Great link on the "name".
The other one offers very little proof and very little concrete data in regards to extreme weather.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion
- Thread starter Raffy.Roma
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Energy Environment Policy
Great link on the "name".
The other one offers very little proof and very little concrete data in regards to extreme weather.
Very well, then perhaps we should look past the article and go straight to the scientific papers themselves:
http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/adai/papers/Dai-drought_WIRES2010.pdf
Projected Atlantic hurricane surge threat from rising temperatures
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v470/n7334/full/nature09763.html
Drought under global warming: a review - Dai - 2010 - Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change - Wiley Online Library
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n7/full/nclimate1452.html
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v470/n7334/full/nature09762.html
Keep in mind, this is only a small portion of the research that's been done. I respect that you have a strong level of skepticism and perhaps reading straight from the people who actually work on these problems for a living is the best answer.
As someone who has competed for NIH grants, I am fully skeptical. Having spent time trying to tie anything to AIDS during the 90s, I always presume that researchers follow the dollars and will work to tie anything to the AGW or CC or whatever we want to call it. I can't critically evaluate any of the articles because I am not a climate scientist. But I have to think if that I was a meteoroligist/climate scientist, I would operate fully knowing that money is pouring in and articles are published when you can tie something in to AGW. The whole mechanism for tenure and research dollars really does throw some doubt in my mind.
Just to back up, I happen to believe in AGW. I happen to do more than 99% to minimize my impact. But the analogy of pissing into a hurricane has been mentioned. Perhaps there needs to be an AGW 12 step program and admit that we are powerless (or how ever it goes).
Great, bring forward some evidence of that and we'll discuss it.
I believe the quote is "Those who say it's impossible should not interrupt those who are doing it." Participation in the transition from fossil fuels to cleaner sources of energy is not compulsory, but recommended. For example, I would really, really not invest in any coal right now. Not because I think the coal industry is ethically challenged and environmentally destructive (both true), but because of cheap natural gas prices, new regulations in N. America and Europe, and air quality problems in Asia. Coal is a huge industry but an industry with a bleak future. Sort of like a lumbering giant who is starting to tip over. One has to wonder if oil is next, not because of lack of demand, it's huge. But demand for climate action worldwide could be on the horizon, as well as greater fuel efficiency standards and new forms of transportation. If that all comes to fruition, it's hard to imagine that oil wouldn't be impacted.
I for one, am fully divested from fossil fuels. If you want to invest in them, go for it. Just don't tell anyone that I told you to do it. :smile:
An article about Ocean Acidification:
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...acidification-carbon-dioxide-emissions-levels
The oceans are more acidic now than they have been for at least 300m years, due to carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels, and a mass extinction of key species may already be almost inevitable as a result, leading marine scientists warned on Thursday.
- - - Updated - - -
From a chemical point of view this is what happens:
Once dissolved in seawater, CO[SUB]2 [/SUB]reacts with water, H[SUB]2[/SUB]O,to form carbonic acid, H[SUB]2[/SUB]CO[SUB]3:[/SUB]CO[SUB]2 + [/SUB]H[SUB]2[/SUB]O ↔ H[SUB]2[/SUB]CO[SUB]3[/SUB]. Carbonic acid dissolves rapidly to form H+ ions (an acid) and bicarbonate, HCO[SUP]3-[/SUP](a base). Seawater is naturally saturated with another base, carbonate ion (CO[SUB]3[/SUB][SUP]−2[/SUP]) that acts like an antacid to neutralize the H+, forming more bicarbonate. The net reaction looks like this: CO[SUB]2 [/SUB]+ H[SUB]2[/SUB]O + CO[SUB]3[/SUB][SUP]−2[/SUP][SUB]→ [/SUB]2HCO[SUP]3-[/SUP]
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...acidification-carbon-dioxide-emissions-levels
The oceans are more acidic now than they have been for at least 300m years, due to carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels, and a mass extinction of key species may already be almost inevitable as a result, leading marine scientists warned on Thursday.
- - - Updated - - -
From a chemical point of view this is what happens:
Once dissolved in seawater, CO[SUB]2 [/SUB]reacts with water, H[SUB]2[/SUB]O,to form carbonic acid, H[SUB]2[/SUB]CO[SUB]3:[/SUB]CO[SUB]2 + [/SUB]H[SUB]2[/SUB]O ↔ H[SUB]2[/SUB]CO[SUB]3[/SUB]. Carbonic acid dissolves rapidly to form H+ ions (an acid) and bicarbonate, HCO[SUP]3-[/SUP](a base). Seawater is naturally saturated with another base, carbonate ion (CO[SUB]3[/SUB][SUP]−2[/SUP]) that acts like an antacid to neutralize the H+, forming more bicarbonate. The net reaction looks like this: CO[SUB]2 [/SUB]+ H[SUB]2[/SUB]O + CO[SUB]3[/SUB][SUP]−2[/SUP][SUB]→ [/SUB]2HCO[SUP]3-[/SUP]
A very well-written article that perfectly articulates the challenge we face:
Finance: market shrugs off latest climate warning on fossil fuels -- Friday, October 4, 2013 -- www.eenews.net
As Bill McKibben said "It is not a flaw in the business plan, the flaw is the business plan." Fossil fuel companies have far more oil/coal/gas in their reserves than what is considered safe to burn. They are actively trying to expand their reserves as well. There is no chance that the world will stop burning fossil fuels, unless there is either a major market disruption from clean energy technology (I wouldn't count on this) or worldwide social action on reducing fossil fuel use. Worldwide action likely won't happen, as the global climate denial campaign has successfully prevented most people from being aware or caring about the risks behind climate disruption. Fossil fuel companies cannot be expected to do the right thing, even if they wanted to, their investors wouldn't let them.
Finance: market shrugs off latest climate warning on fossil fuels -- Friday, October 4, 2013 -- www.eenews.net
As Bill McKibben said "It is not a flaw in the business plan, the flaw is the business plan." Fossil fuel companies have far more oil/coal/gas in their reserves than what is considered safe to burn. They are actively trying to expand their reserves as well. There is no chance that the world will stop burning fossil fuels, unless there is either a major market disruption from clean energy technology (I wouldn't count on this) or worldwide social action on reducing fossil fuel use. Worldwide action likely won't happen, as the global climate denial campaign has successfully prevented most people from being aware or caring about the risks behind climate disruption. Fossil fuel companies cannot be expected to do the right thing, even if they wanted to, their investors wouldn't let them.
But Goverments can do the right thing and worldwide action can happen thanks to them. We don't ask to stop fossil fuels (also because it wouldn't be possible). We only ask to prevent global temperatures from rising beyond 2 degree Celsius according to the IPCC recommendations.
The IPCC had said that to keep global temperatures from rising beyond 2 degrees Celsius, humanity has to follow a carbon budget.
In my discussions (as an executive of a renewable power company) I almost always focus on local benefits and energy security. It's a rare meeting where I bring up climate change or ocean acidification because, too often, I immediately get labeled by some in the room as a wacko commie liberal. Sad, but true. Fortunately, there are plenty of good reasons for communities to want local generation from sustainable resources.
On a slight tangent: although I hate bumper stickers, I'd consider one that read:
BOYCOTT OPEC
DRIVE ELECTRIC
On a slight tangent: although I hate bumper stickers, I'd consider one that read:
BOYCOTT OPEC
DRIVE ELECTRIC
I would like to inform all TMC Members (and also TMC guests) that in two weeks a new course on Global Warming will start on:
https://www.coursera.org/
https://www.coursera.org/
The future by Al Gore
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy0UnMgEp_o
From the former vice president and #1 New York Times bestselling author comes An Inconvenient Truth for everything—a frank and clear-eyed assessment of six critical drivers of global change in the decades to come.
http://atrandom.com/the-future/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy0UnMgEp_o
From the former vice president and #1 New York Times bestselling author comes An Inconvenient Truth for everything—a frank and clear-eyed assessment of six critical drivers of global change in the decades to come.
http://atrandom.com/the-future/
[moderator's note:
Some off-topic posts re negative reputation were moved to random chitchat
Moderators do not see reputation awards/demerits, but the admins do. They are working on a comprehensive rework of the reputation system.]
Some off-topic posts re negative reputation were moved to random chitchat
Moderators do not see reputation awards/demerits, but the admins do. They are working on a comprehensive rework of the reputation system.]
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-climate-change-letters-20131008,0,871615.story
I would like to report this sentence took from the above linked article:
Saying "there's no sign humans have caused climate change" is not stating an opinion, it's asserting a factual inaccuracy.
I would like to report this sentence took from the above linked article:
Saying "there's no sign humans have caused climate change" is not stating an opinion, it's asserting a factual inaccuracy.
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
It’s a good one for sure. Thanks for posting. This one, as well as all your other posts. And hopefully it will be that easy, and finally sway these folks. [I really, really wish!] For example, anyone remember when Flasherz was posting here? It really seemed that you guys really got through. Well, apparently as of two days ago it seems – we were still part of…
[Pause. …and hold.]
But who knows, maybe this little film can help.
[Pause. …and hold.]
But who knows, maybe this little film can help.
Last edited:
This is nice. But Jason Sherman exixts for real?
- - - Updated - - -
@SwedishAdvocate
FlasherZ drives a Model S and has a 9 KW solar power system on his house. He is one of us. He only thinks that sometimes we are a littlle bit integralist while standing for our ideas. If everybody acted like FlasherZ the world would be fine. Believe me no problem with FlasherZ.
Last edited:
Similar threads
