Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

[DrGriz]

Two long pieces on what we can expect in the future.

Beyond Catastrophe: A New Climate Reality Is Coming Into View Beyond Catastrophe: A New Climate Reality Is Coming Into View

The New World: Envisioning Life After Climate Change The New World: Envisioning Life After Climate Change

I don't really know Wells and his basic bent, but it seems he is an optimist.

Though it would mean environmental upheaval and climatic disruption unprecedented in the long sweep of human history, this is a more hopeful outcome than many dared to believe less than a decade ago. It is also much harsher than many had hoped for.

It seems as though he is having it both ways.

I am inclined to think that we've already reached the tipping point and there's no hopeful way to view the world's future from a human perspective.

 

[mspohr]

I don't really know Wells and his basic bent, but it seems he is an optimist.


It seems as though he is having it both ways.

I am inclined to think that we've already reached the tipping point and there's no hopeful way to view the world's future from a human perspective.

I think he is saying it will be bad but it could have been worse if not for the changes that we have been able to make.
Probably the message here is that we should keep pushing for changes since it does help.

 

[DrGriz]

I think he is saying it will be bad but it could have been worse if not for the changes that we have been able to make.
Probably the message here is that we should keep pushing for changes since it does help.

Oh, I get that. But I hear more like, "renewables are cheap, coal is going away, we can relax a little bit. Whatever happens we can handle."

But in my mind, the glaciers have melted and they aren't coming back no matter how many solar panels we put up.

 

[mspohr]

Oh, I get that. But I hear more like, "renewables are cheap, coal is going away, we can relax a little bit. Whatever happens we can handle."

But in my mind, the glaciers have melted and they aren't coming back no matter how many solar panels we put up.

Yes, he's probably too optimistic both about the degree of damage we will see and our ability to "adapt".

 

[DrGriz]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/10/29/egypt-climate-conference-emissions-warming/

Might be paywalled.

I feel like continuing to wage the war is more kicking the can down the road than actually stopping or limiting what will happen. But even that is worth it.

The world might have missed its chance to stay under 1.5 degrees. But every tenth of a degree prevented represents substantially less misery; 2.8 degrees would be better than what would have happened without the Paris conference, and 2.4 degrees would be better than 2.8. The war to keep the planet inhabitable is still worth waging.

 

[mspohr]

Two-thirds of US money for fossil fuel pours into Africa despite climate goals

Joe Biden will head to Egypt next week to tout America’s re-emergence as a leader on the climate crisis at the Cop27 talks. But he will be landing in a continent that the US continues to pour billions of dollars into for fossil fuel projects, with seemingly no end in sight despite the president’s promises. The US government has funneled more than $9bn (£7.7bn) into oil and gas projects in Africa since it signed up to restrain global heating in the 2015 Paris climate agreement, a tally of official data shows, committing just $682m (£587m) to clean energy developments such as wind and solar over the same period. Two-thirds of all the money the US has committed globally to fossil fuels in this time has been plowed into Africa, a continent rich in various minerals but also one in which 600 million people live without electricity and where floods, severe heatwaves and droughts are taking an increasingly devastating toll as the planet heats due to the combustion of coal, oil and gas.

 

[mspohr]

Enormous emissions gap between top 1% and poorest, study highlights

The findings highlight the enormous gaps between what have been termed “the polluting elite”, whose high-carbon lifestyles fuel the climate crisis, and the majority of people, even in developed countries, whose carbon footprints are far smaller. It would take 26 years for a low earner to produce as much carbon dioxide as the richest do in a year, according to Autonomy’s analysis of income and greenhouse gas data from 1998 to 2018, which found that people earning £170,000 or more in 2018 in the UK were responsible for greenhouse gas emissions far greater than the 30% of people earning £21,500 or less in the same year.

