Jump to content
Cold?
Local
Radar
Snow?

Report Climate change ipcc


Recommended Posts

These protestors seem light on practical solutions to their imagined calamity.
 How about doubling and quadruple oil and gas prices so that heating, food and transport are unaffordable for half the population, they'll probably die off quite quickly? That'll fix it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 806
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Am a bit of a loss with this debate. Firstly, because I don't get the name-calling and mudslinging, how does that help? But secondly and more importantly, I just can't understand how much more ev

The IPBES Global Assessment on biodiversity was released yesterday at https://www.ipbes.net/ and makes grim reading. It lists climate change as an increasing factor in the state of life on our planet.

It's amazing really how you continue to miss the point, I don't think anyone is saying climate change isn't caused by humans in some way, but it's not the sole cause, there are other factor at play, s

Posted Images

4 hours ago, Devonian said:

Erm, there are things we all do - sewerage can't be blamed upon the rich because we all have to defecate, a lack of sewers would be the fault of collective responsibility tho. The same with climate change I think. We ARE all responsible, but of course some more responsible than others.

Collective responsibility could be assumed if it was the collective that were responsible for what happened. But that isn't applicable to the climate mess which the fault doesn't lie at the common people.

 

Put simply, the cause of this crisis can be found at the top band of the worlds income and wealth. They created this mess so you'd think have the power to change things, to make positive contributions and negate their own heavy carbon impact, yet the vast vast majority of them decide not to out of greed and spite. The amounts of money the very top bands get its unfathomable, enough money to solve the climate crisis five times over. Yet instead many of the big corporate elites go for lobbying and dirty politics, the fuelling of denialism and the encouragement of unsustainable consumerism, all to protect their empire!

As long as the multinational elites continue to spew their bile and toxicity across this planet, I will have no guilt for leaving the lights on. I'm sick and tired of these campaigns telling people to make frugal changes in their life to help stop the climate crisis. In the grand scheme of things, the light bulbs you use means diddly squat! Its just another way for vulture capitalists to evade government action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

People buy what they think they want and need and at the lowest price.
Be that housing, transport food and entertainment.
Most of those items are supplied in a very competitive way by a combination of individual and corporate bodies
Proposing all that should be controlled by the state as part some kind of environmental agenda isn't very realistic and would mainly promote huge inefficiency and waste.

If such importance is attached to reducing CO2 emissions the way to do it is to invent alternatives that can compete.
Disrupting traffic, scrawling on roads with aerosols and leaving mounds of litter is a good way to antagonize everyone they seek to bully, it doesn't achieve anythng.

Edited by 4wd
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Gray-Wolf said:

Hi Dev!

In our small way ,in our time across various climate forums, we both did our best to highlight just how important climate action is (and try and show the 'Paid Deniers' for the charlatans they were!).and that we need act NOW!

Well, now we are here, nearly two decades of inaction later ......no ,not inaction as our yearly GHG outputs show us! .....we are now facing a whole set of very rude shocks/Cascade events that hold the potential to impact Billions of lives.

If anything the commitment/actions of the XR will again ignite serious debate in Govt.

I know of one Political Party with a large enough following, and Parliamentary presence, to actually try to push for the level and scale of Social change needed to make a difference at this late stage?

They appear to talk the talk but will they show us they can walk the walk?

 

But then if Yamal is on time and does go pop! over summer (giving us the opportunity to see if there are any migratory pathways from the 'pingo like structures' to the significant reserves of 'Natural Gas' that Russia currently exploits?) folk might be seeing a very real event occurring that has been directly forced by' human climate forcings' across the far North and this may well prove to be an even bigger advert for the validity of XR and bring better understanding to why they feel it necessary to take direct action? 

Thanks for the Yamal comment - I just learned myself a thing or two about methane:

https://www.resilience.org/stories/2018-09-05/methane-and-climate-10-things-you-should-know/

??

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think many folk remain blissfully unaware of the 'fat tail' of potentially horrid consequences having only ever been treated the more conservative out comes.

Part of the blame for this may be science itself as it allowed the paid denier assault to alter the way they conveyed 'risk' to us through the noughties?

We then had the way MSM dealt with the so called climate debate by allowing equal say from the Paid Deniers over this period so giving the impression that nothing was settled and there was as much evidence against AGW as that which Science was bringing us ,week upon week, to show the real danger it posed?

Whether you agree with XR actions they are at least bringing our climate woes to the fore and giving folk a proper look at just what may lie in store should we not take instant and meaningful action to mitigate.

Our Neolib elite (that depend upon the status quo to keep amassing more rude wealth?) will not let XR succeed and so will use all they have to quell the wider public's concerns.

