Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

The climate disaters unfolding around the Earth are where we are at today. Today average global temperatures have risen by around 1.1C.
What happens when average global temperatures have increased by 1.5- 2 - 3 degrees C ?
This is the prognosis. Very uncomfortable reading.

‘Soon it will be unrecognisable’: total climate meltdown cannot be stopped, says expert

5150.jpg

Record high temperatures and extreme weather events are being recorded around the world. Photograph: Ian Logan/Getty Images
Blistering heatwaves are just the start. We must accept how bad things are before we can head off global catastrophe, according to a leading UK scientist

Robin McKie
Sat 30 Jul 2022 16.48 BSTLast modified on Sun 31 Jul 2022 05.10 BST


The publication of Bill McGuire’s latest book, Hothouse Earth, could not be more timely. Appearing in the shops this week, it will be perused by sweltering customers who have just endured record high temperatures across the UK and now face the prospect of weeks of drought to add to their discomfort.

And this is just the beginning, insists McGuire, who is emeritus professor of geophysical and climate hazards at University College London. As he makes clear in his uncompromising depiction of the coming climatic catastrophe, we have – for far too long – ignored explicit warnings that rising carbon emissions are dangerously heating the Earth. Now we are going to pay the price for our complacence in the form of storms, floods, droughts and heatwaves that will easily surpass current extremes.

The crucial point, he argues, is that there is now no chance of us avoiding a perilous, all-pervasive climate breakdown. We have passed the point of no return and can expect a future in which lethal heatwaves and temperatures in excess of 50C (120F) are common in the tropics; where summers at temperate latitudes will invariably be baking hot, and where our oceans are destined to become warm and acidic. “A child born in 2020 will face a far more hostile world that its grandparents did,” McGuire insists.

...“Just look at what is happening already to a world which has only heated up by just over one degree,” says McGuire. “It turns out the climate is changing for the worse far quicker than predicted by early climate models. That’s something that was never expected.”

 
@basilio would it work if Russia shuts off the gas to Europe right now and freeze millions to death in the coming winter and we stop all gas and coal exports, that would send a lot of third World and Asian countries into power crisis, which would probably increase the morbidity rate in those countries.
Does that sound like a plan to you, because it would work, the population would reduce and there would be a massive and decisive reduction in pollution.
You probably think that is radical, but everything you post up requires radical action and even then they state it wont help.
So posting every depressing article of the imminent climate doom, doesn't achieve much, other than depress people further. :xyxthumbs
Maybe you could intersperse some uplifting articles, to lighten the mood somewhat and try to persuade people that all is not lost. ?
 
@basilio would it work if Russia shuts off the gas to Europe right now and freeze millions to death in the coming winter and we stop all gas and coal exports, that would send a lot of third World and Asian countries into power crisis, which would probably increase the morbidity rate in those countries.
Does that sound like a plan to you, because it would work, the population would reduce and there would be a massive and decisive reduction in pollution.
You probably think that is radical, but everything you post up requires radical action and even then they state it wont help.
So posting every depressing article of the imminent climate doom, doesn't achieve much, other than depress people further. :xyxthumbs
Maybe you could intersperse some uplifting articles, to lighten the mood somewhat and try to persuade people that all is not lost. ?

That's a really thought provoking observation SP. Your quite right about the brutality and consequences of such a course of action. And it would "work", as you point out, at a horrendous cost.

So where do we go from here ? If you read the whole article there is an attempt to throw in some "good" news. The "good" news, essentially, is that perhaps (?) this sort of direct frankness about what is unfolding might (?) start a massive effort to reduce CO2 emissionsand start up other programs that might (?) turn an unmitigated catastrophe into a very serious but survivable problem. There is your hope - as slim as it is.

I don't like these disaster scenarios one little bit. They drove me around the bend and over a cliff years ago and for sheer self preservation I decided to not focus too much on the very real real science and look for ways and means to make worthwhile contributions to tackling the issue. Realistically it has been the equivalent of emptying an ocean with a glass tumbler.

I have posted many "good news" stories on ASF. I'm keenly aware of the effects of climate despair and have tried to present technologies, practices and policies that could turn the tide so to speak. They do exist. However Bill McGuire is just pointing out that we are now so far down the road of global warming it is impossible to avoid quite devastating outcomes. Only a monumental effort might contain the consequences to a level that allows human civilization to continue in it's current form. Unfortunately he only saying out loud what every climate scientist understands is happening. :(
 
That's a really thought provoking observation SP. Your quite right about the brutality and consequences of such a course of action. And it would "work", as you point out, at a horrendous cost.

So where do we go from here ? If you read the whole article there is an attempt to throw in some "good" news. The "good" news, essentially, is that perhaps (?) this sort of direct frankness about what is unfolding might (?) start a massive effort to reduce CO2 emissionsand start up other programs that might (?) turn an unmitigated catastrophe into a very serious but survivable problem. There is your hope - as slim as it is.

I don't like these disaster scenarios one little bit. They drove me around the bend and over a cliff years ago and for sheer self preservation I decided to not focus too much on the very real real science and look for ways and means to make worthwhile contributions to tackling the issue. Realistically it has been the equivalent of emptying an ocean with a glass tumbler.

I have posted many "good news" stories on ASF. I'm keenly aware of the effects of climate despair and have tried to present technologies, practices and policies that could turn the tide so to speak. They do exist. However Bill McGuire is just pointing out that we are now so far down the road of global warming it is impossible to avoid quite devastating outcomes. Only a monumental effort might contain the consequences to a level that allows human civilization to continue in it's current form. Unfortunately he only saying out loud what every climate scientist understands is happening. :(
It ain't going to happen any time soon, with the war in Russia causing a re commissioning of coal generation in europe and with China already committing to 100 new coal fired power stations, nothing is going to happen in the short term.
As for Australia we are soldiering on, but even when we stop all carbon emissions it will only reduce the total World emissions by less than 2%, but every little bit helps. :xyxthumbs
By the way have you ordered an electric car yet?
 
There is a huge amount of available space over existing highways, that would reduce the requirement to deploy solar panels over native habitat, or arable land IMO.
I would rather see taxpayers money spent on covering highways with solar panels and tapping off charging stations, than subsidising power generators to denude land to put in solar farms.
How the Govt can say we are losing flora and fauna at an increasing rate and not thinking about the ramifications of mass solar farms is beyond me.
 
There is a huge amount of available space over existing highways, that would reduce the requirement to deploy solar panels over native habitat, or arable land IMO.
I would rather see taxpayers money spent on covering highways with solar panels and tapping off charging stations, than subsidising power generators to denude land to put in solar farms.
How the Govt can say we are losing flora and fauna at an increasing rate and not thinking about the ramifications of mass solar farms is beyond me.
I don't believe this makes sense in so many ways.
The article itself points out that the cost of building over a roadway is substantially more than building on "normal" sites.

Also solar farms are not going to be put on prime or even secondary agricultural land. The economics don't make sense. Quality arable land offers far more return for growing crops rather than solar power.

The development of solar farms on marginal properties can actually improve farming and environment outcomes. It can also be used on higher quality arable areas to improve productivity. We have highlighted many examples of solar/farming hybrid models on ASF.

But having said that there is a legitimate question about very narrow based solar farms being built on prime agricultural land .



 
Australian native animals losing their habitat at a world leading pace.


Ecologists say clearing of land is the leading cause in the loss of native species.


But who cares, eh Bas.

As for growing crops under solar panels, I'm sceptical. Maybe some niche produce, but I cant see it being a useful addition to farming, other than in areas of extremely high temps, where nothing grows currently.
But It will be great if it does prove to be a bonus, time will tell, I've seen some very large solar installations in Japan, the only thing growing under them were weeds and problem saplings.
 
Last edited:
Australian native animals losing their habitat at a world leading pace.


Ecologists say clearing of land is the leading cause in the loss of native species.


But who cares, eh Bas.

As for growing crops under solar panels, I'm sceptical. Maybe some niche produce, but I cant see it being a useful addition to farming, other than in areas of extremely high temps, where nothing grows currently.
But It will be great if it does prove to be a bonus, time will tell, I've seen some very large solar installations in Japan, the only thing growing under them were weeds and problem saplings.
So you put in sheep or goats. Enough shade to keep them happy and they keep down the weeds.
And the loss of environment ? Absolutely a problem but the driving reason is commercial farming
 
