WTF Climate Change News

Kara Spengler

Queer OccupyE9 Sluni-Goon
Sep 20, 2018
821
SL: November RL: DC
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
December, 2008
SLU Posts
23289
#61
Contrapoints is a really awesome channel you should all watch. Here she is talking about global warming:

Oh is that what that vid was about? I saw it on my queue this weekend but was not sure what it would be about. Second about contrapoints being a great channel, I keep forgetting to send her a fan email.
 

Katheryne Helendale

🐱 Kitty Queen🐱
Sep 20, 2018
695
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
#62
If you're in your 40s now, you're screwed. You'll be in your 70s or 80s when things start going south, so young enough to live through it but too old to fend for yourselves. Good luck, you'll need it.
I'm 49. Not quite sure where I'll fall into that range.
 

Beebo Brink

Resident Grouch
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Sep 20, 2018
183
#63
I'm 49. Not quite sure where I'll fall into that range.
Current projections are that climate change will start to make major impacts by 2040-50. You'll be in your 70s during that decade. Possible scenarios you'll be facing are food shortages, water shortages, energy brownouts and civil unrest due to escalating floods of climate refugees. Depending on where you live, you'll either end up being a refugee fighting for resources or a resident trying to hold your own against them.
 
Sep 20, 2018
695
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
#65
Have you considered picking up a drug habit to move things along?
Well, the good news is, between my high blood pressure and my Crohn's, I probably won't be around long enough to live the full effects of the apocalypse.
 

Beebo Brink

Resident Grouch
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Sep 20, 2018
183
#67
‘A kind of dark realism’: Why the climate change problem is starting to look too big to solve

“Like a married couple that has put off saving for the future for too long, at some point it becomes nearly impossible to retire comfortably,” Nigel Purvis, co-founder of the advocacy group Climate Advisers, wrote in 2015. “Given where global emissions are today and the urgency of reducing emissions, we just don’t have time for a system that gradually increases climate ambition every five years — the numbers simply don’t work.”
 

Beebo Brink

Resident Grouch
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Sep 20, 2018
183
#68

Beebo Brink

Resident Grouch
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Sep 20, 2018
183
#70
It's easy to fall into the trap of blaming government for the lack of meaningful action on climate change, but here are two recent examples of the grassroots resistance that meets even the most anemic attempts to alter our course.

'Retreat' Is Not An Option As A California Beach Town Plans For Rising Seas
Retreating from sea level rise can take different forms....It can also mean removing or relocating development from vulnerable areas, using buyout programs or transferring property rights...The blowback, though, was almost immediate. Realtors' groups spoke out against the plan. Homeowners were hysterical.

"What we learned from our community is that even the mere discussion of managed retreat, in the minds of some, completely devalues their property," says Amanda Lee, Del Mar's senior city planner.

The concern was that if the city formalized a plan that included retreat, it would be harder for property owners to get loans or sell their land.
France Suspends Fuel Tax Increase That Spurred Violent Protests
...to the protesters, Mr. Macron is concerned about the end of the world, while they are worried about the end of the month. They say that their purchasing power has dwindled so much that they have trouble making ends meet in rural areas and in the suburbs and exurbs of big cities.
The sacrifices needed to mitigate the absolute worst of climate change will fall disproportionately on those people who are challenged to just get through the day. People who are struggling with the "now" aren't in a position to worry about disasters looming a decade or more in the future, no matter how catastrophic. This isn't just capricious self-centeredness or stupidity, it's a very realistic assessment of people's logical priorities.

The U.S. Government could have all the will necessary, but attempts to impose that will on the population would most likely lead to riots and armed resistance. The "ask" that is needed to make meaningful changes -- in an incredibly short time frame -- is huge. It would cripple people's ability to function, to work and support their family. You can't completely dismantle an infrastructure built around cars and consumer consumption in a matter of years, not without significant pain that people simply won't accept.

Transitions of the magnitude we need will take decades, if not centuries. Unfortunately, time is not on our side.
 
Sep 21, 2018
234
SLU Posts
9073
#71
Xcel Energy Commits To Eliminating All Carbon Emissions


Minneapolis-based Xcel Energy says it has heard enough and it is clearly time to act. The utility which provides electricity to customers of eight Midwestern and Western states is taking a leading role in reducing carbon emissions. At an announcement on Tuesday in Denver, Xcel CEO Ben Fowke said, “it’s important for us to act now. Our communities and our customers want us to.” Fowke is committing the Xcel to eliminating all carbon emissions by 2050. He says the goal is important not only for protection of the environment, but also makes good economic sense for customers and Xcel shareholders.
 
