Climate Change: Why aren't more people concerned about it?

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 921 - 940 of total 2200 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
pyro

Big Wall climber
Calabasas
Jan 27, 2017 - 06:54am PT
This thread will get shut down by the new administration.. lol
EdwardT

Trad climber
Retired
Jan 27, 2017 - 07:47am PT
At the current rate of growth in CO2, levels will hit 500 ppm within 50 years.

Look who's leading the way...


tuolumne_tradster

Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
Jan 27, 2017 - 09:47am PT
EdT: that map appears to have significant data gaps...especially Russia, Brazil, N Africa, Middle East...only 4 or 5 stations in India. Nonetheless I think the general conclusion is correct...sh#tload of pollution from China. Probably would be more red stations if India, Pakistan, Iran, S Arabia & Iraq & E Europe had more spatial coverage.

Splater

climber
Grey Matter
Jan 27, 2017 - 10:35am PT
Those are maps of soot, not CO2. Both are issues, but are not the same. Some soot travels long distances, but it affects the immediate downwind population the most, somewhat like groundwater pollution. CO2 & other GHGs become global quite quickly.
It is more difficult to track the actual point sources of pollution and soot, so taxing products to add this external cost is more difficult than taxing GHG emissions. It will be quite a first step to even add a GHG emission equalizer tax to world trade (where the USA is one of the worst emitters), much less the other types of pollution (where the USA isn't so bad), and of course unlikely in a trumphoax universe.
EdwardT

Trad climber
Retired
Jan 27, 2017 - 11:27am PT
Good idea, Dingus.

Get the US, Canada, UK and EU on board, it might just have a significant impact. Tax emerging markets on the back end. Make it worth their while to aggressively move to cleaner energy production.
tuolumne_tradster

Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
Jan 27, 2017 - 03:06pm PT
but it affects the immediate downwind population the most, somewhat like groundwater pollution
but on drastically different time scales and exposure pathways
tuolumne_tradster

Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
Feb 1, 2017 - 08:22am PT
An Open Letter to President Donald Trump and His Administration

We the undersigned are calling on you, in the most urgent terms possible, to maintain our country’s commitment to meeting the greenhouse gas emission targets set forth in the Paris Climate Agreement. This agreement is the first of a series of steps required to avert substantial climate change. The Earth’s climate is entering a state that has not been experienced in human history. Continuing to produce greenhouse gases at current rates will have catastrophic, unstoppable consequences for our environment, our economy, and our country. Bold and decisive action may still avoid the worst scenarios, allow for adaptation to the changes, mitigate the damage, and bring new economic opportunities to our country. To this end, we ask that you ensure America’s place as the global leader on climate action.

With this letter, we aim to express the degree to which the scientists and intellectual leaders of our state, speaking for themselves and not on behalf of their respective employers, agree on the facts of climate change. Despite misleading portrayals, there is widespread consensus in the scientific and academic communities that human-caused climate change is real, with consequences that are already being felt. The science of how greenhouse gases trap heat is unimpeachable. Climate records are being broken as human-caused changes add onto natural oscillations (e.g., El Niño) in the climate system. Fossil records from pre-human times show much higher sea levels and a reorganization of vegetation patterns when greenhouse gases were higher and Earth’s climate was much warmer than today. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere set in motion regional variations in weather, weather extremes, the loss of major ice sheets, and declining biodiversity that has been associated with mass extinctions in Earth's past.

Scientists have warned for decades of the dangers of overreliance on fossil fuels. The world has been slow to respond and, as a result, we run an increasing risk of major damage to America’s economy and security. We have had an unusually large number of serious natural disasters in the past decade that are in line with climate change predictions. The Southeast and West suffer from increasing droughts. Miami floods at high tide as sea levels rise. Major cities on the Eastern and Gulf coasts regularly suffer major damage from violent weather. Western forests die because winters are insufficiently cold to prevent insect infestation of drought-stressed trees. Left unchecked, the frequency and severity of these climate change events will increase with time, as will their economic impact. To secure and conserve our way of life, our economy, and our environment, we need immediate action.

The United States now has a unique opportunity to lead the world in developing innovative ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. By investing in and incentivizing clean energy and carbon sequestration technologies now, we position ourselves to be the economic and political leaders of the 21st century. To do otherwise cedes these opportunities to others and undermines our national security, food security, water security, and the future of our children and grandchildren. For these reasons, we ask you to maintain and increase our country’s commitment to taking action on climate change, beginning with the current Paris Climate Agreement.

