It's getting hot in here....

Muhammed_1

It seems clear that humans will fail to prevent human caused climate change.

Our world will be utterly changed.

20degrees hotter than usual is huge. The great frozen north of Russia and of alaska is melting and releasing huge quantities of methane, a greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere.

The continential US on the west coast could suffer continuous droughts.

I don't expect humans to deal with climate change and so I expect huge changes in climate within our lifetime.


I expect sea level rise of at least 2 meters by 2100, and perhaps much more than that. We could have that amount of sea level rise by 2050.


Trump is mostly concerned with profits.

We cannot prevent climate change because of greed in individual humans.

steddyeddy

Well the Republicans have to plat catch-up with their anti-science thinking. They're following a positive trend but the slope of that line isn't as positive as it should be.

Oodoov

We have overstayed our welcome on the planet anyway. If it's not climate change it will be nuclear war, a nuclear plant meltdown or a virus that will wipe us out eventually. Ireland can make feck all difference anyway.

steddyeddy

20 degrees is huge and it's not looking like it's going to improve anytime soon. Trump seems to have committed to slashing NASA's climate change funding. He's appointed several seriously anti-science people to high positions, including a climate change denier to head of the EPA. Whatever about the trend Republicans in general are setting they seem to be holding increasingly dumber guys to office.

NiallBoo

Winterlong wrote: »

The Costa del Waterford will be our sun holiday destination in a few years.

It'll be Costa del Kilkenny at this rate.

Special Circumstances

Nidom wrote: »

I don't know what to believe anymore

It's a difficult one.
I was browsing a thread recently and somebody said "We are ON TRACK for 6-8 degree rise by 2100" (global average).

So I said - oh really, thats a pretty catastrophic sounding figure considering the noise that's been made about 2 degrees.

"yes really you climate denier* - but the 'rise' is calculated from way back so its a 4-6 degree rise from now"
*:eek: lol, "climate denier"

OK - that still sounds serious. I'm a little skeptical about it, surely it depends a LOT on oil production/consumption and lets face it - the peak oil predictions seem to vary by about 80years so a temperature figure for 80years time is surely vulnerable to the same level of inaccuracy.

"well that figure is from a bunch of scientist known for their conservative estimates"

Wow - so it could be worse? Should I start learning how hunt and forage and self defence etc - sounds like we could be in a fairly Mad Max kinda state well before 2100?

"Well I don't think it will be that bad."

OK, so I was the "climate denier" back along, but when I say this sounds incredibly serious, we are waaay beyond diesels SUVs and carbon credit trading and expensive lightbulbs putting the brakes on this - now there's nothing to worry about?
Should I at least be learning practical survival skills to instill in the next generation?

"naw there won't be any food, whoever is around will be forked"

So I should just carry on as is, annihilation is inevitable, resistance is futile? Just get a diesel SUV and a more efficient washing machine?

...

Austria!

It's not a story really suited to goldfish style news industry, but global temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations should be written next to the date on every newspaper. Maybe even as a separate article within the banner headline.

Help!!!!

Do people really believe what sscientist tells them? Scientists get their funding from governments, governments want to keep the masses down, so they keep telling them they need to pay taxes.
Has anyone on here been to the Arctic? Its like until Dynamo does a trick in front of you, you are always going to think the other people are in on it

Grayson

Grayson wrote: »

It's nuts. A 20 degree increase. 20 fcuking degrees.

Well said. A picture paints a thousand words (from yesterday's New York Times):

Perils of Climate Change Could Swamp Coastal Real Estate

HellSquirrel

Special Circumstances wrote: »

It's a difficult one.
I was browsing a thread recently and somebody said "We are ON TRACK for 6-8 degree rise by 2100" (global average).

So I said - oh really, thats a pretty catastrophic sounding figure considering the noise that's been made about 2 degrees.