Sep 20, 2018
695
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
#72

Beebo Brink

Resident Grouch
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Sep 20, 2018
183
#73
The first 80 percent reduction should be accomplished by 2030 using presently proven and cost effective technologies.

Attaining the remaining 20 percent reduction will largely depend on still to be developed technologies – things like battery storage and carbon sequestration technologies.
Emphasis mine. This reliance on the unknown is a bit dodgy.

Another of my concerns is that as infrastructure begins to deteriorate under the strains created by climate change, these initiatives will falter. The disruptive effects of climate change are yet another unknown.
 

Sid

I'm not old, I'm vintage!
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Sep 20, 2018
671
Limburg, Netherlands
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
Oct 2009
#74
  • Sid

    Sid

On the bright side, a lot can be done when needed. It is not so that on (lets say) January 1st 2035 the disaster button will be pushed somewhere in the Universe so the whole world will be to ashes. Things will happen more gradually. When for instance big parts of Amsterdam will be flooded 3 times in 10 years. Things will get urgent for that city and money will not be a big issue then, because it the problem has to be faced then, no excuses left to wait then.
Most techniques to come to a rescue already exist, even if it is mainly only on the drawing boards, no body really wants to pay the bills yet.
Not the industry, not the commerce not the Joe Averages.
The time will come when they will be willing to do so: When it is urgent enough.
Research is very important and figuring out practical solutions in advance mandatory.
As an example, the plant breeders who are researching / trying to create vegetable varieties at the moment, that could grow with less fresh water or in saltier soil environments.
As I wrote before, adapting is more important than putting all the money on trying to reverse things. We don't even know for sure for what percentage human activity is causing the climate change that is happening or how much of it is reversible.
A cleaner environment is important, but surviving is key.
 

Beebo Brink

Resident Grouch
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Sep 20, 2018
183
#75
We don't even know for sure for what percentage human activity is causing the climate change...
If memory serves, you've said that before, but it's not true. Scientists actually have a pretty good idea of what and how much human activity is adding to greenhouse gas emissions. Sources can be identified and traced and rising rates can be quantified.

...or how much of it is reversible.
Now THAT is true.

What we've pumped into the atmosphere already has set mechanisms in motion that may very well be beyond our control. We're assuming that, at the very least, ending our CO2 emissions will slow the pace and severity of climate change, but there's also speculation of a tipping point beyond which feedback loops will outstrip our own contributions.
 

Beebo Brink

Resident Grouch
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Sep 20, 2018
183
#76
Most techniques to come to a rescue already exist, even if it is mainly only on the drawing boards, no body really wants to pay the bills yet.
Not the industry, not the commerce not the Joe Averages.
The time will come when they will be willing to do so: When it is urgent enough.
It was urgent in the 1970s, at a time when we actually could have made meaningful progress at averting catastrophic climate change. You're not talking about urgency for action, you're actually talking about the visibility of the results of inaction.

At some point the visibility of the problem will become glaringly obvious, but that visibility is time-delayed. It's exactly like the alcoholic who is diagnosed with cirrhosis of the liver and finally says "Oh, I guess I'd better stop drinking." If you're really fortunate, you'll live awhile longer, but your health is compromised. The sense of urgency comes too late, after a lifetime of unrecognized disease progression.

We could very easily pass a tipping point of recovery before we see the level of climate damage that triggers our epiphany.

My point is not to harp on the worst case scenario because I enjoy wallowing in pessimism. It's to clear away sunny optimism that's built on fantasy scenarios of redemption. Complacency drives me crazy. "Oh, we'll think of something. Eventually." That's just not going to cut it.

People who are young enough to be affected need to pay attention to how they're going to get through this era. In that you and I are both in agreement: they need to focus on survival.
 
Sep 20, 2018
102
RL: NZ / EVE: 1DQ1-A & Niarja / SL: Jessie
SL Rez
2007
#77
It was urgent in the 1970s, at a time when we actually could have made meaningful progress at averting catastrophic climate change. You're not talking about urgency for action, you're actually talking about the visibility of the results of inaction.
A lot of the problems we are facing now, we were warned about in the 1970s and earlier. I recall reading and hearing of the effects of CFCs, global warming, antibiotic resistance due to misuse, and pesticide overuse during my childhood. But because all the negative effects are externalities (very wrongly so), there was no financial impetus to do the right thing. The cost of doing the right thing now far exceeds the cost of doing the right thing back then.