Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

[Mithgul]

Everything you said has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked in this thread. The heat trapping physics of CO2 and CH4 are irrefutable, there has never been such a drastic spike in their atmospheric concentrations while humans existed, and global cooling was a limited theory of what might happen if man made particulates kept increasing to block sunlight and is actually an example of humanity taking steps to reduce their impact.

How the "Global Cooling" Story Came to Be

Nine paragraphs written for Newsweek in 1975 continue to trump 40 years of climate science. It is a record that has its author amazed

www.scientificamerican.com

I didn't realize the Tesla doesn't have amazing tech and isn't an amazing car.

My discussing CO2 is past history, Sorry if you confused that with human history. I can site other examples of research but that is not my point here.

My points stand. I do not disagree with being a good custodian of our planet, My disagreement is why.

Can't we just agree to do the right thing?

 

[JRP3]

My discussing CO2 is past history, Sorry if you confused that with human history. I can site other examples of research but that is not my point here.

The earth was once a molten ball, so what? Humans exist because of a relatively stable climate we evolved with that has relatively slow changes over time. Extreme climate events lead to extinction events.

This look concerning to you at all?

My points stand. I do not disagree with being a good custodian of our planet, My disagreement is why.

Can't we just agree to do the right thing?

We can't allow incorrect statements about climate to go unchallenged like your "global cooling" nonsense. If you don't understand the impacts of humans how can we "just do the right thing?" How would you even understand what the "wrong things" are?

 

[eevee-fan]

I didn't realize the Tesla doesn't have amazing tech and isn't an amazing car.

My discussing CO2 is past history, Sorry if you confused that with human history. I can site other examples of research but that is not my point here.

My points stand. I do not disagree with being a good custodian of our planet, My disagreement is why.

Can't we just agree to do the right thing?

Are you a single cell life form? Humans have not existed through all those periods.

 

[Mithgul]

See, that's the thing. Some folks find it necessary to be personal and insulting. That has no place here or anyplace civilized folks talk. And no, humans have not existed through all pre-history.

I have not and would not make a personal insult here.

 

[JRP3]

I have not and would not make a personal insult here.

What personal insult? More importantly, do you understand all the facts that are being presented to you or are we just wasting time?

 

[David_Cary]

Unfortunately just trying to do the right thing is pretty complicated and I would think everyone who is knowledgeable about the world should realize that.

We can't just "do the right thing" without understanding what that is. Remember the whole paper vs plastic debate? It was an honest debate even though the right answer is no bag of course....

Everything you do has an impact on the world from what you eat to what you buy and the fuel you use. There are very smart people who worry more about other impacts like you suggest but the overwhelming consensus is the carbon problem in number one. Thankfully, most of the things that help with carbon also protect biodiversity etc. But certainly not all. We know that solar panels and batteries do not magically appear without mining.

To truly "do the right thing" you have to understand the myriad of damages that we do.

As far as Tesla being an amazing car with great tech, I have a combined 12 years and 150k miles on ours. Are cameras great tech compared to radar and lidar? The vast majority of cars sold now are 3/Y - and the suspension isn't great. I have a 2 series rental car now and it has a better suspension for sure. The seats are way better. Now the drivetrain is crap and the software is crap and overall, I'd rather be in a Tesla but I could see my next car being a BMW EV.

But - for sure - sometimes buttons and levers are better. And the progress has really stalled. Tesla is gradually falling behind on many things. I mean list the things that have been added to the 3/Y since inception over the 6 years. Pretty sad really. I mean my Leaf had a heat pump in 2013. My 545 had a heated steering wheel in 2005. That car also had better auto windshield wipers. My Model S from 2015 still has better auto wipers than the 3 does.

 

[JRP3]

Every vehicle is a compromise of some sort, none will have everything. My '22 Model 3 LR is overall the best car I've ever owned even though certain aspects could still be better. The Supercharger network means I can't realistically consider any other EV at this point in time.

 

[DrGriz]

I was unaware of this opportunity:

In the United States, the health sector is responsible for nearly 9 percent of the nation’s greenhouse gases. Researchers estimate that the environmental harm caused by medical care ultimately costs as many lives as preventable medical errors, which are responsible for as many as 98,000 deaths annually. This is in direct conflict with the mission of the healing professions.