This new report on the benefits of taxing extreme carbon emitters makes for shocking reading,” he said. “On the eve of a critical climate summit [Cop27] in Egypt, and staring down an unprecedented cost of living crisis, it is clear we are not all in this together. Revenue raised from a carbon tax on the wealthiest top 1% of the population would have raised enough money to retrofit nearly 8m homes, keeping us warm this winter and bringing down fuel bills, while providing critical support for renewable energy and making us less dependent on Putin’s gas.”

 

[ElectricIAC]

Tax the ones attending those meetings in their Private Jets and leave my stack alone.

 

[mspohr]

Fossil fuel burning once caused a mass extinction – now we’re risking another | George Monbiot

The sediments preserved in these cliffs were laid down in the early Triassic period, just after the greatest mass extinction in the history of multicellular life that brought the Permian period to an end 252m years ago. Around 90% of species died, and fish and four-footed animals were more or less exterminated between 30 degrees north of the equator and 40 degrees south. Most remarkably, while biological abundance (if not diversity) tends to recover from mass extinctions within a few hundred thousand years, our planet remained in this near-lifeless state for the following 5m years. In studying these cliffs, you see the precipice on which we teeter.

We now know that there were two main pulses of extinction. The first, which began 252.1m years ago, mostly affected life on land. It coincided with a series of massive volcanic eruptions in the region now known as the Siberian Traps. The second, more devastating phase, started about 200,000 years later. It almost completed the extinction of terrestrial life, as well as wiping out the great majority of species in the sea. Though we cannot yet be sure, the first phase might have been triggered by acid rain, ozone depletion and metal pollution caused by volcanic chemicals. As rainforests and other ecosystems were wiped out, more toxic compounds were released from exposed soils and rocks, creating an escalating cycle of collapse. The second phase appears to have been driven by global heating. By 251.9m years ago, so much solidified rock had accumulated on the surface of the Siberian Traps that the lava could no longer escape. Instead, it was forced to spread underground, along horizontal fissures, into rocks that were rich in coal and other hydrocarbons. The heat from the magma (underground lava) cooked the hydrocarbons, releasing vast amounts of carbon dioxide and methane. In other words, though there were no humans on the planet, this disaster seems to have been caused by fossil fuel burning.

 

[DrGriz]

Fossil fuel burning once caused a mass extinction – now we’re risking another | George Monbiot

The sediments preserved in these cliffs were laid down in the early Triassic period, just after the greatest mass extinction in the history of multicellular life that brought the Permian period to an end 252m years ago. Around 90% of species died, and fish and four-footed animals were more or less exterminated between 30 degrees north of the equator and 40 degrees south. Most remarkably, while biological abundance (if not diversity) tends to recover from mass extinctions within a few hundred thousand years, our planet remained in this near-lifeless state for the following 5m years. In studying these cliffs, you see the precipice on which we teeter.

We now know that there were two main pulses of extinction. The first, which began 252.1m years ago, mostly affected life on land. It coincided with a series of massive volcanic eruptions in the region now known as the Siberian Traps. The second, more devastating phase, started about 200,000 years later. It almost completed the extinction of terrestrial life, as well as wiping out the great majority of species in the sea. Though we cannot yet be sure, the first phase might have been triggered by acid rain, ozone depletion and metal pollution caused by volcanic chemicals. As rainforests and other ecosystems were wiped out, more toxic compounds were released from exposed soils and rocks, creating an escalating cycle of collapse. The second phase appears to have been driven by global heating. By 251.9m years ago, so much solidified rock had accumulated on the surface of the Siberian Traps that the lava could no longer escape. Instead, it was forced to spread underground, along horizontal fissures, into rocks that were rich in coal and other hydrocarbons. The heat from the magma (underground lava) cooked the hydrocarbons, releasing vast amounts of carbon dioxide and methane. In other words, though there were no humans on the planet, this disaster seems to have been caused by fossil fuel burning.

Maybe we should just drill magma vents and get it over with.

 

[mspohr]

Biden’s climate bill victory was hard won. Now, the real battle starts

The bitter fight to deliver a climate change bill to Joe Biden’s desk this summer pitted the White House and its Democratic allies against some of America’s most powerful industry lobbies and every Republican in Congress. It may prove to have been the easy part. At the heart of the hard-won Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is a $369bn package of climate investments that Biden called the “most significant legislation in history” to tackle the climate crisis. Estimates suggest it could cut US greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2030. That monumental potential, however, comes with a monumental to-do list and a series of tight deadlines – not to mention high-stakes political decisions in an election season when Democrats are fighting to keep control of Congress

 

[ElectricIAC]

Biden’s climate bill victory was hard won. Now, the real battle starts

The bitter fight to deliver a climate change bill to Joe Biden’s desk this summer pitted the White House and its Democratic allies against some of America’s most powerful industry lobbies and every Republican in Congress. It may prove to have been the easy part. At the heart of the hard-won Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is a $369bn package of climate investments that Biden called the “most significant legislation in history” to tackle the climate crisis. Estimates suggest it could cut US greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2030. That monumental potential, however, comes with a monumental to-do list and a series of tight deadlines – not to mention high-stakes political decisions in an election season when Democrats are fighting to keep control of Congress

What’s funny is right after they passed this drek, they called it everything BUT inflation reducing.

- Healthcare legislation
- Climate legislation
- Inflation reducing (only when asked about inflation and an eye roll that would make a teen blush)

Ridiculous.

 

[DrGriz]

What’s funny is right after they passed this drek, they called it everything BUT inflation reducing.

- Healthcare legislation
- Climate legislation
- Inflation reducing (only when asked about inflation and an eye roll that would make a teen blush)

Ridiculous.

Having lived through a time of terrible inflation, I can only say that there are very few moves that can be made to reduce inflation. What's much easier to do is to make it worse, say, by cutting taxes and thereby increasing spending at the consumer level.

For the most part, I think some politicians will try maneuvers to make it better. Others won't care.

Mainly, I think we'll just have to hunker down and wait it out. It's a worldwide situation and no one country is going to turn the ship around by itself.

 

[mspohr]

Having lived through a time of terrible inflation, I can only say that there are very few moves that can be made to reduce inflation. What's much easier to do is to make it worse, say, by cutting taxes and thereby increasing spending at the consumer level.

For the most part, I think some politicians will try maneuvers to make it better. Others won't care.

Mainly, I think we'll just have to hunker down and wait it out. It's a worldwide situation and no one country is going to turn the ship around by itself.

I agree. Current inflation is a combination of COVID supply disruptions and Russia's Ukraine war. Raising interest rates is an odd way to deal with these problems but it's the only hammer the Fed has...
OTOH, Congress could increase taxes on rich people and corporations (reverse Trump tax cuts). That would cud down spending pressures.

 

[mspohr]

Climate crisis: past eight years were the eight hottest ever, says UN

The past eight years were the eight hottest ever recorded, a new UN report has found, indicating the world is now deep into the climate crisis. The internationally agreed 1.5C limit for global heating is now “barely within reach”, it said. The report, by the UN’s World Meteorological Organization (WMO), sets out how record high greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are driving sea level and ice melting to new highs and supercharging extreme weather from Pakistan to Puerto Rico.

The WMO report said: Carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide are at record levels in the atmosphere as emissions continue. The annual increase in methane, a potent greenhouse gas, was the highest on record. The sea level is now rising twice as fast as 30 years ago and the oceans are hotter than ever. Records for glacier melting in the Alps were shattered in 2022, with an average of 13ft (4 metres) in height lost. Rain – not snow – was recorded on the 3,200m-high summit of the Greenland ice sheet for the first time. The Antarctic sea-ice area fell to its lowest level on record, almost 1m km2 below the long-term average.

 

[mspohr]

A Core Question at COP27: Who Will Pay for Climate Change? A Core Question at COP27: Who Will Pay for Climate Change?

Poor nations, which have contributed the least to climate change but are among the most vulnerable to its effects today, are seeking more financial commitments from rich countries, many of which have grown their economies by burning fossil fuels.