If I am wrong on this then we are in far more trouble than I thought!

Edited by Gray-Wolf
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Gray-Wolf said:

 

Our Neolib elite (that depend upon the status quo to keep amassing more rude wealth?) will not let XR succeed and so will use all they have to quell the wider public's concerns.

 

This identity politics approach is what's toxic, the real reason many are on the climate protest bandwagon is a desire to rabble rouse against a nebulous 'elite' whatever that is.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, 4wd said:

This identity politics approach is what's toxic, the real reason many are on the climate protest bandwagon is a desire to rabble rouse against a nebulous 'elite' whatever that is.
 

You speak with great authority about these marchers. Are you in London with them, or in N. Yorkshire?

I'll let you know how it went, and what the people involved were like, when the person I know who is actually there returns.

Edited by Devonian
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Paul said:

So not all of it then?

I've asked this question before, but how much more and what evidence does science need to provide you in order for you to re-consider your view?

Explain to me why between 1940 and 1980 temperature was flat if not slightly decreasing during that time yet CO2 levels steadily increased during that 40 year period? The two don't correlate unless you are telling me there is a significant lag effect to CO2 in which case what is it and how does that occur. Science has proved nothing. IPCC projections from artic free ice by 2020 to runaway population growth etc etc have all not materialised. Ozone plays a big part in how climate patterns change over long periods and its not man who is the chief influencer it is the solar cycles and how low or active they are. I could go on but would probably be wasting my breathe.

So to answer your question Paul Science has to provide an awful lot more evidence to convince me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Devonian said:

 

You speak with great authority about these marchers. Are you in London with them, or in N. Yorkshire?

I'll let you know how it went, and what the people involved were like, when the person I know who is actually there returns.

Thing is though, they've arrested 120 or so people so far. Imagine if that was a right wing march, and 120 got arrested, they'd all be labeled as racist scum etc etc! So why should "climate activists" be let off criminal damage and disruption? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Rambo said:

Thing is though, they've arrested 120 or so people so far. Imagine if that was a right wing march, and 120 got arrested, they'd all be labeled as racist scum etc etc! So why should "climate activists" be let off criminal damage and disruption? 

They haven’t been let off though. They have been arrested and will now presumably face criminal charges.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 4wd said:

These protestors seem light on practical solutions to their imagined calamity.
 How about doubling and quadruple oil and gas prices so that heating, food and transport are unaffordable for half the population, they'll probably die off quite quickly? That'll fix it.

Or, how about making it a legal requirement for all new homes/new roofs to be fitted with solar panels? This would be simple enough to do and would cut GHG-emissions, without the need for any increase in fuel prices?:oldgood:

Oh dear, no extra profits for foreign-owned multinationals, and no extra £billions into offshore bank accounts!??

Edited by Ed Stone
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 4wd said:

This identity politics approach is what's toxic, the real reason many are on the climate protest bandwagon is a desire to rabble rouse against a nebulous 'elite' whatever that is.
 

Then again, by merely changing one or two words, the same sentence can be given an entirely different meaning:

'This identity politics approach is what's toxic, the real reason many are on the Brexit bandwagon is a desire to rabble rouse against a nebulous 'elite' whatever that is.'

Then again, it's not really that different, when you think about it!:oldgrin:
 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jonboy said:

Explain to me why between 1940 and 1980 temperature was flat if not slightly decreasing during that time yet CO2 levels steadily increased during that 40 year period? The two don't correlate unless you are telling me there is a significant lag effect to CO2 in which case what is it and how does that occur.

Interesting there WAS a flatlining of Co2 concentration that occurred between 1940-1960. it only got back to the average long trend by the 60-70s period. That was a period where we had both a COLD Atlantic thanks to the -ve AMO and quite a few La Nina events (especially in the 70s) which likely also took the edge of the global temperatures. Those two things alone may explain to a large extent why the global temperature didn't straight away start following the Co2 trend after the flatling of Co2 concentrations in the earlier period.

Once those two negative features eased off (indeed 80-95 was full of El Nino events and the Atlantic turned back +ve AMO around 1995) the inhabitors that masked the background warming suddenly turned unfavourable and allowed warming to accelerate. Since then global temps have slackened a little in terms of the trend and the warming we are seeing globally now seems purely driven by AGW factors.

I think what should be most worrying is that the last 5 years have ALL been the top 5 warmest years ever. Of course you can have one of flukes...but 5 in a row to all go top 5...more than a coincidence IMO...and normal trends don't work that way either, natural trends would have at least some more variability. All we see is upwards march over time.

