Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

Jump to new
Near the end of the north pole melt.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

You can see from the picture why the Chinese are building a fleet of ships to transverse the northern route to Europe. it's quite a bit shorter and relatively ice free.
Russia like China has had no blind spot to global warming unlike the USA which has pretended it's not happening. One US general said it's a joke, they have soldiers and defences designed to fight over ice that's not there. It's mostly slush or water now.

Russia have set up six bases and are claiming much of the territory which has oil and as the ice melts becomes more accessible. http://theweek.com/articles/614075/how-russia-fortifying-arctic

The USA have only just woken up to the fact, they have let domestic politics overrule the science. They have no decent bases. "The US Coast Guard currently has just two working icebreaker ships in service, and even those need to be fitted with hardened hulls and better insulation if they are to operate in the icy waters of the Arctic." https://www.rt.com/usa/us-wants-arctic-resources-154/
Canada has started a defence spend as Russia is claiming most of the arctic and have the ships, troops and ports to claim it at present. https://www.rt.com/news/240741-canada-arctic-resources-military/

When this and the previous thread was started I pointed out this was happening and was told I was believing corrupt scientists and it was all rubbish. :rolleyes:
 
Knobby22 said:
Near the end of the north pole melt.
..............

When this and the previous thread was started I pointed out this was happening and was told I was believing corrupt scientists and it was all rubbish. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think you are confusing windups with self evident emergent truths.
 
The inevitable result of climate change is rising sea levels and the flooding of coastal cities.
And if people can't grows fins and gills they will drown or move.:cautious:

The process is happening around the world including the US. Sobering read. Many implications.

'We're moving to higher ground': America's era of climate mass migration is here
Illustration: R Fresson for the Guardian
By the end of this century, sea level rises alone could displace 13m people. Many states will have to grapple with hordes of residents seeking dry ground. But, as one expert says, ‘No state is unaffected by this’

After her house flooded for the third year in a row, Elizabeth Boineau was ready to flee. She packed her possessions into dozens of boxes, tried not to think of the mold and mildew-covered furniture and retreated to a second-floor condo that should be beyond the reach of pounding rains and swelling seas.

Boineau is leaving behind a handsome, early 20th-century house in Charleston, South Carolina, the shutters painted in the city’s eponymous shade of deep green. Last year, after Hurricane Irma introduced 8in of water into a home Boineau was still patching up from the last flood, local authorities agreed this historic slice of Charleston could be torn down.

“I was sloshing through the water with my puppy dog, debris was everywhere,” she said. “I feel completely sunken. It would cost me around $500,000 to raise the house, demolish the first floor. I’m going to rent a place instead, on higher ground.”

Millions of Americans will confront similarly hard choices as climate change conjures up brutal storms, flooding rains, receding coastlines and punishing heat. Many are already opting to shift to less perilous areas of the same city, or to havens in other states. Whole towns from Alaska to Louisiana are looking to relocate, in their entirety, to safer ground.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/24/americas-era-of-climate-mass-migration-is-here
 
Yep, you are right Bas, we are stuffed.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-28/japan-braces-typhoon-trami-life-threatening-impacts

Day after day they come in increasing numbers, storms around the world that is.

However, my life is gone and I can sit back, as tonight, Grand Final tomorrow and soak myself in alcohol and feel good. But no I cannot (but I am soaked) or I would not be doing this.

Bloody conscience, gave God away years back but thinking of others never goes away for me.

We could save our planet, lets go
 
explod said:
Yep, you are right Bas, we are stuffed.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-28/japan-braces-typhoon-trami-life-threatening-impacts

Day after day they come in increasing numbers, storms around the world that is.

However, my life is gone and I can sit back, as tonight, Grand Final tomorrow and soak myself in alcohol and feel good. But no I cannot (but I am soaked) or I would not be doing this.

Bloody conscience, gave God away years back but thinking of others never goes away for me.

We could save our planet, lets go
Click to expand...

The burden of knowledge and sympathies there explod.
 
World 'nowhere near on track' to avoid
warming beyond 1.5C target
Exclusive: Author of key UN climate report says limiting temperature rise would require enormous, immediate transformation in human activity

Oliver Milman

@olliemilman
Thu 27 Sep 2018 15.00 AEST Last modified on Fri 28 Sep 2018 06.00 AEST

Shares
6569


3000.jpg
Avoiding a temperature increase of more than 1.5C will be ‘extraordinarily challenging’, says the report’s author. Photograph: Matt Brown/AP
The world’s governments are “nowhere near on track” to meet their commitment to avoid global warming of more than 1.5C above the pre-industrial period, according to an author of a key UN report that will outline the dangers of breaching this limit.

A massive, immediate transformation in the way the world’s population generates energy, uses transportation and grows food will be required to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5C and the forthcoming analysis is set to lay bare how remote this possibility is.

“It’s extraordinarily challenging to get to the 1.5C target and we are nowhere near on track to doing that,” said Drew Shindell, a Duke University climate scientist and a co-author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, which will be unveiled in South Korea next month.

“While it’s technically possible, it’s extremely improbable, absent a real sea change in the way we evaluate risk. We are nowhere near that.”

In the 2015 Paris climate pact, international leaders agreed to curb the global temperature rise to 2C above the era prior to mass industrialization, with an aspiration to limit this to 1.5C. The world has already warmed by around 1C over the past century, fueling sea level rises, heatwaves, storms and the decline of vulnerable ecosystems such as coral reefs.

Shindell would not share exact details of the IPCC report, but he said that the more ambitious 1.5C goal would require a precipitous drop in greenhouse emissions triggered by a rapid phaseout of fossil fuels, particularly coal, mass deployment of solar and wind energy and the eradication of emissions from cars, trucks and airplanes.

Even then, emerging technology will be required on a global scale to capture emissions at the source and bury them in the ground or remove carbon directly from the air.

“The penetration rate of new technology historically takes a long time,” Shindell said. “It’s not simple to change these things. There aren’t good examples in history of such rapid, far-reaching transitions.”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/26/global-warming-climate-change-targets-un-report
 
Are well, step up the party, some ice in that?

"After the biggest football weekend of the year, it's the Federal Government who deserves the wooden spoon.

Last Friday night, the Federal Department of Environment and Energy discreetly released news that deserved front page attention: Australia’s greenhouse gas pollution levels have risen yet again. Worse, this is the third year running.

The data should have been released months ago, but instead, it seems the Government has waited for an opportune moment to slip this worrying news under the table.

And if this sounds familiar, it most certainly is.

It’s a tactic that’s been used time and again, as the Government has repeatedly tried to conceal the fact that emissions have been rising since March 2015. They have released reports on Australia’s rising emissions on Christmas Eve, on weekends, during holiday periods or major events, hoping that no one is paying attention.

Unfortunately, the Federal Government has no credible climate policy to reduce greenhouse gas pollution. And the stakes are deadly serious.

Australia has just experienced its driest September on record (1), with farmers desperately waiting for rain. With the bushfire season starting early in many local government areas in NSW, and large areas of Queensland and most of NSW in drought, Australians are already feeling the acute impacts of rising greenhouse gas pollution levels.

But we’re not letting the Government get away with these sneaky climate censorship tactics.

Over the long weekend, we were out in the media making sure the Australian public gets the facts it deserves about climate change.

Will you share this article with your friends and family to show the Government that no matter what tactics they try, they can’t smother the truth on climate? We need to get this news to as many people as possible so that they know the truth about Australia’s emissions scorecard.

At a time when credible Federal Government climate policy remains missing in action, the need for transparent greenhouse gas pollution information has never been more important.

Together, we can hold the Government to account and keep pushing for positive change with the bountiful renewable energy and storage solutions that we have on hand.

Martin_Rice_new-sml.png


Dr Martin Rice

Acting CEO and Head of Research"

  1. https://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/rainfall-tallies-plummet-after-australia-s-driest-september-on-record-20181001-p50732.html
 
The Trump administration expectation of Global Warming..

Trump administration sees a 7-degree rise in global temperatures by 2100

Last month, deep in a 500-page environmental impact statement, the Trump administration made a startling assumption: On its current course, the planet will warm a disastrous seven degrees by the end of this century.

A rise of seven degrees Fahrenheit, or about four degrees Celsius, compared with preindustrial levels would be catastrophic, according to scientists. Many coral reefs would dissolve in increasingly acidic oceans. Parts of Manhattan and Miami would be underwater without costly coastal defenses. Extreme heat waves would routinely smother large parts of the globe.

But the administration did not offer this dire forecast, premised on the idea that the world will fail to cut its greenhouse gas emissions, as part of an argument to combat climate change. Just the opposite: The analysis assumes the planet’s fate is already sealed.

The draft statement, issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), was written to justify President Trump’s decision to freeze federal fuel-efficiency standards for cars and light trucks built after 2020. While the proposal would increase greenhouse gas emissions, the impact statement says, that policy would add just a very small drop to a very big, hot bucket.

“The amazing thing they’re saying is human activities are going to lead to this rise of carbon dioxide that is disastrous for the environment and society. And then they’re saying they’re not going to do anything about it,” said Michael MacCracken, who served as a senior scientist at the U.S. Global Change Research Program from 1993 to 2002.

The document projects that global temperature will rise by nearly 3.5 degrees Celsius above the average temperature between 1986 and 2005 regardless of whether Obama-era tailpipe standards take effect or are frozen for six years, as the Trump administration has proposed. The global average temperature rose more than 0.5 degrees Celsius between 1880, the start of industrialization, and 1986, so the analysis assumes a roughly four degree Celsius or seven degree Fahrenheit increase from preindustrial levels.

The world would have to make deep cuts in carbon emissions to avoid this drastic warming, the analysis states. And that “would require substantial increases in technology innovation and adoption compared to today’s levels and would require the economy and the vehicle fleet to move away from the use of fossil fuels, which is not currently technologically feasible or economically feasible.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...0f81cc58c5d_story.html?utm_term=.5e16ea0bb1ee
 
SirRumpole said:
And sell Australian agriculture stocks.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't write off Australian agriculture, it really is the only sustainable industry we have, other than H2.
If we can get irrigation happening in the North of Australia, then get a handle on the issues(pests etc), we will have plenty of demand for our product.
 
explod said:
After the biggest football weekend of the year, it's the Federal Government who deserves the wooden spoon.
Click to expand...
I’d give environmental groups a pretty hard smack with the spoon too.

As a general rule I’m not keen on “I told you so” stuff but I’ll make an exception.

Environmentalists got their wish and Hazelwood power station is now permanently closed. Alglesea, Northern, Morwell, Playford B, Redbank and Wallerawang C are shut too.

Meanwhile emissions went up and environmental groups who pushed for the closure of Hazelwood and others are suspiciously silent on the issue.

If it was up to me then I’d remove politicians and green groups alike, neither grasps the issue properly, and put professional scientists and engineers in charge of coming up with a workable national plan and implementing it.

To do that I’d set up a properly structured Commission, with the authority to own and operate businesses, enter contracts with the private sector and to raise funds. I’d give parliament a simple yes / no role in approving major investment decisions but with no ability to alter the details.

That approach built the energy system we’ve got today and would have a far better chance of delivering what we need going forward when compared to what we’re actually doing now.

Note that this approach doesn’t necessarily mean natuonalising anything although that is an option if needed.
 
What kind of world will my kids have to grow up in, or raise thier kids in?
 
Smurf1976 said:
I’d give environmental groups a pretty hard smack with the spoon too.

As a general rule I’m not keen on “I told you so” stuff but I’ll make an exception.

Environmentalists got their wish and Hazelwood power station is now permanently closed. Alglesea, Northern, Morwell, Playford B, Redbank and Wallerawang C are shut too.

Meanwhile emissions went up and environmental groups who pushed for the closure of Hazelwood and others are suspiciously silent on the issue.

If it was up to me then I’d remove politicians and green groups alike, neither grasps the issue properly, and put professional scientists and engineers in charge of coming up with a workable national plan and implementing it.

To do that I’d set up a properly structured Commission, with the authority to own and operate businesses, enter contracts with the private sector and to raise funds. I’d give parliament a simple yes / no role in approving major investment decisions but with no ability to alter the details.

That approach built the energy system we’ve got today and would have a far better chance of delivering what we need going forward when compared to what we’re actually doing now.

Note that this approach doesn’t necessarily mean natuonalising anything although that is an option if needed.
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ct-failure-its-time-for-a-publicly-owned-grid
 
This is the intensity of the fires in California last summer. It is what will be facing us this summer and even more so as temperatures increase.
Hellfire
by John Vaillant • Photography by Tim Hussin

The worst case scenario plays out the same way everywhere, whether you are in southern California or northern Alberta. A nascent wildfire – driven by extreme heat, high winds, drought conditions and a century of largely successful fire suppression – explodes into a juggernaut and takes over the countryside.

Any houses in the way are simply more fuel. Preheated to 500C by the 100ft flames of the advancing blaze, homes don’t so much catch on fire as explode into flames. In a dense neighborhood, many homes may do this simultaneously. The speed of ignition shocks people – citizens and firefighters alike – but it is only the beginning.

Because the temperatures achievable in an urban wildfire are comparable to those in a crucible, virtually everything is consumed as fuel. What doesn’t burn, melts: steel car chassis warp and bend while lesser metals – aluminum engine blocks, magnesium wheels – will liquify.

In turn, the ferocious heat generates its own wind that can drive sparks and embers hundreds of meters ahead of the fire. Conflagrations of this magnitude are virtually unstoppable. Ordinary house fires often leave structures somewhat intact; things can be salvaged. But no one is prepared for the damage caused by a wildfire when it overruns their town – not the scale of it, nor its capacity to wipe out everything they have worked for.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/n...-will-happen-hellfire-california-forest-fires
 

Similar threads

basilio
What does Lloyds think is happening?
2
Replies
22
Views
5K
springhill
springhill
2020hindsight
  • Poll
Which IPCC Scenario is your guess?
2
Replies
32
Views
10K
2020hindsight
2020hindsight
Top