Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

[Sean K]

Why do I write in this thread ? Why do I challenge the relentless barrage of climate change denial that never seems to cease regardless of what is happening around the world ? What exactly will my contributions to this conversation do to make any difference to global warming ?

Fair questions.

Firstly regardless of what anyone else here (including me) says, or denies or trashes, rapid human caused global warming is happening. It's written in the ever escalating temperatures, the effects on ecosytems, sea levels, melting ice caps, extreme fire events the lot. However for 40 years, despite all the science and then the clear effects of this increase in global temperatures, a range of actors have undermined public response to this crisis.

They have attacked the science. They have disputed the meteorologists. They have recreated history to pretend current temperatures are not that severe. They trashed the scientists. Then they went after any citizens who accepted the scientific evidence and accused them of being alarmists and of course "hypocrites" . And all the time we are watching the world getting hotting and hotter with consequences that are already ranging from dangerous to catastrophic.

Any solution or solutions can only come with widespread public support of massive changes to our infrastructure as well as widespread adaptations to where we live and how we protect ourselves in an increasingly difficult climate. Realistically one of the biggest challenges of global warming will be the rising sea levels caused by warming oceans and melting ice caps.

How is public support created or destroyed ? Destroying it is done post by post around the word by people who echo the memes, the mocking, the false science and derision that we see on threads like this in ASF. Creating it is building a citizen community that acknowledges the reality of what is happening and and giving support to leaders who bite the bullet on the problem and look for best value solutions

ASF is a hostile environment for conversation about CC. It is largely a forum of fairly conservative investors. That doesn't mean all those people think CC is a hoax or a socialist ploy or really overrated. But they are also aware of the numbers. They realise that mounting any CC argument here is a short trip to getting accused of being a hypocrite, an alarmist, a socialist, or some other tag that never ever looks at discussing reality but aims to destroy the messenger.

However I believe ASF is an important forum of public debate and influence. In that context I'm prepared to highlight the factual elements of what is happening with global warming as well as promoting some of the solutions/adaptations.

What is interesting at the moment is that finally the economic arguments around the (possible) solutions to CC are becoming very obvious. Renewable energy is cheaper, cleaner and better value than fossil fuels. Protecting our environment makes sense if only to see the Great Barrier Reef stay alive. I had hoped that this economic reality might change some of the discourse. Maybe it has .

Fair enough. But what's the best thing we can do now, if it's unstoppable?

Are you just trying to make people think it's real so that mitigation can be put in place?

Or, are you after increased expenditure on technological solutions such as carbon capture, hydrogen, or thorium reactors, for eg?

All of that still won't matter to us now though. Chindia won't stop spewing out CO2 until 2060 and it doesn't look like they're decreasing emissions that much.

 

[basilio]

Fair enough. But what's the best thing we can do now, if it's unstoppable?

Are you just trying to make people think it's real so that mitigation can be put in place?

Or, are you after increased expenditure on technological solutions such as carbon capture, hydrogen, or thorium reactors, for eg?

All of that still won't matter to us now though. Chindia won't stop spewing out CO2 until 2060 and it doesn't look like they're decreasing emissions that much.

View attachment 156170

The best things we can do now ?
1) Acknowledge the very dangerous situation we are in instead of pretending its either not that bad, or a scam or totally beyond our control.
2) Realise and recognise there will have to be rapid momentous decisions and actions made across a multitude of areas if we are to somehow get through all this. 25-35 years an orderly winding down of CO2 emissions with a ramp up of clean renewable energy may have been sufficient to stop global warming with only limited damage. That boat has sailed

3) Take this belief into our social networks and challenge our political leaders to be bold in their actions on CC.

4) Expect good value decisions about how we go about reducing emissions and mitigating outcomes of a warming planet. In that context the carbon capture proposed by fossil fuel companies is an expensive hoax. Thorium reactors will not offer a solution to reducing GG emissions inside the critical time span of the next 10-20 years ( If we somehow manage to turn the corner by 2040 then cost effective thorium reactors might make sense - in some circumstances)

This analysis has been done by thousands of scientists and engineers from across the world. The IPCC put the picture together in March this year. This tells the story of what we have to do to have any sort of chance of working our way out of this mess.