PS - as for Arctic ice being gone by 2020...I've not seen that mentioned in any report. Some that I've just seen say we will be down to about 1 million km by late 2030s and ice free summer by 2050...but that's VERY different from 2020!! Indeed a report from 2012 said that the Arctic ice has retreated FASTER than their models had predicted.

 

Edited by kold weather
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jonboy said:

The planet did not die when CO2 was considerably higher in the past and won't know. All natural cycles I'm afraid

Ah guess 97% of climate scientists are wrong and the greenhouse effect is simply trash then... I guess your opinion is more important then all those people who spend the whole of their time studying the subject. 

3 hours ago, Rambo said:

Thing is though, they've arrested 120 or so people so far. Imagine if that was a right wing march, and 120 got arrested, they'd all be labeled as racist scum etc etc! So why should "climate activists" be let off criminal damage and disruption? 

Are you putting climate change protesters and far right racists in the same category? Seriously?

As Norrance says the protesters have been caught anyway...

Saying that I don't agree with the nature of some of the protests, hold the government to account and protest peacefully but don't disrupt the infrastructure and time of people who have to pass by. It's a shame the 120 protesters had to go too far.

Neither do I think a direct move to socialism is in any way the answer as suggested a few pages back. A mix of socialism and capitalism is far more sensible.

The most important thing is to protest against the lack of action done by the government to invest in renewables (look at how Osbourne cut carbon capture funding for example) and we need to drive innovation. As this switch becomes increasingly beneficial to the short term economy than that could set an example to other countries and they could follow. We could lead the way and make it easier for people to live greener lifestyles. We are in a position to make that move.

My worry is that a government could simply put the burden completely on people themselves by lumping higher taxes on fuels. That is a bad move as the 'yellow jackets' movement in France showed. It hits the poor the hardest.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rambo said:

Thing is though, they've arrested 120 or so people so far. Imagine if that was a right wing march, and 120 got arrested, they'd all be labeled as racist scum etc etc! So why should "climate activists" be let off criminal damage and disruption? 

Err, read four's posts.  He was quick to label them as a rabble and as bullies who want half the worlds population to die - should I laugh or cry at such descriptions... Meanwhile, in another place, someone else called them snowflakes.

'Bullying snowflakes' - LOL.

Edited by Devonian
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ed Stone said:

Or, how about making it a legal requirement for all new homes/new roofs to be fitted with solar panels? This would be simple enough to do and would cut GHG-emissions, without the need for any increase in fuel prices?:oldgood:

Oh dear, no extra profits for foreign-owned multinationals, and no extra £billions into offshore bank accounts!??

The solutions are not rocket science are they...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jonboy said:

Explain to me why between 1940 and 1980 temperature was flat if not slightly decreasing during that time yet CO2 levels steadily increased during that 40 year period? The two don't correlate unless you are telling me there is a significant lag effect to CO2 in which case what is it and how does that occur. Science has proved nothing. IPCC projections from artic free ice by 2020 to runaway population growth etc etc have all not materialised. Ozone plays a big part in how climate patterns change over long periods and its not man who is the chief influencer it is the solar cycles and how low or active they are. I could go on but would probably be wasting my breathe.

So to answer your question Paul Science has to provide an awful lot more evidence to convince me.

And, just how much of the relevant science do you yourself apprehend, eh? About the same amount as Nigel bloody Lawson does? How can that which you so clearly fail to comprehend ever convince you of anything!:wallbash:

If you must insist on asking questions, you should at least ask sensible ones. You are beginning to sound like a creationist: Can you create life in a test-tube? No? Right then -- God did it!

Edited by Ed Stone
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ed Stone said:

Or, how about making it a legal requirement for all new homes/new roofs to be fitted with solar panels? This would be simple enough to do and would cut GHG-emissions, without the need for any increase in fuel prices?:oldgood:

Oh dear, no extra profits for foreign-owned multinationals, and no extra £billions into offshore bank accounts!??

Ed...

These people are stating that they want to bring the UK to a standstill.(If necessary).

Their intention is then to carry out the same process in over 30 countries in the world.

But not Russia, China and the SE Asian economies.

They are asking for a Carbon neutral economy by 2025, without the total collapse of the western economy.

I am afraid that a few new solar rooves will not achieve their aims. The countries they are targeting are the ones that have done most to try and reduce their CO2. It is China and South East Asia that are now producing over 50% of the worlds CO2,and this level will increase over the next 15 years.

Our whole economy is based upon oil, these people have come up with nothing positive as to how it is achieved.

Your idea of solar panels is the only one I have seen with anything positive, but will not result in a CO2 neutral environment, without the use of nuclear for backup, and they are anti-nuclear. 