"yes really you climate denier* - but the 'rise' is calculated from way back so its a 4-6 degree rise from now"
*:eek: lol, "climate denier"

OK - that still sounds serious. I'm a little skeptical about it, surely it depends a LOT on oil production/consumption and lets face it - the peak oil predictions seem to vary by about 80years so a temperature figure for 80years time is surely vulnerable to the same level of inaccuracy.

"well that figure is from a bunch of scientist known for their conservative estimates"

Wow - so it could be worse? Should I start learning how hunt and forage and self defence etc - sounds like we could be in a fairly Mad Max kinda state well before 2100?

"Well I don't think it will be that bad."

OK, so I was the "climate denier" back along, but when I say this sounds incredibly serious, we are waaay beyond diesels SUVs and carbon credit trading and expensive lightbulbs putting the brakes on this - now there's nothing to worry about?
Should I at least be learning practical survival skills to instill in the next generation?

"naw there won't be any food, whoever is around will be forked"

So I should just carry on as is, annihilation is inevitable, resistance is futile? Just get a diesel SUV and a more efficient washing machine?

...

6-8C is possible.

The idea behind 2C was to keep warming at under that level. It was already pretty well accepted that we were in for at least 2C warming. Under the most stringent IPCC scenarios, it could be limited to that, but that was only if the world followed through. The world did not.

8C was always an outlier, much like "no change at all" or "under 1C by 2100". It's...about conceivable, but unlikely. 4-6C is the most likely stage now, although if the US follows through on the track they're going (damnit, US, it was always one of the hardest and most necessary countries to get onside), it could well be worse.

The problem is that warming has a knock-on effect. To give one example - the oceans warm and expand (that's where most of the sea level rise comes from, not from melt, although we could see a significant boost from Antarctica. Not so much the Arctic as that is already sea ice rather than land ice). As they warm, they start to release sequestered CO2. Now, we're not releasing that, exactly, but there's another slow, steady and long-term release that will continue to contribute.

Another is deforestation - green vegetation is also something that sequesters carbon and when it's burned, it releases it back.

It's not going to be a slow and continuous thing (well, it iiiis, but at the same time..); we will see tipping points with relatively sudden changes and a new normal for a time, until the next one. Noticed how the seasons are starting late? "Winter's very late this year. Oh god, how is it still fcuking snowing, it's March! Still feels like summer, despite being end of September.."

The greatest scam ever pulled was convincing people that they were being lied to about climate change. They were being lied to, but it was depressingly predictable how often the ones saying the loudest that there was nothing to worry about could be tracked back to oil and fossil fuel interests.

topper75

ardinn wrote: »

At one point during the last ice age where icewas 2 miles high over greenland - irelands shore on the west was 400 miles further out than at present - that was only 12,500 years ago! think about that for a second - 400 miles!!!

Finn McCool in his souped-up 4.0 litre Datsun. And that Cuchullain lad, pure divil for 3 bars on the Superser of a morning.

The bastards.

ardinn

Can you all take 5 minutes to shut up and watch this - this history of climate change on our planet.

For those who say "joe rogan - a stoner - wow great sauce etc" randall carlson is possibly world leading in this field - start at 15 minutes and watch for the bombshell at 20mins in - then come back.

Even better watch the whole 3 hrs and the other podcast (501) with randall

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0Cp7DrvNLQ

Muhammed_1

Deleted User wrote: »

Well said. A picture paints a thousand words (from yesterday's New York Times):

Perils of Climate Change Could Swamp Coastal Real Estate

In theory, the housing market and the house prices should already reflect the fact that sea level rise will occur.

In other words, climate change is not a secret and the market is supposed to take account of all publically known information.


I personally believe the market has not taken sufficient account of climate change.

If the houses were being sold with a 50 year lease the prices would drop further I suspect.

The houses could be permanently flooded in 50 years.

Having said that, there are some bizarre federal insurance products in the US that allow you to keep rebuilding your doomed house even if it keeps flooding.

Galway_Old_Man

Help!!!! wrote: »

Do people really believe what sscientist tells them?

If there's one thing we know about humanity, it's that we love predicting the end times. People really get off on it.

Before someone jumps down my neck, I'm not saying that man-made climate change isn't a thing. I'm saying that it's a problem.

But the current commentary on it from certain quarters is bordering on that you'd expect from the craziest of religious cults approaching the "predicted end of the world".

Special Circumstances

HellSquirrel wrote: »

6-8C is possible.

The idea behind 2C was to keep warming at under that level. It was already pretty well accepted that we were in for at least 2C warming. Under the most stringent IPCC scenarios, it could be limited to that, but that was only if the world followed through. The world did not.

8C was always an outlier, much like "no change at all" or "under 1C by 2100". It's...about conceivable, but unlikely. 4-6C is the most likely stage now, although if the US follows through on the track they're going (damnit, US, it was always one of the hardest and most necessary countries to get onside), it could well be worse.

The problem is that warming has a knock-on effect. To give one example - the oceans warm and expand (that's where most of the sea level rise comes from, not from melt, although we could see a significant boost from Antarctica. Not so much the Arctic as that is already sea ice rather than land ice). As they warm, they start to release sequestered CO2. Now, we're not releasing that, exactly, but there's another slow, steady and long-term release that will continue to contribute.

Another is deforestation - green vegetation is also something that sequesters carbon and when it's burned, it releases it back.

It's not going to be a slow and continuous thing (well, it iiiis, but at the same time..); we will see tipping points with relatively sudden changes and a new normal for a time, until the next one. Noticed how the seasons are starting late? "Winter's very late this year. Oh god, how is it still fcuking snowing, it's March! Still feels like summer, despite being end of September.."

The greatest scam ever pulled was convincing people that they were being lied to about climate change. They were being lied to, but it was depressingly predictable how often the ones saying the loudest that there was nothing to worry about could be tracked back to oil and fossil fuel interests.

Are we pretty much straight screwed no matter what? 6 degrees rise, (4 from where we are?) is still a major displacement of people, major impact on food production etc etc.

If we gave up fossil fuels, cars, meat, electricity, buying crap from China... If we gave all that up in the morning is there any hope without a cull?

Should we be ACTUALLY doing something RIGHT NOW beyond green party endorsed diesel cars and lightbulbs?

HellSquirrel

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Are we pretty much straight screwed no matter what? 6 degrees rise, (4 from where we are?) is still a major displacement of people, major impact on food production etc etc.

If we gave up fossil fuels, cars, meat, electricity, buying crap from China... If we gave all that up in the morning is there any hope without a cull?

Should we be ACTUALLY doing something RIGHT NOW beyond green party endorsed diesel cars and lightbulbs?

We can't reverse the clock, no. To some extent, we will have to adapt and mitigate. We're not going to die out though! Humans are extremely good at adapting to various circumstance and pretty much alone of the animal kingdom have adapted to every livable environment, from the desert tribes to the Inuit peoples.

It's not so much as whether we're stuffed or not, it's how bad are we going to let it get? Going green won't hurt* - actually, it will probably serve you well in the long run as fossil fuel prices will rise again and I strongly suspect that at some point, it will be legally required to have a house that meets certain standards for heating, etc. But no, alone it's not enough. One country, it's not enough. But much like it takes one country to be the first to put down the weapons, it takes one country to be first to meet goals. At the moment, the countries of the world are staring at each other, waiting for someone else to go buy the toilet roll and milk. America has just pointed out very loudly that it won't be buying any toilet paper and will, in fact, be wiping their arse on someone's bathtowel instead. Let's not be America on that front. Also, hide your bathtowel.

Lobbying is something that anyone can start, if you want something more to make a difference. You won't be popular for it, but if enough do it, it can work.

*Do some reading up on what actions you want to take though. Some things sound like good ideas but are impractical, some things sound like good ideas but are a bit of a cod, and some things aren't quite developed enough yet to be efficient.
Oh, and, uh, don't buy a house on the floodplain. Actually, be a bit wary around the coastline too.

Special Circumstances

HellSquirrel wrote: »

We can't reverse the clock, no. To some extent, we will have to adapt and mitigate. We're not going to die out though! Humans are extremely good at adapting to various circumstance and pretty much alone of the animal kingdom have adapted to every livable environment, from the desert tribes to the Inuit peoples.

