Re: Sorry, there was no "pause" in global warming ...
Except for 31,000 scientists ?
quote:"The petition project was a deliberate attempt to mislead scientists and to rally them in an attempt to undermine support for the Kyoto Protocol. The petition was not based on a review of the science of global climate change, nor were its signers experts in the field of climate science."
quote: Approved names on the list included fictional characters from the television show M*A*S*H, the movie Star Wars, Spice Girls group member Geri Halliwell, English naturalist Charles Darwin (d. 1882) and prank names such as "I. C. Ewe".
I have the reputation of being some kind of a physics idiot...
Hey, me too! I'm so bad at GR (How bad are you? Well I'll tell ya.) I'm so bad at GR that when I sit in my chair I have to strap myself in to keep from floating away! I don't know how many times I've been knocked on my knoggin by that damn ceiling fan.
While the UN Climate summit is going on the 13 largest gas/oil/coal energy companies held their own summit at the same time.
They produced their own program on how they will combat our desperate climate problems.
Problem is their program is just more of the same PR gloss they have been pushing for decades as their defense. And while acknowledging the Global Warming problem and what is needed to curb its continued destruction of the planet, Big Carbon's programs will not meet the global targets for carbon emissions reductions by even half by the end of the century.
Further, decrying governmental interference their plan leaves themselves in charge of humanity's climate change efforts by pumping millions of additional tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, and raking in $trillions, while the rest of us watch the world burn.
Their plan also calls, with government help, for their own major investments (i.e. control) into renewable technologies. Surprise, surprise.
OK but then we can address each of those situations with the carbon-grabbing technology separately without having to butt heads with the producers of the fossil fuel, no?
Sequestration alone will not solve the problem. Burning fossil fuels is the problem and needs to be *drastically* reduced. There is no way to do that without costing Big Carbon $$billions. They will not allow that to happen. And they have the means to stop it.
The best way I know of to reduce emissions by the amounts needed is through a carbon tax levied on the refineries and coal mines. That would drastically increase the cost of gasoline, oil, heating fuel, natural gas, coal, shale oil.
This will spur improvements and efficiencies in alternatives like electric cars, solar for homes and businesses, alternative electric generation. More and more people would switch to avoid the higher costs.
To offset the cost to the less fortunate in our society a tax refund equal to the average cost increase would be given. But only to those making less than some number, say $200,000.
Additionally, the new taxes would fund tax incentives to utilities to switch to alternative power sources and would fund R&D into more efficient vehicles and additional alternative power sources and sequestration technologies.
But Big Carbon has a stranglehold on our political institutions. And the voting public, dumb as a stump, is too disposed to their propaganda and manipulation to change that. We're screwed.
Those of us here will not be around for the bad stuff, but, our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will have it much harder than we as ecosystems and social systems come under the strain of near collapse. In the short term, 200-500 years, those poor souls will suffer greatly. In the long term ... well ... the only thing that will be left is for whatever remains of humanity to take a comfortable seat, bend over real far and kiss their ass goodbye.
New study shows global warming, even within the target 2oC, will cause greater climate changes than previously expected. Due to the land warming faster than the oceans over the short term, human population and growing regions will be under greater stress than initial indications.
quote:Using climate model simulations, researchers have shown that short-term, rapid warming will cause up to 91 percent of people on Earth to experience higher local temperatures. Plus, under this scenario, the likelihood of extreme heat events is at least twice as high in some areas. . . . And judging by our progress so far, that seems the most likely scenario. Greenhouse gases are continuing to surge worldwide, so much so that last year, scientists compared them to a "speeding freight train".
We do actually have the tools to slow that train down - it just looks like we need to act even faster than anyone suspected.
Re: Wind Turbines Are Not Killing Fields for Birds
I was looking to place it in Is The World Getting Better Or Worse? where we had a subtopic about this some time back but you beat me to it, which is fine and probably more appropriate given the Deranged Orange One's latest bs. Here is just fine.
I am beginning to think that this whole global warming thing is even more serious than previously thought and will lead to competition and even conflict in the world.
Your revelation is welcome, Phat, and you are not alone. More and more people the world over are awakening to the fact that we are in deep trouble already and that "conflict" is an understatement of what is to come.
Now we have to vote locally, nationally, to do those things science has been discussing for the last few decades. First and foremost, we need to re-join the community of nations trying to rebate in some small way the horrors we have already set for this planet.
We cannot stop it and it will be very bloody but at least we can try to save some of our great-grandchildren's lives.