How do you change all the transport infrastructure by 2025?. EV are still many years off as a transport medium for an industrial economy. They are still many years off for ordinary usage for travel outside ones locality.

Four is correct. They are behaving as bullies. They have no positive plans of their own. Just lets stop the current economic environment and society, seems to be their intention.  Their  leaders call for a change of society and are attempting to use CC as their hammer for achieving it - The snowflakes just play follow my leader. It will be interesting to see how many organisers are arrested.

If they had any positive means of 'decarbonising' - working on a country wide scale -  then they have some chance of success.

But there is nothing, apart from the cheering of the many verbal onlookers,  such as on here.. 

MIA   

   

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Midlands Ice Age said:

Ed...

These people are stating that they want to bring the UK to a standstill.(If necessary).

Their intention is then to carry out the same process in over 30 countries in the world.

But not Russia, China and the SE Asian economies.

They are asking for a Carbon neutral economy by 2025, without the total collapse of the western economy.

I am afraid that a few new solar rooves will not achieve their aims. The countries they are targeting are the ones that have done most to try and reduce their CO2. It is China and South East Asia that are now producing over 50% of the worlds CO2,and this level will increase over the next 15 years.

Our whole economy is based upon oil, these people have come up with nothing positive as to how it is achieved.

Your idea of solar panels is the only one I have seen with anything positive, but will not result in a CO2 neutral environment, without the use of nuclear for backup, and they are anti-nuclear. 

How do you change all the transport infrastructure by 2025?. EV are still many years off as a transport medium for an industrial economy. They are still many years off for ordinary usage for travel outside ones locality.

Four is correct. They are behaving as bullies. They have no positive plans of their own. Just lets stop the current economic environment and society, seems to be their intention.  Their  leaders call for a change of society and are attempting to use CC as their hammer for achieving it - The snowflakes just play follow my leader. It will be interesting to see how many organisers are arrested.

If they had any positive means of 'decarbonising' - working on a country wide scale -  then they have some chance of success.

But there is nothing, apart from the cheering of the many verbal onlookers,  such as on here.. 

MIA   

   

But we are now paying the price for yesterday's emissions...and the bulk of those were emitted by the developed Western nations, were they not? And anywho, whatever happened to all that faux-concern about our denying the 'developing' nations their right to advance?

That's the problem with denialist 'science'...it needs to change its stance from day-to-day, from week-to-week, from year-to-year...and on and on and on...ad infinitum!

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Midlands Ice Age said:

Ed...

These people are stating that they want to bring the UK to a standstill.(If necessary).

...

Four is correct. They are behaving as bullies. They have no positive plans of their own. Just lets stop the current economic environment and society, seems to be their intention.  Their  leaders call for a change of society and are attempting to use CC as their hammer for achieving it - The snowflakes just play follow my leader. It will be interesting to see how many organisers are arrested.

If they had any positive means of 'decarbonising' - working on a country wide scale -  then they have some chance of success.

But there is nothing, apart from the cheering of the many verbal onlookers,  such as on here.. 

MIA   

   

 

MIA they're protesting. It might go on all week, at max that's a small part of a few cities for 1/52 of the year.  Bring the UK to a standstill? I think not.

I think we can say they're not bullies AND snowflakes. So, for you they are bullies - all these women who protest? The kids there, bullies too? People drawing with chalk on the road - dangerous bullying arty types? People carrying offensive plants onto bridges - bullies? People cooking food - dangerous bullies?

Its like Monty Python - 'How do you defend yourself from a man attacking you with a piece of chalk or some porridge'....The climate sceptic answer seems to be you call him names to draw attention away from what he's actually trying to get across....

'No solutions' you say. Well, that'll make everything Ok wont it - close your eyes, pretend enough and bad things will go away...

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Midlands Ice Age said:

Ed...

These people are stating that they want to bring the UK to a standstill.(If necessary).

There are a minority that do, not all. I would never want to put the UK at a standstill and I do think that those who cross the line are making their protests counter productive.

Their intention is then to carry out the same process in over 30 countries in the world.

But not Russia, China and the SE Asian economies.

I agree with your concerns here but if nobody does anything how can things change? Given how innovate humans can be, what can we come up with if we really try? Look at the Montreal Protocol for example, yes climate change is much more complicated but it shows what we can do when we set our mind to things. If nobody says anything nothing ever changes... but thankfully we have the right to speak out here.

They are asking for a Carbon neutral economy by 2025, without the total collapse of the western economy.

This I don't think is achievable so soon but the more effort we put in the quicker a carbon neutral economy will be. Economic shocks should be avoided but at some point the cost of climate change will outweigh the benefits of oil and gas. A bit of foresight is needed. Sadly I think we will turn to geo-engineering but regardless of your view on climate change, surely clean air is better for all.

I am afraid that a few new solar rooves will not achieve their aims. The countries they are targeting are the ones that have done most to try and reduce their CO2. It is China and South East Asia that are now producing over 50% of the worlds CO2,and this level will increase over the next 15 years.

Again I agree about China and SE Asia but we are in a position where we can push things forward. If nobody does anything how are things meant to progress?

Our whole economy is based upon oil, these people have come up with nothing positive as to how it is achieved.

Do you think people in the oil industry will have motivation to do so? when oil gives these companies so much wealth?

Your idea of solar panels is the only one I have seen with anything positive, but will not result in a CO2 neutral environment, without the use of nuclear for backup, and they are anti-nuclear. 

This is where things like the tidal barrier in Swansea should have been given the go-ahead, we need to try new things. Wind and solar do provide a lot of renewable energy though but we do need more.

How do you change all the transport infrastructure by 2025?. EV are still many years off as a transport medium for an industrial economy. They are still many years off for ordinary usage for travel outside ones locality.

Push for the process to be sped up? Fund more research to make this switch occur faster more easily?

Four is correct. They are behaving as bullies. They have no positive plans of their own. Just lets stop the current economic environment and society, seems to be their intention.  Their  leaders call for a change of society and are attempting to use CC as their hammer for achieving it - The snowflakes just play follow my leader. It will be interesting to see how many organisers are arrested.

120 so far have been arrested but lets not just brand the term 'snowflake' to the whole group of protesters.

If they had any positive means of 'decarbonising' - working on a country wide scale -  then they have some chance of success.

But there is nothing, apart from the cheering of the many verbal onlookers,  such as on here.. 

But it is the elephant in the room, we have to do something about AGW. We can't keep ignoring it.

MIA   

   

 

You make some interesting points, I'll chip in with some replies...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

the trouble is the alternatives to fossil fuels all takes time and development and making them efficient wont happen overnight..for example i am working on a development in Edmonton..carbon neutral..all the heating and cooling is provided by geo thermal ...electricity by solar and wind..sustainable building materials...problem is the cost is very high compared with traditional techniques and off set cost are 25-40 years...its great development but we dont quite have the technology and infrastructure to make it more efficient and cost neutral..not yet..we are 10 maybe 20 years to get there..but we are getting there but it takes time and effort.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, cheeky_monkey said:

the trouble is the alternatives to fossil fuels all takes time and development and making them efficient wont happen overnight..for example i am working on a development in Edmonton..carbon neutral..all the heating and cooling is provided by geo thermal ...electricity by solar and wind..sustainable building materials...problem is the cost is very high compared with traditional techniques and off set cost are 25-40 years...its great development but we dont quite have the technology and infrastructure to make it more efficient and cost neutral..not yet..we are 10 maybe 20 years to get there..but we are getting there but it takes time and effort.

Indeed.

But, plenty of people knew it would take time decades ago - that's why we should have acted decades ago. And in some senses we have acted - the growth of solar across the world is astonishing - but it could have been greater, and yet people like trump drag their feet and here solar growth will probably reduce as aid is cut.

The 'nays' have been stronger that the 'ayes', and they still are, if anything they are stronger (at least in terms of power). Resistance to change is strong - hell, I have a car, I buy some thing packed in plastic too. That it IS difficult to get change (though I think the solutions are practical and possible) is part of why XRers see such urgency.

Edited by Devonian
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should all be protesting if we cared for our planet and future generations.?. especially for those who like to see better than a few days of wet snow during winter??

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The 'flatline' from 40 to 80 was a period that we first noted the flip side of our polluting ('Dimming') and once the west passed its clean air acts we saw a sudden jump in the rate of change in global temps but this was short lived due to the headlong dash of China into industrialisation ( leading to another 'flatline' in the noughties). Of course the negative naturals also had their part to play?

We are now coming out of the China dimming and are also into a long period of Pacific 'naturals' aiding AGW.

You can expect the current uptick in global temps to continue to increase and a new run of record Global temps to occur over the coming decade?

If this triggers any of the cascade impacts we expect then all bets are off!

Let's get through this coming summer and find out if those 'pingo like structures' ,ripe for exploding, are connected into the natural gas reserves below via the geological faulting in the region?

It'd pizz Russia off to see it natural gas wealth flooding the atmosphere above the Arctic......... but then the rest of us will not be best pleased either!!!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...