decade and especially with the fires and methane increase. It got nixed for political reasons...you can draw your own conclusions.
The acceleration is easy to see.

https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2021/08/weather/antarctica-climate-change-cnnphotos/
 
Last edited:
Germany is opening new coal mines:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics...-laschet-balloon-climate-protest-germany.html

An Armin Laschet balloon in Luetzerath, Germany, where climate activists gathered on Aug. 7 to protest the planned demolition of two villages to make way for the expansion of the nearby Garzweiler open-pit coal mine.
Click to expand...
The balloon was used in other climate protests throughout the summer, which brings us to this week’s photo, taken on Aug. 7. That day, thousands of people gathered in Luetzerath—also located in Laschet’s state, which was recently hit by deadly flooding—to form a 2.5-mile human chain between that village and the neighboring village of Keyenberg. The reason? Both areas are set to be bulldozed to make way for new coal mines, with the approval of the CDU-led government.
Click to expand...

I think this is a consequence of Germany's decision to phase out nuclear energy. If they had nuclear power, they wouldn't need to be expanding open-pit coal mines and bulldozing villages to do it.
 
Rain fell at the normally snowy summit of Greenland for the first time on record
By Rachel Ramirez, CNN
Updated 1927 GMT (0327 HKT) August 19, 2021
Click to expand...

210819115436-greenland-icecap-0828-file-restricted-exlarge-169.jpg

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/weather/greenland-summit-rain-climate-change/index.html
 
July 2021 was the warmest July on record.
Eight of the largest fires have occurred in the last four years.

James Hansen reports that
Abstract. Global surface temperature in 2020 was in a virtual dead-heat with 2016 for warmest
year in the period of instrumental data in the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) analysis.
The rate of global warming has accelerated in the past several years. The 2020 global temperature
was +1.3°C (~2.3°F) warmer than in the 1880-1920 base period; global temperature in that base period is a reasonable estimate of ‘pre-industrial’ temperature. The six warmest years in the GISS record all occur in the past six years, and the 10 warmest years are all in the 21st century. Growth rates of the greenhouse gases driving global warming are increasing, not declining.

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2021/20210114_Temperature2020.pdf

The fires in Siberia are larger than all the other fires around the world combined. Some will remember the 2000 methane pingos found in Siberia years ago

Leaking pingos 'can explode under the sea in the Arctic, as well as on land'

https://siberiantimes.com/science/c...der-the-sea-in-the-arctic-as-well-as-on-land/
 
Last edited:
This surely isn't a novel idea, but I'm finding the whole experience of the complete failure of the US to deal with the problems of covid to be a very dark foreshadowing of the whole climate crisis.

Even now, as delta variant rips through country leaving piles of bodies, the right wing is digging in deeper and deeper into covid denialism. Their response to failure is to double down on destructive policies and become increasingly bloodthirsty. The failure of the right wing's response to covid is immediately and obviously observable, and yet they do not change tact. If they can't see the error of their ways even as it kills them painfully and slowly, there is 0 chance they can deal with something more abstract and complicated like climate change.

Even if there is a technological solution provided to deal with the coming climate catastrophe, I very much doubt there is going to be the sufficient collective will to actually implement any solution. The right wing will gleefully speed along our demise.

It is becoming increasingly clear that political dysfunction is going to be the key barrier to dealing with climate catastrophe, and I see no reason to expect a resolution to this problem.
 
Last edited:
The Atheist said:
This is pure gold:

Fossil fuel firms sue governments across the world for £13bn as climate policies threaten profits
Click to expand...
Where you see 'pure gold', I see a government that needs to do a better job of handling policy changes. Sometimes contracts should be broken, but not without appropriate compensation. With large changes there are bound to be unforeseen issues, and the government should be ready to deal with them without it getting to the courts.

But this kind of thing is not unique to climate change measures, it happens all the time because the politicians who are aware of the issues are usually in the pockets of industry and so aren't interested in making big changes, leaving it to those who are not aware to make them.

Two on the same day - I can't work out which is funnier: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-58600723
Click to expand...
Despite all the promises to take action, the world is still on course to heat up to dangerous levels.

That's the latest blunt assessment of the United Nations.

Its experts have studied the climate plans of more than 100 countries and concluded that we're heading in the wrong direction.

Scientists recently confirmed that to avoid the worst impacts of hotter conditions, global carbon emissions needed to be cut by 45% by 2030.

But this new analysis shows that those emissions are set to rise by 16% during this period.
Click to expand...
Not sure why you think that is funny.

It was entirely predictable of course. Yes, we need to take radical action, but it can't be done overnight, and it takes time for people to get onboard. The sad truth is that most people need to have their noses rubbed in it a bit before they see it. Until the effects of global warming start to become dire we can expect action to be slow - and dire they will become. This is no laughing matter.

But action is happening, and when we reach the mitigation 'tipping point' it will be quite rapid. Some say it's too late, but I don't believe that. Sure things will be worse than if we had started 20 years ago, but technology - and sentiment - has advanced in those 20 years. Right now many of us are still skeptical about whether certain measures will work, but in another 10 years (when they are a part of our lives) we may wonder why we were. renewable energy sources, electric cars, hydrogen powered planes and ships, better land use etc. will all be familiar and accepted. By 2030 we should start to see real improvement, and I bet the situation will not be as dire as predicted.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
By 2030 we should start to see real improvement, and I bet the situation will not be as dire as predicted.
Click to expand...

We can certainly hope so. It's not even close to a given, unfortunately, though. Another Republican President, for example, would be likely to set back efforts in the US and around the world (because the US really does wield influence directly and indirectly) quite significantly. Similarly, China could likely undermine quite a bit, both domestically in China and around the world, should Xi make some unfortunate decisions that I don't think would be at all surprising.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
Not sure why you think that is funny.
Click to expand...

I believe some people expected a different result. I imagine they hadn't met many humans.

Roger Ramjets said:
Until the effects of global warming start to become dire we can expect action to be slow - and dire they will become.
Click to expand...

And by then, it will almost certainly be too late.

Roger Ramjets said:
This is no laughing matter.
Click to expand...

You don't the conflict between a species that can unlock the secrets of subatomic particles while undertaking inter-planetary exploration simultaneously being so ******* stupid they've **** in their own nest to the point of destroying it is funny?

I sure do.

Roger Ramjets said:
By 2030 we should start to see real improvement, and I bet the situation will not be as dire as predicted.
Click to expand...

I'll take that bet.

Name a suitable prize. I'll put a stake down and say 2030 emissions will be more than they are right now.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
This surely isn't a novel idea, but I'm finding the whole experience of the complete failure of the US to deal with the problems of covid to be a very dark foreshadowing of the whole climate crisis.

Even now, as delta variant rips through country leaving piles of bodies, the right wing is digging in deeper and deeper into covid denialism. Their response to failure is to double down on destructive policies and become increasingly bloodthirsty. The failure of the right wing's response to covid is immediately and obviously observable, and yet they do not change tact. If they can't see the error of their ways even as it kills them painfully and slowly, there is 0 chance they can deal with something more abstract and complicated like climate change.

Even if there is a technological solution provided to deal with the coming climate catastrophe, I very much doubt there is going to be the sufficient collective will to actually implement any solution. The right wing will gleefully speed along our demise.

It is becoming increasingly clear that political dysfunction is going to be the key barrier to dealing with climate catastrophe, and I see no reason to expect a resolution to this problem.
Click to expand...

Given that we've know about Climate change since the 1980's this should be the other way around. The failures to act on climate change foreshadowed the failures of Covid, and indeed show us that the US is no longer capable of dealing with any real crisis.
 
"Until China takes the climate seriously, nothing we do is going to help!"

:rolleyes:

China will no longer fund coal projects abroad, President Xi Jinping pledges at the UN General Assembly

China will stop funding coal projects overseas, Chinese President Xi Jinping has announced, all but ending the flow of public aid for the dirty energy contributing to the climate crisis.

Mr Xi made his announcement at the UN General Assembly where US President Joe Biden, seeking to show leadership in a growing competition with China, promised to double Washington's contribution to countries hardest hit by climate change.

China is still investing in coal, reducing the impact of Mr Xi's commitment, but it is by far the largest funder of coal projects in developing countries such as Indonesia, Vietnam and Bangladesh as it goes on a global infrastructure-building blitz with its Belt and Road Initiative.

Mr Xi has vowed to accelerate efforts for China, the world's largest emitter, to go carbon neutral by 2060.
Click to expand...
 
"the right wing is digging in deeper and deeper into covid denialism"

I wondered why the GOP was so supportive of Trump becoming a dictator and as usual it's probably a follow the money thing. Could they be getting substantial payouts from the 1.5 trillion dollars that Trump handed off mostly to the rich? Think of the billions of dollars of fossil fuel profits that could continue to be earned under the control of an American dictator as apposed to a government that wants to fight climate change.
 
Last edited:
Louden Wilde said:
Yeah - I don't think human impact on the ecosystem (via climate change, pollution) gets enough coverage.
Click to expand...

It's a difficult thing to sell, not helped by a lot of the media coverage - and Al Gore - at the start of the hard sell, being very badly done.

Covid's been an excellent learning curve - if we can't deal with an immediate threat, what chance is there of dealing with one in the far future. My suspicion for years has been that by the time people accept the need to change, it will already be far too late.

We may have even passed that point.
 
I don't think human impact on the ecosystem (via climate change, pollution) gets enough coverage.

The media companies are businesses the make money by attracting the largest viewership possible so advertisers will pay more for commercial slots. People didn't want to hear about climate change out of fear or for other types of motivated reasoning so that would hurt the companies bottom line.
When I was younger I used to believe that the news media was out to help society.

Fox News has been ripping North America apart and the owners live in Australia.
 
A recent post from James Hansen claims that not only has climate change accelerated in the last five or six years but there is now an extra source of warming that can't be explained by GHG forcings.

Climate change is now happening "Faster than expected" on steroids.
 
Warmer1 said:
A recent post from James Hansen claims that not only has climate change accelerated in the last five or six years but there is now an extra source of warming that can't be explained by GHG forcings.

Climate change is now happening "Faster than expected" on steroids.
Click to expand...

Plenty of climate scientists have a good explanation: because of the tremendous backlash against their predictions over the decades, the constant accusations of fear mongering, scientists have tended to publish the lower, not upper end of the predictions of their models when it comes to climate change.
 
Under reporting has been the norm for a long time, as was the pace of climate change, and the IPCC takes a lot of heat for being too conservative but they won't report things that are too uncertain. These recent recording are different. There has been an acceleration from the long term trend line and there are additional changes that are also increasing the global temperature (clouds ?).

I am working 13 hours a day and don't have time to log into Columbia University's website to drag out that article but as for you claim that political organizations are being too conservative James Hansen writes "The bad news: we approach the gas bag season – the next Conference of the Parties (COP26) is scheduled for November 1-12. Gas bag politicians won’t show you the data that matter because that would reveal their miserable performances. Instead, they set climate goals for their children while adopting no polices that would give such goals a chance. Some of them may have been honestly duped about the science and engineering, but many must be blatant hypocrites."
 
Last edited:
If we have to resort to geoengineering there will be mass opposition from the chemtrail kooks, but totally reasonable folks may side with them in opposing certain projects, like cloud seeding.

It's looking desperate.
 
Warmer1 said:
y.

Fox News has been ripping North America apart and the owners live in Australia.
Click to expand...

Yep, Murdoch. He is toxic. Has had a lesser effect in the UK from newspapers and TV channels. I've seen Fox. No way could you get away with such bias in the UK on TV. The BBC is supposedly neutral. Funded by licence payers. It produces some stunning science programs. Including by everybody's darling, David Attenborough. Who is certainly convinced of AGW. Most of the other major broadcasters don't get into science. News is just news. It isn't opinion. Even the right wing written press here daren't go too far in the direction of Fox. Americans might buy that crap, but pretty much all sides of the political divide here believe AGW is a thing. Ditto in Australia and NZ. And Canada, I assume.
Either the US public is far better educated than everywhere else, and are right to believe the rubbish promoted by the likes of Fox, or they aren't. And just believe any old crap told to them by media outlets.
I know what I think.

And that isn't even getting into the science.
 
In the Murduck speak with forked tongue ...his staff in Australia have to be full vaxxed but he allows the anti-vax idjits full reign in his rags.