 

[mspohr]

Who’s Driving Climate Change? New Data Catalogs 72,000 Polluters and Counting https://nyti.ms/3Tk3j3B

Their estimates are part a new global compendium of emissions released on Wednesday by Climate TRACE, a nonprofit coalition of environmental groups, technology companies and academic scientists. By using software to scour data from satellites and other sources, Climate TRACE says it can project emissions not just for whole countries and industries, but for individual polluting facilities. It catalogs steel and cement factories, power plants, oil and gas fields, cargo ships, cattle feedlots — 72,612 emitters and counting, a hyperlocal atlas of the human activities that are altering the planet’s chemistry.

 

[mspohr]

World’s biggest carmakers to build 400m more vehicles than 1.5C climate target will allow

The report, which focused on 12 carmakers globally, showed some of Australia’s most popular brands – Toyota, Volkswagen and Hyundai/Kia – were on track to make far more petrol and diesel cars than is sustainable if the world is to limit global heating to the Paris climate agreement target of 1.5C.Sven Teske, an associate professor at UTS and co-author of the report, said the research showed there was a need for a global ban on new petrol vehicles beyond 2030.

 

[mspohr]

The 1.5C climate target is dead – to prevent total catastrophe, Cop27 must admit it | Bill McGuire

In retrospect, it is clear that having a specific target, rather than fighting to stop every fraction of a degree in temperature rise, has actually been counterproductive. There is a perennial problem with targets, and that is that they are always still reachable – until they aren’t. In this way, they can be used to justify inertia right up until it is too late. And this is exactly how fossil-fuel corporations, world leaders and others have used 1.5C – as a get-out-of-jail card to justify inaction on emissions. Continuing to present this temperature threshold as an attainable target provides a fig leaf for business as usual. Take it away, and this dangerous jiggery-pokery is exposed for all to see.

Only if Cop acknowledges that 1.5C is now lost, and that dangerous, all-pervasive climate breakdown is unavoidable, will corporations and governments no longer have anywhere to hide, and no safety net that they can use as an excuse to do little or nothing. Only if they finally lay bare the bankruptcy of efforts to achieve the goals of Cop21 will we be able to move on to acknowledging that every 0.1C temperature rise needs fighting for. We also have to accept that we are going to crash through the 1.5C climate breakdown guardrail, so that we are forced to face the brutal reality of desperately challenging climate conditions in the decades to come. This means facing the fact that we have no choice but to adapt rapidly to a very different world, one that our grandparents would struggle to recognise.

 

[DrGriz]

The 1.5C climate target is dead – to prevent total catastrophe, Cop27 must admit it | Bill McGuire

In retrospect, it is clear that having a specific target, rather than fighting to stop every fraction of a degree in temperature rise, has actually been counterproductive. There is a perennial problem with targets, and that is that they are always still reachable – until they aren’t. In this way, they can be used to justify inertia right up until it is too late. And this is exactly how fossil-fuel corporations, world leaders and others have used 1.5C – as a get-out-of-jail card to justify inaction on emissions. Continuing to present this temperature threshold as an attainable target provides a fig leaf for business as usual. Take it away, and this dangerous jiggery-pokery is exposed for all to see.

Only if Cop acknowledges that 1.5C is now lost, and that dangerous, all-pervasive climate breakdown is unavoidable, will corporations and governments no longer have anywhere to hide, and no safety net that they can use as an excuse to do little or nothing. Only if they finally lay bare the bankruptcy of efforts to achieve the goals of Cop21 will we be able to move on to acknowledging that every 0.1C temperature rise needs fighting for. We also have to accept that we are going to crash through the 1.5C climate breakdown guardrail, so that we are forced to face the brutal reality of desperately challenging climate conditions in the decades to come. This means facing the fact that we have no choice but to adapt rapidly to a very different world, one that our grandparents would struggle to recognise.

This is spot on. Carbon credits? What a joke.

This needs to be all hands on deck if we have any hope of any traction at all.

Well, it's happening, and it didn't need to be as painful as it will be.