“Desflurane has the global warming potential of over 3,700 equivalents of carbon dioxide,” she told me. “It lasts for 14 years in the atmosphere.” Her organization is among those that have been urging health-care systems to move away from desflurane and switch to sevoflurane and isoflurane, anesthetics that are clinically equivalent but have a small fraction of the environmental consequence of desflurane.

He also measured and documented each anesthesiologist’s desflurane use. When Chesebro informed a colleague that his use of desflurane was equivalent to driving a fleet of 12 Hummers, the colleague sputtered in defense, “But I drive a Prius!”

Paywalled I know. But if someone wants to read the whole article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/04/05/health-care-climate-change-desflurane-anesthetic/

 

[David_Cary]

Of course 14 years is pretty quick. Likely "des" as it is called will be banned or curtailed significantly over the next decade so will be less of a major player than other things. The conflict in health care (like many other things) is the commitment to the patient over all else. On some level that is a good thing but it can also lead to neglecting external realities - like cost and enviromental damage.
Scotland banned Des this year. I would guess the EU will over the next 5 years and the US over 10 years.
I had recently heard of a surgeon at Yale who avoided all inhalation anesthetics over these concerns. This was in the last 6 months. So I would argue that it is becoming realized and apparently publicized at an appropriate rate. And changes will come.
The population won't resist this like they will resist gas taxes and beef bans (or heavy taxes). So this is easy stuff.

 

[ggies07]

OCI+ Update: Tackling Methane in the Oil and Gas Sector - RMI

The Oil Climate Index plus Gas (OCI+) reveals the methane problem by quantifying and comparing greenhouse gas emissions from over two-thirds of the world’s oil and gas supplies.

rmi.org

 

[eevee-fan]

 

[ggies07]

sign me up as a consumer and investor! Thanks for sharing.

 

[mspohr]

I have several clay cups that I reuse every day. No waste.

 

[mspohr]

Why elephants, otters and whales are nature’s secret weapons against climate breakdown | Matthew Gould

What do elephants, otters and whales have in common? They all increase the amount of carbon that can be stored in their ecosystems. Elephants disperse seeds and trample low vegetation, enabling taller trees to grow. Sea otters eat sea urchins, allowing kelp to flourish. Whales feed at depth and release nutrients as they breathe and rest at the surface, stimulating phytoplankton production. It isn’t just these three. We are beginning to learn that many species have complex effects on their environments that change the amount of carbon stored by their surrounding ecosystems – ultimately affecting climate change. When the population of wildebeest in the Serengeti plummeted due to disease, they no longer grazed as much, and the uneaten grass caused more frequent and more intense fires. Bringing back the numbers of wildebeest through disease management has meant fewer and smaller fires. And the Serengeti has gone from releasing carbon back to storing it.

These are examples contained in a stunning new paper just published in Nature. It makes the case that animals cause ecosystems to be more effective in storing carbon, through their eating, moving, trampling, digging, defecating and building. Looking across a range of different studies, it concludes that wild animals account for only 0.3% of the carbon in the total global biomass, but can cause anywhere between 15% and 250% difference in how much carbon is stored in a given ecosystem.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

COOL!
Hope to see these cups also in Italy SOON!

 

[mspohr]

Climate diplomacy is hopeless, says author of How to Blow Up a Pipeline

As activists around the world take increasingly desperate actions against destructive projects, Andreas Malm told the Guardian he had not “a shred of hope” elites were prepared to take the urgent action needed to avert catastrophic climate change. “If we let the dominant classes take care of this problem, they’re going to drive at top speed into absolute inferno,” Malm said. “Nothing suggests that they have any capacity of doing anything else of their own accord because of how enmeshed they are with the process of capital accumulation.ause of how enmeshed they are with the process of capital accumulation.

“What that means is stopping pointing out what the government should or shouldn’t be doing [and instead] actively stopping the government doing what they shouldn’t be,” they said, in a direct echo of Malm’s rhetoric – rhetoric he, in turn, had directly quoted from no less radical a figure than Ulrike Meinhof: “Protest is when I say I don’t like this. Resistance is when I put an end to what I don’t like.”

Clearly, not everyone is blowing up pipelines – I don’t know if anyone is doing it. But the idea that the big crime is to build a pipeline, and not potentially blow it up – that idea has a very broad appeal.”

 

[mspohr]

Costa Rica restored its ravaged land to health. The rich UK has no excuse for such complete failure | George Monbiot

Why does a wealthy, powerful nation struggle while a small, much poorer one succeeds, asks Guardian columnist George Monbiot

www.theguardian.com

Until the Arias government took power, Costa Rica suffered one of the world’s worst deforestation rates: on one scientific assessment, its forest cover fell to just 24.4% of the country. Today, forests occupy 57%, which, Umaña tells me, is close to the maximum: some parts were never forested, while others are now occupied by productive farms and cities. While a small amount of illegal timber felling continues, Costa Rica is the only tropical country to have more or less stopped and then reversed deforestation. It now has one of the world’s highest percentages of protected areas. How did it happen?

So why does a rich, powerful nation fail, while a small, much poorer one succeeds? Talking to Umaña and researching the history of this transformation suggests a simple answer: quality of government. When governments are committed, decisive and consistent, things happen. When they are beholden to lobby groups, cronyism and corruption, and delegate responsibility to an abstraction called “the market”, they spend decades flapping their hands while chaos reigns.

 

[mspohr]

Down to Earth: The path to radically lower emissions tucked away inside the devastating IPCC report

In this week’s newsletter: The world has no choice but to halve carbon output by 2030 – one chart shows the way forward

www.theguardian.com

It feels impossible. The world has to slash carbon emissions by almost half in the next seven years to remain on track for just 1.5C of global heating and avoid the worst of climate impacts. Yet emissions are rising. However, tucked away in the recent (and devastating) landmark report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is a chart that provides the road map for an escape from catastrophe. It assesses with extraordinary clarity the potential for emissions cuts of more than 40 options.

“What struck me especially was that wind and solar was so big,” Prof Kornelis Blok, at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, told me this week. Blok, who led the work on the chart, identified the winners: “The big five are wind, solar, energy efficiency, stopping deforestation and reducing methane emissions.”

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Down to Earth: The path to radically lower emissions tucked away inside the devastating IPCC report

In this week’s newsletter: The world has no choice but to halve carbon output by 2030 – one chart shows the way forward

www.theguardian.com

It feels impossible. The world has to slash carbon emissions by almost half in the next seven years to remain on track for just 1.5C of global heating and avoid the worst of climate impacts. Yet emissions are rising. However, tucked away in the recent (and devastating) landmark report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is a chart that provides the road map for an escape from catastrophe. It assesses with extraordinary clarity the potential for emissions cuts of more than 40 options.

“What struck me especially was that wind and solar was so big,” Prof Kornelis Blok, at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, told me this week. Blok, who led the work on the chart, identified the winners: “The big five are wind, solar, energy efficiency, stopping deforestation and reducing methane emissions.”

Not really surprising that renewable electricity generation would have so large an impact when a key part of the process is electrification.

 

[mspohr]

John Kerry: relying on technology to remove carbon dioxide is ‘dangerous’

Relying on technology to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is “dangerous” and a cause for “alarm”, John Kerry has warned. The US special presidential envoy for climate said in an interview that new technologies may not prevent the world from passing “tipping points”, key temperature thresholds that, once passed, could trigger a cascade of unstoppable physical effects.ove-carbon-dioxide-dangerous

He called on governments to deploy renewable energy faster, along with related technologies such as electric vehicles. These are already available for widespread deployment, and could prevent the world from reaching the high levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that would cause temperatures to breach the 1.5C threshold.

He pointed to the Inflation Reduction Act, the $369bn (£296bn) push by the US to invest in renewable energy and low-carbon technologies. EU governments have protested at aspects of the legislation, such as tax breaks for green companies to set up in the US, which they see as protectionist and a potential competitive threat.