So much push back in Australia on his climate crap that

Murdoch Outlets in Australia Plan Reversal on Climate Change https://www.businessinsider.com › Politics › Media
7 Sept 2021 — After decades of dismissing the scientific consensus behind climate change and attacking carbon reduction measures, news outlets owned by Rupert Murdoch in ...
Click to expand...
 
some help

Google prohibits ads that promote or make money from climate change denial

Ban applies to claims that climate change is a hoax, content that denies human activity contributes

The Associated Press · Posted: Oct 08, 2021 11:15 AM ET | Last Updated: October 9

A woman walks below a Google sign on the campus in Mountain View, Calif. On Thursday, the company announced it will restrict digital ads that promote false climate change claims, hoping to stop those making such claims from profiting from them and limit the spread of misinformation on its platform. (Jeff Chiu/The Associated Press)
Google is cracking down on digital ads that promote the idea that climate change is a hoax or make money from that kind of content, hoping to limit revenue for climate change deniers and stop the spread of misinformation on its platforms.

The company said in a blog post on Thursday, Oct. 7 that the new policy will also apply to YouTube, which last week announced a sweeping crackdown of vaccine misinformation.
Click to expand...
more
https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/google-bans-ads-denying-climate-change-1.6204593
 
jonesdave116 said:
Yep, Murdoch. He is toxic. Has had a lesser effect in the UK from newspapers and TV channels. I've seen Fox. No way could you get away with such bias in the UK on TV. The BBC is supposedly neutral. Funded by licence payers. It produces some stunning science programs. Including by everybody's darling, David Attenborough. Who is certainly convinced of AGW. Most of the other major broadcasters don't get into science. News is just news. It isn't opinion. Even the right wing written press here daren't go too far in the direction of Fox. Americans might buy that crap, but pretty much all sides of the political divide here believe AGW is a thing. Ditto in Australia and NZ. And Canada, I assume.
Either the US public is far better educated than everywhere else, and are right to believe the rubbish promoted by the likes of Fox, or they aren't. And just believe any old crap told to them by media outlets.
I know what I think.

And that isn't even getting into the science.
Click to expand...

The fact that Brexit is a thing says otherwise. The right wing in the UK wanted out of the EU so they would no longer have to follow EU rules on issues like climate change, and you can expect meaningful climate action in the UK to stop now.
 
lomiller said:
The right wing in the UK wanted out of the EU so they would no longer have to follow EU rules on issues like climate change, and you can expect meaningful climate action in the UK to stop now.
Click to expand...
Perhaps not 'meaningful', but...

UK car sales plunge but electric vehicles soar to record amid fuel crisis
The number of electric cars sold in the UK last month neared the figures for the whole of 2019, with panic-buying at the petrol pumps expected to accelerate consumer appetite to switch to cleaner vehicles.

Nearly 33,000 pure electric cars were registered in a record month for EVs, almost 50% more than last year, as sales of new cars otherwise tumbled to the weakest September total for more than two decades...

Battery-powered cars took a record slice of the new car market in a month that ended with fuel supply issues dominating the news, as motorists struggled to find petrol or diesel to fill their tanks. About 15% of new cars sold were pure electric, up from 11% in August...

Jamie Hamilton, automotive director at Deloitte, added: “The inconvenience of long queues and empty pumps has jump-started many motorists to explore the switch to electric.”
Click to expand...

Unintended consequences aren't always a bad thing. Leaving the EU precipitated a fuel crisis, which caused more people to see the advantages of electric cars. So instead of stopping climate action, leaving the EU is accelerating it!
 
I see Norway is the country getting to zero carbon first.
This country of 5 million has 1 trillion euros in the bank, and I am wondering where that money came from, not.
This highlights the absurdity of looking for carbon zero in a timely fashion.
 
Initially from oil and gas but they have translated that in 2% of the world's equity.
Not sure why you have a problem with that?
DO you expect them to stop extracting a commodity that still has a likely 30 year life and perhaps may be increasing in value as supply tightens.

We are not getting to carbon neutral without extacting carbon from the atmosphere as well as reducing emmissions.

Norway has started work on Project Longship, a €1.7 billion project that could bury vast amounts of captured carbon under the North Sea in an effort to slow climate change. Named Project Longship, the initiative will involve injecting carbon dioxide captured from factory emissions in depleted oil and gas fields.
Click to expand...
 
Anthropogenic Climate Change

Perhaps I've missed it somewhere. I have been away for a while so I apologize if so, but shouldn't there be a sub topic on AGW here of all places?

I invite those with at least a high school science education to try to educate the professional science deniers at CFACT.ORG and other Trumpist websites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom