nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

World's hottest day since records began

Nabber

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-66104822

The world's average temperature reached a new high on Monday 3 July, topping 17 degrees Celsius for the first time.

US researchers said the new record was the highest in any instrumental record dating back to the end of the 19th century.

Scientists believe a combination of a natural weather event known as El Niño and mankind's ongoing emissions of carbon dioxide are driving the heat.

It’s toasty out there folks.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Akrasia

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/27/project-2025-dismantle-us-climate-policy-next-republican-president

the GOP it seems, will not rest until the planet is no longer inhabitable

bluedex

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120883295#Comment_120883295

It doesn't mean that they are accurate either. That's the point.

M.T. Cranium

Looks like the extreme heat in parts of the Med region has backed off a bit with more seasonable temperatures on Wednesday. Monday and Tuesday saw some readings between 45 and 50 and a suspect higher max at Desfina, Greece near 60 C on Tuesday 25th (somebody might want to research whether that was fire-related).

The severe heat is spreading in from the Sahara because of the depressed state of the jet stream over the Atlantic, forcing the normal superheated Saharan air masses to move northeast into the central and eastern Med. Coastal Tunisia had readings near 48 C on Tuesday, and this spread into parts of Sicily and southern Italy, Greece and western Turkey.

Wednesday was quite a bit cooler in Sicily, readings between 30 and 35 C.

It's a similar story in North America with severe heat confined to the southern half of the U.S., temperatures have been close to normal in the northern states and most of Canada.

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120901589#Comment_120901589

That's shocking!

Reminds me of a typical heatwave in Perth, 3 decades ago.

cnocbui

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120900650#Comment_120900650

Well if the AMOC shuts down, it is believed that may be a trigger for a galciation event. Strictly speaking, we have been in an Ice Age for about as long as humans have been around - 3 million years. During this time, large parts of the northern hemisphere are under a large ice sheet a couple of km thick and sea levels fall a lot. These are called glacial periods. Occasionally during this ice age, it warms up a bit and you get conditions such as we have been experiencing for the last 12,000 years or so. These are called interglacials. So when the Ice returns, it's just yet another glacial period within the Ice Age.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120901380#Comment_120901380

Well that depends on whether you are a faithful follower of the church of climate change and fully subscribe to the dogma or not and so believe climate change caused it. It would be a catastrophe for mankind, but that has probably always been the case.

The clique of climate 'scientists' who did the the original chicken little and said CO2 levels are rising (Mann et al), we are all going to die and it's man's fault, pulled off an amazing trick, they managed to kill off the terms that were originally used - Global Warming or Anthropogenic Global Warming - and get everyone to call it Climate Change instead.

I think that is because they knew perfectly well that atmospheric CO2 and global average temperatures both rise dramaticially and very rapidly just before the onset of glaciation events. The other thing that is believed to happen is the AMOC shutting down. There is a fourth thing, involving Antarctic icebergs drifting way further north than normal, up around the lattitude of New Zealand, but that's most likely a consequence of the warming you get rather than a cause.

By calling it Climate Change, they could then claim that if things start cooling, instead of warming, that they were right all along. They can't lose, no matter what the climate does, it can always be mans fault and they were right. Very clever insurance.

Past interglacial periods have been shorter than this one, longer and of roughly the same span, so if the next interglacial period were to happen now or soon, it would be perfectly normal timing wise.

If the next glaciation event were to kick off in my lifetime, I wouldn't believe for a second that it was caused by anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

Oneiric 3

Apocalyptic furnace heat and devastation ongoing in Italy as temps reach almost 50c. 🥵🥵🥵🥵

My poor Sicily is burning. Temperatures have soared to a staggering 49 degrees Celsius. The situation has become extremely dire, with air quality severely compromised, making it difficult to breathe. It's like hell

https://twitter.com/Elis_101/status/1683912068083208192?s=20

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120900650#Comment_120900650

Thats climate change.

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120899820#Comment_120899820

So climate change causes Northern Europe to freeze - how is that not a climate catastrophe ?