‘It can be done. It must be done’: IPCC delivers definitive climate change report

The world is in deep trouble on climate change, but if we really put our shoulder to the wheel we can turn things around. Loosely, that’s the essence of today’s report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

www.australiangeographic.com.au

 

[wayneL]

The best things we can do now ?
1) Acknowledge the very dangerous situation we are in instead of pretending its either not that bad, or a scam or totally beyond our control.
2) Realise and recognise there will have to be rapid momentous decisions and actions made across a multitude of areas if we are to somehow get through all this. 25-35 years an orderly winding down of CO2 emissions with a ramp up of clean renewable energy may have been sufficient to stop global warming with only limited damage. That boat has sailed

3) Take this belief into our social networks and challenge our political leaders to be bold in their actions on CC.

4) Expect good value decisions about how we go about reducing emissions and mitigating outcomes of a warming planet. In that context the carbon capture proposed by fossil fuel companies is an expensive hoax. Thorium reactors will not offer a solution to reducing GG emissions inside the critical time span of the next 10-20 years ( If we somehow manage to turn the corner by 2040 then cost effective thorium reactors might make sense - in some circumstances)

This analysis has been done by thousands of scientists and engineers from across the world. The IPCC put the picture together in March this year. This tells the story of what we have to do to have any sort of chance of working our way out of this mess.

‘It can be done. It must be done’: IPCC delivers definitive climate change report

The world is in deep trouble on climate change, but if we really put our shoulder to the wheel we can turn things around. Loosely, that’s the essence of today’s report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

www.australiangeographic.com.au

*Who* is expected to do all this?

The Chinese?

The Indians?

The Japs?

Or is it just us expected to destroy ourselves?

 

[basilio]

 

[SirRumpole]

*Who* is expected to do all this?

The Chinese?

The Indians?

The Japs?

Or is it just us expected to destroy ourselves?

I think we should do our bit, fossil fuels won't last forever and will continuously rise in price, so "destroying ourselves" may well be to stay with coal and gas and not moving to cheaper forms of energy.

I has to be done with a plan as I've been saying for a long time. Imo governments have to get back into energy production and distribution and not just leave it to the private sector otherwise one monopoly will replace another.

But yes, continual harassment of countries like Australia to do more while ignoring the elephants in the room doesn't cut it if people want to reduce the vast bulk of GG emmissions.

 

[basilio]

But yes, continual harassment of countries like Australia to do more while ignoring the elephants in the room doesn't cut it if people want to reduce the vast bulk of GG emmissions.

Rumpy this issue has not just happened in the last couple of years. Yes there is a need to also reduce emissions in India and China. But the reality is that a very large amount of those emissions are simply the industrial plant that has been transferred to China to produce Western goods.

I suggest the process of pointing to India and China is just a deflection tactic that does not engage in the issue of how quickly we can make essential changes and then bring pressure to bear elsewhere.

The West has not, in total, taken anywhere near the steps necessary to reduce GG emissions.So saying "its all their fault" is neither helpful or accurate.

 

[SirRumpole]

Rumpy this issue has not just happened in the last couple of years. Yes there is a need to also reduce emissions in India and China. But the reality is that a very large amount of those emissions are simply the industrial plant that has been transferred to China to produce Western goods.

I suggest the process of pointing to India and China is just a deflection tactic that does not engage in the issue of how quickly we can make essential changes and then bring pressure to bear elsewhere.

The West has not, in total, taken anywhere near the steps necessary to reduce GG emissions.So saying "its all their fault" is neither helpful or accurate.

Well if you think we should pull manufacturing out of China and use our own 'energy efficient' power sources I totally agree, if we had some of those.

 

[basilio]

Things are heating up on the CC front.

April Mediterranean heatwave ‘almost impossible’ without climate crisis​

Extreme event would have been expected once in 40,000 years before global heating, scientists estimate

Damian Carrington Environment editor

@dpcarrington
Fri 5 May 2023 14.00 BSTLast modified on Fri 5 May 2023 19.36 BST


The record-shattering temperatures that hit the western Mediterranean last week would have been “almost impossible” without the climate crisis, according to scientists.

The heatwave across Spain, Portugal, Morocco and Algeria was made at least 100 times more likely by global heating, the researchers calculated. Before the climate crisis, such an extreme event would have been expected only once in a least 40,000 years, making it statistically impossible on human timescales.

The scientists said such heat early in the year was especially harmful to people, who were less prepared than in summer. Farmers were already suffering under a prolonged drought and the heatwave struck at an important time in the crop-growing season, particularly for wheat.

Extreme temperatures in the region are increasing faster than predicted by climate models – a problem that worries scientists – and intensive research is in progress to understand the reasons.
Human-caused global heating was already known to be increasing the severity and frequency of heatwaves. But the number of extreme events that would have been essentially impossible without the climate crisis is rising, destroying lives and livelihoods across the planet.

April Mediterranean heatwave ‘almost impossible’ without climate crisis

Extreme event would have been expected once in 40,000 years before global heating, scientists estimate

www.theguardian.com

Vietnam records highest ever temperature of 44.1C

Report comes after neighbouring countries also register unprecedented highs during April heatwave

www.theguardian.com

 

[basilio]

And while record temperatures are happening across the world including Australia the BOM has to deal with harassment from BS accusations that attempt to underplay what is happening with global warming.

Climate scientists first laughed at a ‘bizarre’ campaign against the BoM – then came the harassment​

Former Bureau of Meteorology staff say claims they deliberately manipulated data to make warming seem worse are being fed by a ‘fever swamp’ of climate denial

• Follow our Australia news live blog for the latest updates
• Get our morning and afternoon news emails, free app or daily news podcast

Graham Readfearn

@readfearn
Sat 6 May 2023 21.00 BSTLast modified on Sun 7 May 2023 03.41 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/science...nst-the-bom-then-came-the-harassment#comments
137
For more than a decade, climate science deniers, rightwing politicians and sections of the Murdoch media have waged a campaign to undermine the legitimacy of the Bureau of Meteorology’s temperature records.
Those records say Australia has warmed by 1.4C since 1910, the year when the bureau’s main quality-controlled climate dataset starts.

Extremely hot days come along more often than they used to, and the warming trends are happening everywhere, at all times of the year.
As a target for those with an often visceral distrust of the established science of human-caused global heating, the bureau’s temperature record might be seen as ground zero.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...e-over-climate-denial-into-an-exclusive-story
How Sky News Australia turned watchdog’s rebuke over climate denial into an ‘exclusive’ story
Amanda Meade

Read more
“This has frankly been a concerted campaign,” says climate scientist Dr Ailie Gallant, of Monash University. “But this is not about genuine scepticism. It is harassment and blatant misinformation that has been perpetuated.”

Despite multiple reviews, reports, advisory panels and peer-reviewed studies rejecting claims that its temperature record was biased or flawed, Gallant says the “harassment” of the bureau has continued.

In the latest challenge, the Australian newspaper – which over the years has elevated claims from sceptics and bloggers on to its pages – is calling for a “proper, expert appraisal” of temperature records after running claims that mercury thermometers occasionally used by the bureau were recording lower temperatures at one location than newer automatic probes in the same place.

Climate scientists first laughed at a ‘bizarre’ campaign against the BoM – then came the harassment

Former Bureau of Meteorology staff say claims they deliberately manipulated data to make warming seem worse are being fed by a ‘fever swamp’ of climate denial

www.theguardian.com

 

[wayneL]

*If* global warming is unstoppable, this is why... ie the actions of those bleating most about it.

*****

Did you know that Bill Gates' primary residence in Seattle boasts 7 bedrooms, 24 bathrooms, a 60-foot pool with an underwater music system, a 2,500-square-foot gym, a 1,000-square-foot dining room, six kitchens, and a trampoline room with a 20-foot ceiling? And let's not forget the 2,100-square-foot library, a home theater that seats up to 20 guests, and a massive 300-square-foot reception hall with room for 200 guests. And there's also a spacious guesthouse, a garage that fits 23 cars, and an artificial stream stocked with fish.

Depending on the source, its value is estimated at $127 to $170 million. But wait, there's more! Gates also owns homes in Del Mar, California at sea level ($43 million), Indian Wells, California ($12.5 million), Wellington, Florida ($8.7 million), and a ranch in Wyoming ($8.9 million).

A fun little tidbit about his Florida property: In 2016, he paid $13.5 million for the neighboring house. Rumor has it he's also bought four other properties on the same street, making him the sole resident of the entire block.

While Bill doesn't own a mega-yacht, he regularly charters them for his vacations. He also has a penchant for spending big on luxury cars, and let's not forget his four private jets. In interviews, he's mentioned that purchasing private jets is his "guilty pleasure."

Now, isn't it ironic that one of the main proponents of reducing our carbon footprint lives like this? With such an expansive estate and luxurious lifestyle, we can't help but wonder how much his own carbon footprint is ballooning.

If the people who are urging us to reduce our carbon footprints are living lives of excess, how can we trust their motivations and the validity of their claims about man-made climate change?

H/T Simon Goddek PhD

 

[basilio]

*If* global warming is unstoppable, this is why... ie the actions of those bleating most about it.

*****

Did you know that Bill Gates' primary residence in Seattle boasts 7 bedrooms, 24 bathrooms, a 60-foot pool with an underwater music system, a 2,500-square-foot gym, a 1,000-square-foot dining room, six kitchens, and a trampoline room with a 20-foot ceiling? And let's not forget the 2,100-square-foot library, a home theater that seats up to 20 guests, and a massive 300-square-foot reception hall with room for 200 guests. And there's also a spacious guesthouse, a garage that fits 23 cars, and an artificial stream stocked with fish.

Depending on the source, its value is estimated at $127 to $170 million. But wait, there's more! Gates also owns homes in Del Mar, California at sea level ($43 million), Indian Wells, California ($12.5 million), Wellington, Florida ($8.7 million), and a ranch in Wyoming ($8.9 million).

A fun little tidbit about his Florida property: In 2016, he paid $13.5 million for the neighboring house. Rumor has it he's also bought four other properties on the same street, making him the sole resident of the entire block.

While Bill doesn't own a mega-yacht, he regularly charters them for his vacations. He also has a penchant for spending big on luxury cars, and let's not forget his four private jets. In interviews, he's mentioned that purchasing private jets is his "guilty pleasure."

Now, isn't it ironic that one of the main proponents of reducing our carbon footprint lives like this? With such an expansive estate and luxurious lifestyle, we can't help but wonder how much his own carbon footprint is ballooning.

If the people who are urging us to reduce our carbon footprints are living lives of excess, how can we trust their motivations and the validity of their claims about man-made climate change?

H/T Simon Goddek PhD

So the science and reality around Global Warming is now fifth fiddle to highlighting the wealth of some of richest people in the world who also happen to recognise the problems we face ?

You know Wayne highlighting the excesses of the super rich and their impact on global warming is quite legitimate. It is true that this sliver of very rich people produce mega tons of GG. So clearly we need to tackle the problem at all levels with all people including the super rich from all persuasions.

Incidentally I would also be interested in learning what actions Bill Gates has taken to reduce his carbon footprint and/or invest in carbon reduction activities. Perhaps Simon Goddek PhD could find that out in his research ?

 

[wayneL]

So the science and reality around Global Warming is now fifth fiddle to highlighting the wealth of some of richest people in the world who also happen to recognise the problems we face ?

You know Wayne highlighting the excesses of the super rich and their impact on global warming is quite legitimate. It is true that this sliver of very rich people produce mega tons of GG. So clearly we need to tackle the problem at all levels with all people including the super rich from all persuasions.

Incidentally I would also be interested in learning what actions Bill Gates has taken to reduce his carbon footprint and/or invest in carbon reduction activities. Perhaps Simon Goddek PhD could find that out in his research ?

Well, I'd say my (the reviled "climate denier") carbon footprint is a small fraction of the alarmists.

Including you, despite purported "carbon reduction strategies )

Therefore, my point is irrefutable.

 

[basilio]

Well, I'd say my (the reviled "climate denier") carbon footprint is a small fraction of the alarmists.

Including you, despite purported "carbon reduction strategies )

Therefore, my point is irrefutable.

Who talked about you Wayne ? I didn't. Ain't all about you babe.

You opened this puerile diversion of attacking Bill Gates as a super rich guy who also understands why CC is an end game.

As I pointed out
1) Yes lets recognise all the extreme consumption of the uber rich as well as the relatively well off and "do something about it" in tackling global warming
2) Maybe, just maybe some of these people are already doing something very constructive in this field.

Climate change: The rich are to blame, international study finds​

• • Published
    

• 16 March 2020
• comments
  

• • Comments

By Roger Harrabin
BBC environment analyst

The rich are primarily to blame for the global climate crisis, a study by the University of Leeds of 86 countries claims.
The wealthiest tenth of people consume about 20 times more energy overall than the bottom ten, wherever they live.

The gulf is greatest in transport, where the top tenth gobble 187 times more fuel than the poorest tenth, the research says.

Climate change: The rich are to blame, international study finds

The Leeds University study looked at 86 countries and came to broadly the same conclusions about the rich.

www.bbc.com

 

[basilio]

How can we stop the super-rich from polluting the planet?​

Ajit Niranjan
01/02/2023January 2, 2023
From Roman Abramovich's yacht toTaylor Swift's private jet, the lifestyles and business interests of billionaires are baking the planet.

'Ridiculous' levels of carbon pollution​

The biggest inequalities in carbon emissions have for decades been between rich and poor countries. Now, inequalities within countries explain more of the gap between clean and dirty lifestyles. The top 1% of global earners — somebody earning a yearly salary of about €124,000 ($132,000) — are responsible for one-fifth of the growth in carbon pollution in the last 30 years. They live in cities from Miami to Mumbai.


"The top 1% use basically a similar amount to the bottom 50% of humanity — and so obviously that, just in terms of scale, is a ridiculous proportion of the carbon budget," said Anisha Nazareth, a scientist at the Stockholm Environment Institute studying emissions inequality.

How can we stop the super-rich from polluting the planet? – DW – 01/02/2023

From Roman Abramovich's yacht toTaylor Swift's private jet, the lifestyles and business interests of billionaires are baking the planet.

www.dw.com

 

[basilio]

Turning CC around. This story highlights a number of positive tipping points in our collective efforts to control the amount of globalwarming we will have to face.
Just being positive.

The clean energy milestone the world is set to pass in 2023​

Share using Email


Share on Twitter

Share on FacebookShare on Linkedin


(Image credit: Getty Images)

By Martha Henriques
https://twitter.com/@Martha_Rosamund
15th April 2023

Renewable electricity has pushed through a series of positive tipping points in recent years, with 2023 set to pass a major milestone.
T
This year, the world is predicted to pass a critical turning point in renewable energy.

Greenhouse gas emissions from the power sector, the largest source of the world's emissions, are expected to fall for the first time, according to London-based think tank Ember. That's despite the fact that the world's demand for electricity is still growing. Emissions are set to fall because expansion in renewable energies such as solar and wind is outstripping that growth in demand.

It's a crucial moment in the effort to tackle climate change, and the report, written by Małgorzata Wiatros-Motyka, senior electricity analyst at Ember, and colleagues, argues that we are fast approaching a positive "tipping point" in the effort to curb climate change.

The clean energy milestone the world is set to pass in 2023

Renewable electricity has pushed through a series of positive tipping points in recent years, with 2023 set to pass a major milestone.

www.bbc.com

 

[basilio]

So how would our lifestyles have to change to meet the CC challenge ? This graph highlights the most recent data on the impact of groups in society on global warming based on their income.

In 2020 Carys Mainprize decided to live a 2 ton of CO2 a year lifestyle in London to see what that looked like.

The people living ultra-low-carbon lifestyles​

Share using Email

https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?te...es?ocid=ww.social.link.twitter&via=BBC_Future
https://www.linkedin.com/shareArtic...The people living ultra-low-carbon lifestyles

(Image credit: Getty Images)

By Jocelyn Timperley
https://twitter.com/@jloistf
5th May 2023

To tackle climate change, many of us need to cut our carbon footprints. But what do truly low-carbon lifestyles look like – and can they really be achieved by personal choice alone?

As 2020 drew to a close, Carys Mainprize set herself a challenge for the approaching year: to spend the next 12 months living on two tonnes of carbon: an amount equivalent to around half the average yearly emissions of a petrol car in the US.
It was not an easy challenge. Mainprize lives in the UK, where the average yearly consumption footprint per person is over four times her goal: 8.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), a measure that includes CO2, methane and other greenhouse gases.

The people living ultra-low-carbon lifestyles

To tackle climate change, many of us need to cut our carbon footprints. But what do truly low-carbon lifestyles look like – and can they really be achieved by personal choice alone?

www.bbc.com

 

[wayneL]

OMG, volumes of copium.

Okay I get it, the greatest emitters of co2 aren't responsible for the greatest emissions of co2.

Those mansions, private jets, motorcades megayachts... completely innocent

China, India, completely irrelevant

It's the mere act of questioning that raises co2 by a billion parts per million.

Absurdity reigns.

 

[basilio]

Wayne,that is some serious weed your on ole boy. Did ya source it from Uncle Donald ?

I appreciate you have a vastly different POV . But for once your looking at some clear analysis of the breakdown CO2 emissions from richest to the poorest people Earth.

And surprise, surprise , surprise the ones with the biggest toys produce the biggest poo. But you question that reality ?

Gimme a toke..

 

[wayneL]

Wayne,that is some serious weed your on ole boy. Did ya source it from Uncle Donald ?

I appreciate you have a vastly different POV . But for once your looking at some clear analysis of the breakdown CO2 emissions from richest to the poorest people Earth.

And surprise, surprise , surprise the ones with the biggest toys produce the biggest poo. But you question that reality ?

Gimme a toke..

I don't smoke that shyte, but not surprised that you do. It explains your schizophrenia... paranoid delusions etc

 

[basilio]

I don't smoke that shyte, but not surprised that you do. It explains your schizophrenia... paranoid delusions etc

Wayne you clearly don't need to smoke the shyte or any stuff for that matter.. I was just trying to offer you an exit excus for your complete BS. Your paranoid delusions are carefully cultivated, home grown and closely held.