Signed by 2344 faculty members, listed on the following pages.

https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1PKBnTWIGk__YNnmDqaO_7ckSK_s5P3J2Gygy7WTQCfY/pub
tuolumne_tradster

Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
Feb 1, 2017 - 08:40am PT
Denmark's plan to transition to a fossil fuel free economy by 2050...

Ya, I know, US is NOT Denmark...

I'm afraid that this is the Trump administration's vision...;-(
Tricouni

Mountain climber
Vancouver
Feb 1, 2017 - 11:14am PT
tuolumne_tradster,

Interesting. Can you post a link to that chart/diagram, please?
Thanks...
tuolumne_tradster

Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
Feb 1, 2017 - 11:38am PT
Tricouni: here's the reference...

Energy Strategy 2050 – from coal, oil and gas to green energy
Summary February 2011:8

The Danish Ministry of Climate and Energy
Stormgade 2-6
1470 Copenhagen Denmark

ISBN printed publication 978-87-92727-15-2
ISBN electronic publication 978-87-92727-16-9

This publication can be downloaded
and ordered on www.ens.dk
and via www.kemin.dk

If you click on this link it will download the *.pdf

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0ahUKEwiZsM6y0u_RAhUEx7wKHQXMDh0QFggtMAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdfcgreenfellows.net%2FDocuments%2FEnergyStrategy2050_Summary.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGgahtLtyhA4SQ5hEvmeCbRkZd9qQ&sig2=Q_68OqHbg71XR00lsqQn

Here's a link summarizing the impact the Danish strategy will have on the average household...
http://denmark.dk/en/green-living/strategies-and-policies/the-impact-of-the-energy-strategy-2050-on-the-danish-consumer
Tricouni

Mountain climber
Vancouver
Feb 1, 2017 - 12:31pm PT
Thanks. This is a ray of sunshine in what's a pretty bleak time for me right now.

rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Feb 1, 2017 - 04:35pm PT
I'm not too much concerned with AGW anymore. What, with Exxon Mobil CEO at the helm of State Dept, the foremost state AG litigating against EPA soon to be in charge of the EPA, and Trump as Chief Executive. I breathe easier in the belief that now is when the global temperature breaks and the seas recede.
monolith

climber
state of being
Feb 1, 2017 - 04:53pm PT
monolith

climber
state of being
Feb 3, 2017 - 03:41pm PT
monolith

climber
state of being
Feb 3, 2017 - 06:46pm PT
Splater

climber
Grey Matter
Feb 3, 2017 - 06:51pm PT
I'm going to quote a bit from the article Malemute posted
about the danger of waiting any longer to act. Those who can only handle 140 characters may exit now and return to watching the alt universe.

Basically one of the lead economists has changed his mind that it was better to wait until renewable technology was perfected until taking much action. Even in 2007 this was a dubious claim since by then there were already available choices such as highly efficient hybrid cars, toll roads, and lower-fossil fuel power, and carbon taxes. He has adjusted all his variables so that now his predictions are similar to the IPCC.

"Some people who study climate change believe that addressing it later -- when economic growth has made humanity wealthier -- would be better than taking drastic measures immediately. Now, though, one of this group's most influential members appears to have changed his mind.

In the early 1990s, Yale's William Nordhaus was among the first to examine the economics of reducing carbon emissions. Since then, he and colleagues have mixed climate physics with economic modeling to explore how various policies might play out both for global temperatures and growth. The approach attempts to weigh, in present-value terms, the costs of preventative measures against the future benefit of avoiding disaster.

Nordhaus has [as of 2007 - see link] mostly argued for a small carbon tax, aimed at achieving a modest reduction in emissions, followed by sharper reductions in the medium and long term. Too much mitigation now, he has suggested, would damage economic growth, making us less capable of doing more in the future. This view has helped fossil fuel companies and climate change skeptics oppose any serious policy response.

In his latest analysis, though, Nordhaus comes to a very different conclusion. Using a more accurate treatment of how carbon dioxide may affect temperatures, and how remaining uncertainties affect the likely economic outcomes, he finds that our current response to global warming is probably inadequate to prevent temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius above their pre-industrial levels, a stated goal of the Paris accords.