It's not so much as whether we're stuffed or not, it's how bad are we going to let it get? Going green won't hurt* - actually, it will probably serve you well in the long run as fossil fuel prices will rise again and I strongly suspect that at some point, it will be legally required to have a house that meets certain standards for heating, etc. But no, alone it's not enough. One country, it's not enough. But much like it takes one country to be the first to put down the weapons, it takes one country to be first to meet goals. At the moment, the countries of the world are staring at each other, waiting for someone else to go buy the toilet roll and milk. America has just pointed out very loudly that it won't be buying any toilet paper and will, in fact, be wiping their arse on someone's bathtowel instead. Let's not be America on that front. Also, hide your bathtowel.

Lobbying is something that anyone can start, if you want something more to make a difference. You won't be popular for it, but if enough do it, it can work.

*Do some reading up on what actions you want to take though. Some things sound like good ideas but are impractical, some things sound like good ideas but are a bit of a cod, and some things aren't quite developed enough yet to be efficient.
Oh, and, uh, don't buy a house on the floodplain. Actually, be a bit wary around the coastline too.

So there wouldn't be any mass migrations and intense violent competition for resources? Few grants from SEAI be grand like?

Mr. FoggPatches

Grayson wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/nov/25/arctic-ice-melt-trigger-uncontrollable-climate-change-global-level

So the arctic is 20 degrees higher than it should be for this time of year and we have republicans who don't believe in climate change going into government in the US. I wonder if this will change their minds? Probably not.....

Tis Baltic out .

Help!!!!

What ever way you look at it its not going to get 20c hotter in Ireland over night so people have time to adapt. OK we may lose a lot of gingers but that's cant be bad....right???
Look at the money we're going to save when we don't have to get on a plane to get a suntan

DEFTLEFTHAND

Tbh I've never met anybody who flat out denies Climate Change, although i'm sure they exist. It's absurd to not acknowledge the cyclical nature of climate change, it has been occurring since the dawn of time.

The argument I hear usually lies around are humans having a meaningful impact on it. 200 years of industrialisation vs millennia of natural change etc.

The 'Green Industry' side of it also seems to raise quite a few suspicions with people from my experience.

Muhammed_1

The oil in the ground accumulated there over millions of years. Perhaps 300 million years or so.

We will use it all up in 300 years.

We use a million years worth of oil in a single year.

That's a million years of stored sunlight per year and we're releasing it all very quickly.


I'm aware that's not a scientific analysis but it's not totally incorrect either.

Special Circumstances

Somehow I respect the selfish "not my problem buddy, I'll be long gone" types more than the weird double thinky preachers.

"Behold, I make scary numbers appear and disappear to suit my argument!!"
Wow, they do look scary, what should we do about it?
"poooof, the scary numbers are gone, you shouldn't do anything to radical or immediate, it will all be fine"
Phew, you had me worried
"mwuhahaha why are you looking so relieved - ALAKAZAM and the scary numbers are back woooooooo it's going to be catastrophic"
Ah here, seriously what should we do?
"lightbulbs! Diesel SUVs! await further instruction closer to massive famines/plagues/migrations/floods/slightly uncomfortable summers woooo"

Help!!!!

If you really want to know what to do when the glaciers melt.....make friends with a guy called Noah, he'll know what to do

Galway_Old_Man

Muhammed_1 wrote: »

We will use it all up in 300 years.

Maybe so.

I do wonder what happened to all the predictions that Young Greens etc were shouting about when I was in college (lates 90s, early 2000s). Basically oil would never be under $100 a barrel again, countries by now would be clamouring over each other for what was left...

Help!!!!

Ask yourself this:
If this was true & all our leaders were so worried about it wouldn't they stop flying around the world in private jets? They could skype each other or go economy like the rest of us.
They would also stop driving around in fuel guzzling cars.
Until then cant see it being a big deal

sbsquarepants

Wibbs wrote: »

While he's a demigod to the nerd sphere his solutions are more like a band aid on a gunshot wound. Yes it is an improvement, but unless the leccy driving his cars is sourced from solar/atomic/wind then you're just moving the crap upstream. Out of sight out of mind. All too human a view. That's before the environmental cost of building the cars in the first place. And rocket launches aren't exactly clean. They're dirty as feck, but thankfully still rare events so…

.

I was thinking more of his new roof idea than the cars, that has the potential to make a real difference I think.

MonkieSocks

Muhammed_1 wrote: »

We will use it all up in 300 years.

37 of oil Years left, going by the site below.


http://www.worldometers.info/

Global warming has been happening for thousands of years, 10.000 thousand years ago Ireland was cover in ice, 1 mile in depth.

Glaciers went all the way to to the Mediterranean sea.


Good Video here explaining it all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Z5YU6BMpUQ

HellSquirrel

Special Circumstances wrote: »

So there wouldn't be any mass migrations and intense violent competition for resources? Few grants from SEAI be grand like?

Probably not. Thing is, it all depends where you live. We're fairly isolated from it thanks to our geography. We can probably expect more changeable weather, more fierce storms, more extreme events - that includes ridiculous amounts of rainfall in a short period, possibly heatwaves (less likely, but will happen from time to time) and cold snaps, such as winter 2012. Bear in mind that I'm not saying that year was absolutely, specifically caused by climate change, but it's the sort of unusual event that will become more commonplace for us. We better get used to flooding if we're not already!

Now, if you live in Australia, around the Sahel, or in midregions Europe, you're in for a rougher time. Heatwaves are becoming more commonplace and they kill. The 2005 heatwave killed something at least 35,000 people, and estimates have revised that up to closer to 70,000 due to lingering effects. And that's just from the heat. What do you reckon that sort of thing in the growing season will do to crops and food supplies?

A land rush is possible in countries where previously inhospitable land is becoming habitable (or exploitable). Siberia, Greenland, Canada, Alaska, but that depends too much on what people get up to and I'm more interested in the science of it.

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Somehow I respect the selfish "not my problem buddy, I'll be long gone" types more than the weird double thinky preachers.

"Behold, I make scary numbers appear and disappear to suit my argument!!"
Wow, they do look scary, what should we do about it?
"poooof, the scary numbers are gone, you shouldn't do anything to radical or immediate, it will all be fine"
Phew, you had me worried
"mwuhahaha why are you looking so relieved - ALAKAZAM and the scary numbers are back woooooooo it's going to be catastrophic"
Ah here, seriously what should we do?
"lightbulbs! Diesel SUVs! await further instruction closer to massive famines/plagues/migrations/floods/slightly uncomfortable summers woooo"

I...don't follow any of that. What?

Austria!

ardinn wrote: »

Can you all take 5 minutes to shut up and watch this - this history of climate change on our planet.

For those who say "joe rogan - a stoner - wow great sauce etc" randall carlson is possibly world leading in this field - start at 15 minutes and watch for the bombshell at 20mins in - then come back.

Even better watch the whole 3 hrs and the other podcast (501) with randall

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0Cp7DrvNLQ

What field is that exactly?

"“Randall Carlson is a master builder, architectural designer, teacher, geometrician, geomythologist, explorer, and renegade scholar. For over forty years, he’s researched the interface between ancient mysteries and modern science."

Renegade scholar? You're out of line scholar, turn in your microscope. And the other one. Your Mass Spec privileges are revoked.

Grayson

HellSquirrel wrote: »

Now, if you live in Australia, around the Sahel, or in midregions Europe, you're in for a rougher time. Heatwaves are becoming more commonplace and they kill. The 2005 heatwave killed something at least 35,000 people, and estimates have revised that up to closer to 70,000 due to lingering effects. And that's just from the heat. What do you reckon that sort of thing in the growing season will do to crops and food supplies?

The middle of Europe is fecked. It gets all its water from glaciers in the Alps. Once they go rivers and lakes will dry up.