So you put in sheep or goats. Enough shade to keep them happy and they keep down the weeds.
And the loss of environment ? Absolutely a problem but the driving reason is commercial farming
I'm more concerned about the massive solar farms that are going to go in the North, to supply power and hydrogen to overseas buyers, for very little benefit for Australia as it will be like the gas we export, the net benefit to us in miniscule when you compare it to what the middle East earns. Yet the cost to us ecologically could be huge.
I know that this is the way we have to and are going, but as per usual we seem to be approaching it as we do with mining, just let the companies do as they like and we collect the crumbs off the table.
Putting in solar wind farms in and around the Riverina area and central Queensland can't be avoided, as they are the obvious areas to locate them to supply the East coast grid, same as the great dividing range, Victorian alps and Tasmania will require more dams.
But as I said when the mega solar farms in the Northern Territory and Northern W.A were announced, there is scant information as to what financial benefit Australia gains other than the wages and construction jobs, which is normal for us and why we get exploited so badly.
But I think it will come home to bite us on the butt, when the ecological/cultural fall out happens and we are tagged as ecological vandals.
Unless we get proper compensation for the land use, we will wear the cost of compensation for the damage it causes and I believe their will be compensation costs involved down the track.
Time will tell.:cool:
 
France is facing the most severe drought in its history. Apart from the effects of a record heat wave on people and the environment, drinking water is now unavailable in 100 municipalities.

On the energy front Frances nuclear power stations are also under pressure because river water is now becoming too hot.

France is facing its 'most severe drought' ever, PM to activate government crisis unit

Posted 4h ago4 hours ago
&cropW=2109&xPos=222&yPos=240&width=862&height=485.jpg

The country is facing its third heatwave of the summer. (Reuters: Pascal Rossignol)
Help keep family & friends informed by sharing this article



French Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne has warned France is facing its "most severe drought" on record, announcing the activation of a government crisis unit.

Key points:​

  • The government's crisis unit will monitor the drought in the hardest-hit areas and coordinate measures like supplying drinking water
  • More than 100 municipalities are not able to provide drinking water to the tap anymore
  • A heatwave is expected to continue for 15 days, which the PM says will worsen the already "historic situation"
 
More detail on the current drought in France and its effects across the country.
This is happening with global temperatures only 1.1 C above our previous normal levels.

Water restrictions in force across France as drought threatens crop production

1659771947939.png


Issued on: 02/08/2022 - 12:14Modified: 02/08/2022 - 12:20

The remains of a fish lies on the parched Loire River bed at Ancenis, western France. The country is battling with the consequences of a third heatwave in less than 2 months, with water restrictions hampering agricultural production. AFP - SEBASTIEN SALOM-GOMIS

2 min
Drought and a succession of three heat waves since June – attributed by scientific consensus to climate change - have severely reduced river flows across France, multiplying water restriction measures, directly affecting agricultural production.

Across the fields of France, crops are suffering from heat and drought, with water restrictions worrying the farming community, especially with regard to corn production, which has already been hit hard by the record-breaking temperatures.

With just 9.7 millimetres of rain in July according to weather service Météo France, rainfall over the past four weeks was 84 percent down on average figures for July over the past three decades.

The French drought has hampered agriculture and force widespread restrictions on the use of freshwater.

The cumulative effects of drought and the lack of water are occurring during the pollination of corn – a crucial period for the crop’s development.

 

Attachments

  • 1659771850575.gif
    1659771850575.gif
    42 bytes · Views: 4
Wow this makes sense


and to pay for it


Hmmm seems the bean counters thought that one through :thumbsdown:

I must admit to not being any sort of expert on carbon credits but not sure how it could stack up.

Not sure if there is a Carbon Credit thread but I would be interested to learn.



bux
 
Wow this makes sense


and to pay for it


Hmmm seems the bean counters thought that one through :thumbsdown:

I must admit to not being any sort of expert on carbon credits but not sure how it could stack up.

Not sure if there is a Carbon Credit thread but I would be interested to learn.



bux
The Pacific islands should be fully renewables IMO, there wont be a large load.
How to pay for it was in the article by the Guardian, you posted, $1.2 billion isn't a lot on a global scale.
“Today, Vanuatu is calling for the establishment of a new loss-and-damage finance facility at the UN. To be an effective ally to the Pacific on climate action, Australia should support a new loss-and-damage finance facility.”
 
Bad luck kids. We dropped the ball. Sorry.
Our excuse is that we had two many dumbfcks that believe everything they are told.


Yup. The ball was dropped many years ago. The International Panel on Climate Change was established in 1988 so there has been ample warning.
 
Top