Worse, the analysis suggests that the required carbon-dioxide reductions are beyond what's politically possible. For all the talk of curbing climate change, most nations remain on a business-as-usual trajectory. Meanwhile, further economic growth will drive even greater carbon emissions over coming decades, particularly in developing nations.

Nordhaus deserves credit for changing his mind as the results of his analyses have changed, and for focusing on the implications of current policies rather than making rosy assumptions about the ability of new technologies to achieve emission reductions in the future...
Nonetheless, the shift in his assessment is stark. For two decades, the advice has been to do a little but mostly hold off. Now, suddenly, the message is that it's too late, that we should have been doing a lot more and there's almost no way to avoid disaster.

Perhaps the main lesson is that we shouldn’t put too much trust in cost-benefit calculations, the standard economic recipe for making policy decisions.
In the case of climate change, they are inherently biased toward inaction: It's easy to see the costs of immediate emissions reductions, and much harder to quantify the benefits of avoiding a disaster likely to materialize much farther in the future. By the time the nature and impact of that disaster become clear, it may be too late to act."

2007 paper
http://www.econ.yale.edu/~nordhaus/homepage/documents/Nordhaus_stern_jel.pdf

Dec 2016 paper
"The present study finds the opposite result. When taking uncertainties into account, the strength of policy (as measured by the social cost of carbon or the optimal carbon tax) would increase, not decrease. "
Craig Fry

Trad climber
So Cal.
Feb 7, 2017 - 06:59am PT
Solar Could Beat Coal to Become the Cheapest Source of Energy

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-03/for-cheapest-power-on-earth-look-skyward-as-coal-falls-to-solar

Jan 3, 2017 - By 2025, solar may be cheaper than using coal on average globally, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. ... It's also driven by economies of scale and manufacturing experience since the solar boom started more than a decade ago, giving the industry an increasing edge in the competition with fossil fuels.


It's Official: Solar Is Becoming World's Cheapest Form of New Electricity

http://www.ecowatch.com/solar-cheapest-electricity-2156232780.html

Dec 19, 2016 - Solar power is becoming the cheapest form of electricity production in the world, according to new statistics from Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF). ... While unsubsidized solar has occasionally done better than coal ...

World Energy Hits a Turning Point: Solar That's Cheaper Than Wind ...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-15/world-energy-hits-a-turning-point-solar-that-s-cheaper-than-wind

Dec 14, 2016 - World Energy Hits a Turning Point: Solar That's Cheaper Than Wind. ... But now unsubsidized solar is beginning to outcompete coal and natural gas on a larger scale, and notably, new solar projects in emerging markets are costing less to build than wind projects, according to fresh data from Bloomberg New Energy Finance.


Wind and Solar Are Crushing Fossil Fuels - Bloomberg

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-06/wind-and-solar-are-crushing-fossil-fuels

Apr 6, 2016 - Record clean energy investment outpaces gas and coal 2 to 1. ... renewables vs fossil. Investment in Power Capacity, 2008-2015.

Solar Could Beat Coal to Become the Cheapest Power on Earth

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist 70 Years Speaking Knowledge to Power

http://thebulletin.org/solar-could-beat-coal-become-cheapest-power-earth10398


need I elaborate?
Solar is now the cheapest energy source available for new energy production
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Feb 7, 2017 - 07:24am PT
None of those Bloomberg links work for me.

Curt
Craig Fry

Trad climber
So Cal.
Feb 7, 2017 - 09:07am PT
I fixed the links
EdwardT

Trad climber
Retired
Feb 7, 2017 - 09:16am PT
Uh oh!

Another black eye for the climate science community.

The Mail on Sunday today reveals astonishing evidence that the organisation that is the world’s leading source of climate data rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic Paris Agreement on climate change.

A high-level whistleblower has told this newspaper that America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but flawed report, aimed at making the maximum possible impact on world leaders including Barack Obama and David Cameron at the UN climate conference in Paris in 2015.

The report claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in global warming in the period since 1998 – revealed by UN scientists in 2013 – never existed, and that world temperatures had been rising faster than scientists expected. Launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare, it was splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers.

But the whistleblower, Dr John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation, has shown The Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence that the paper was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data.

It was never subjected to NOAA’s rigorous internal evaluation process – which Dr Bates devised.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4192182/World-leaders-duped-manipulated-global-warming-data.html#ixzz4Y1KJQtqD

Is Bates a paid off denier?

A disgruntled former employee?

Or a man of integrity?
Messages 921 - 940 of total 2200 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta