Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Sep 29, 2009 - 08:46pm PT
|
Thanks, Ed. I have looked at all three reports and their references, but I have not studied every reference carefully, of course. In fairness, I wasn't just looking for information; I was looking to make sure any of my thoughts on papers weren't preempted.
I think WGII has a description of the state of affairs in its technical summary -- mainly saying we've made very little progress in measuring cost of mitigation and cost of non-mitigation.
My personal belief is that we'll get marginal costs of mitigation more easily than those of non-mitigation. Everyone knows how much extra they pay for a particular mitigation procedure fairly quickly. The cost of not mitigating is more amorphous. That's why we write papers, I guess.
John
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 30, 2009 - 03:55pm PT
|
Just read this:
The Nike corporation said Wednesday it would abandon its position on the board of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, citing differences with the business group on climate change.
...
"Nike believes U.S. businesses must advocate for aggressive climate change legislation and that the United States needs to move rapidly into a sustainable economy to remain competitive and ensure continued economic growth," the company said in a statement. "Therefoce [sic], we have decided to resign our board of directors position."
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/60889-nike-resigns-from-chambers-board-citing-climate-differences
Me, I thought that was cool...
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
I'm with Karl in thinking the denial about cigerettes is a good analogy. Including all the "scientific" hacks that the industry hired to cast doubt.
I no longer try as much as I did to convice people about warming. Those that still deny it aren't going to be changed by arguments. Its like trying to use science on creationists. When something is an article of faith, not much can be done.
But I think discussing the economics has merits. For a start, we could decide how much to spend fighting global warming. For instance, the US could decide to spend about 1% of GDP (an arbritrary example). We could then decide what would give us the most bang for the buck, but the cost is limited.
Many of the things that would help in the fight would be good for other reasons. I think it is a matter of national security to wean the country off of petroleum.
Better insulation and more efficient apliances will eventually save consumers money.
A $40,000 electric sport car more fun to drive and just as big a status symbol as a $40,000 SUV.
"Green spending" will certainly create winners and losers but it can create jobs as well as destroy them.
The hard one is coal power plants. Ignoring the environment, coal is cheap and it doesn't look like this country has the stomach for nuclear. Alternative energy will take time to ramp up.
These types of regulations, while never attempted on this scale, have typically cost far less than the doomsters predicted (see replacing CFCs, adding air bags, fighting acid rain from coal plants). Once there is a gaurenteed market, the technology can really take off.
But given the politics, I don't see the US or China making meaningful cuts. I feel sorry for our grandkids.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
Its like trying to use science on creationists.
Aw, for f*#k's sake....
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Here's how serious things could be
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/10/05/himalayas.glacier.conflict/index.html
Millions, if not billlions of people rely on Himalayan water.
"...(CNN) -- The glaciers in the Himalayas are receding quicker than those in other parts of the world and could disappear altogether by 2035 according to the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report.
The result of this deglaciation could be conflict as Himalayan glacial runoff has an essential role in the economies, agriculture and even religions of the regions countries.
The Himalayan glaciers form the world's largest ice body outside of the polar caps. Popularly known as the "Water Tower of Asia," they are the source of water for rivers that flow across the continent: the Indus River in Pakistan, the Brahmaputra that flows through Bangladesh, the Mekong that descends through Southeast Asia, the Irrawaddy in Myanmar, the Yellow and Yangtze rivers of China and a multitude of smaller rivers that flow through the Indo-Gangetic plains of Northern India.
Satellite data from the Indian Space Applications Center, in Ahmedabad, India, indicates that from 1962 to 2004, more than 1,000 Himalayan glaciers have retreated by around 16 percent. According to the Chinese Academy of Sciences, China's glaciers have shrunk by 5 percent since 1950s.
Dr. Vandana Shiva, an environmental activist, physicist and leader in the International Forum on Globalization, has just returned from a "Climate Yatra," a research journey to the Himalayas to study the impact of climate change and the glacial melt upon communities in Asia.
"Himalayan rivers support nearly half of humanity," Dr. Shiva told CNN. "Everyone who depends on water from the Himalayas will be affected."
One area of increasing concern for Shiva is flooding. "In Ladakh villages have already been washed away due to flash floods," she said.
The situation has exacerbated the occurrence of Glacier Lake Outburst Floods (GLOFs). Impacts include loss of lives, domestic property, cultivable land, mountain infrastructure downstream, forced migration and long-term secondary environmental degradation....."
|
|
Thom
Trad climber
South Orange County, CA
|
|
There are no solutions, only compromises. What is the priority? Every action has an equal, and opposite reaction.
Today I heard that factions of the Enviro movement are fighting amongst themselves: seems a certain windfarm is supposedly killing over 10,000 birds each year (eagles, red-tailed hawks, falcons, etc.). One solution attempted resulted in MORE bird deaths.
CFL's must be disposed of properly due to their MERCURY content.
Electric cars use more batteries which will turn our landfills into lead and cadmium wastelands (do you really think everyone will dispose of these batteries properly?), that will eventually affect the water supply.
Where will all this electricity come from, since we can't build new power plants anywhere and our power grids are over-burdened?
Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology produces water vapor as a by-product. Water vapor is the primary Greenhouse Gas, contributing approximately 95% of the greenhouse affect of our planet.
And on it goes...
There are no solutions, only compromises.
T.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
Del Cross, isn't water vapor the most abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere?
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, Ca.
|
|
This is incorrect since additional H20 added to the atmosphere is gone within a matter of weeks so the effect is essentially nil.
I understand your point and the theory of water vapor, but is it still true if it is persistently ADDED on a growing basis (more of those cars) and, therefore, not given time to dissipate. It would be overwhelmed, in theory, no?
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
Thom
I agree there are not going to be perfect solutions. But some outcomes, such as business as usual, are going to be much worse than others.
I can't see how we can maintain our throw away society without destroying the planet. Technology can help solve some problems but will throw up new problems. We really need a major rethink in how we live and what we value, but I'm not optimistic.
However, regarding batteries, for instance: This doesn't have to be a problem. The price of dealing with batteries can be included in the price of the car. So if you have to buy replacement batteries, you trade in old batteries at no cost. Or if/when the car is junked, the junk yard can give them back to the manufacturer or designed recycling center at no charge. Of if the no charge is not sufficient, they can have a deposit so you actually get money back for turning them in.
And I don't think it is that far out before recycling becomes profitable. Electric cars aren't powered by lead batteries and lithium is pricy enough to make it worthwhile to recover. For that matter, I expect it is likely that companies will start "mining" landfills in my lifetime. Society has landfilled a lot of valuable metals.
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
I just red Boreal ski area is opening this Saturday Oct. 10, the earliest in it's history. Doesn't this prove the Earth isn't warming?
Sure it took millions of dollars of state of the art snowmaking equipment to make a postage stamp zone of snow and the glaciers are melting but... I was cold last night.
Bluey, add more water to the atmosphere and it comes out as rain. Also creationists doesn't mean religous folks, it means people who think man was created in his current form and deny evolution from earlier organisms.
|
|
Lee Bow
Trad climber
wet island
|
|
Look,don't anyone fool you. This phenomena has been seen befoere... on the decks of the Titanic...and this time there are no life boats..
But don't worry, the ship can't sink.
|
|
WandaFuca
Social climber
From the gettin place
|
|
Spencer (who is himself a GCC skeptic) has shown that Lindzen & Choi 2009 used shoddy and faulty analyses.
http://scienceblips.dailyradar.com/story/some-comments-on-the-lindzen-and-choi-2009-feedback/
Lindzen's, as well as Spencer's, research has been debunked many times in the past. It's a pity that Lindzen and his mouthpiece, Monckton, are getting so much press. When the next wave of peer-reviewed re-analyses of the ERBE data shows how mistaken Lindzen is, I doubt that Glenn Beck will give it much airtime.
|
|
213
climber
The Biggest Little City
|
|
I think the debates would be a whole lot more interesting if those (many, er most, but not all) involved had at least a slight understanding of the dynamics and thermodynamics of the atmosphere (ocean and land systems, too while we're at it). Lindzen certainly does...
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
Just spent 2 days in a room full of Arctic scientists. Always an educational experience.
There's a growing belief that the changes in water cycles (e.g., when and where the rain and snow fall) will have greater human impacts than the changes in temperature themselves.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!