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120899820#Comment_120899820

So your saying we should prepare for an ice age in Ireland as opposed to being burnt up?

Finty Lemon

Forest fires in continental Portugal

Result of profound alterations in society and territorial consequences

Luciano Lourenço, 2018

J Med Geography

The socioeconomic transformations that occurred in Portuguese society during the second half of the last century have led to a profound change in its age structure, with important repercussions in terms of sectors of activity. This in turn has led to a drastic reduction of workers in the primary sector, due to the rural exodus, a consequence of which was the abandonment of many agricultural areas and their transformation into forested areas.

In turn, the abandonment of the agricultural-forestry-pastoral activity led to an accumulation of large amounts of fuel in the forest which, when weather conditions are favorable, feed forest fires.

With the accelerated abandonment of farming activities-conditions conducive to the development of natural areas-, and with disinvestment in forests, forest fires have been growing increasingly bigger and there seems to have been little success in countering this terrible scourge that is wiping out greater space suitable for forestry.

Interesting perspective on forest fires in Iberia. Large scale land abandonment to unmanaged forestry in 20th has accelerated the risk of significant fire events.

Supercell

I've read that the warming is enough to mitigate even the north atlantic drift shutting down by now. That will buy us a few years/decades of moderate temperate increases here and in Scandinavia or even stabilised temps as the rest of the world burns, eventually though it will start getting crazy warm even here. Its going to take a massive volcanic event to stop this now.

cnocbui

A recent paper in Nature predits that an ocean current, the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Current (AMOC), usually attributed with keeping the polar bears out of Ireland and Scotland - Ireland being at the same latitude as the southern end of Hudson Bay in Canada, where Polar Bears sort your rubbish for you - is on course to shut down between 2023 and 2095. So you can stop with the climate catastrophism about world's hottest day ever, fires everywhere, sea levels rising and Polar bears suffering, because the Polar Bears will be coming home and taking over the Wicklows.

M.T. Cranium

This link gives some context, Antarctic sea ice has been more variable in recent years and is in a declining phase in 2023.

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_sea_ice

Jizique

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120895458#Comment_120895458

Can't read it as I am blocked, although I have always voted for the Greens (including Clare Byrne is Dub SE by-election).

This gobshite blocking me is symbolic of everything that's wrong with the party and movement

cdeb

Many countries have large emissions because they produce the stuff we buy and use. Or at least that is my understanding.

Yep, that's my understanding too

randomname2005

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120895399#Comment_120895399

I would be pro greening but even still it is hard not to feel that way sometimes. Saying to my kids and grandkids that we tried is what keeps me motivated.

I think if we did better carbon footprint calculations and assigned emissions to the consumer rather than the producer, or did two sets of calculations so both sides can see, we would truly see how much we could improve by reducing the amount of crap we have shipped across the planet. Many countries have large emissions because they produce the stuff we buy and use. Or at least that is my understanding.

cdeb

I mean, it's important to understand anything, so that comment doesn't really add much.

But the chart seems fairly straightforward. The straight line represents the average ice cover throughout the year - 365 data points, we can presume. It's straight because it's not indicating 10ft or 50ft or whatever, but just the average, x.

The wavy lines are the actual points over the past 30 years. They're mostly within one standard deviation of the average because that's what one standard deviation means. It doesn't say it's two feet thicker or less thick than normal - you could probably add that, but you don't need to - but 68% of data will be within one standard deviation (plus or minus) and that's fine. Any average is going to be made up of points above and below the average

And some items are within two standard deviations - which again will happen. 95% of points should be there.

Three standard deviations covers 99.7% of all data points typically (sounds very precise, but large data will tend to match this bell curve fairly well)

To be six standard deviations away from average is huge. 99.9999998% of the data is within six deviations. It's quite improbable. In chess, if a player is found matching computer moves with that level of improbability, for example, there's pretty much no defence against the suggestion you were cheating.

So in the normal course of events, these events don't occur. But it is occurring. Why? Three options spring to mind. 1) The data is wrong. Always got to keep it in mind. Is the source reliable? 2) It's a complete unlikely outlier. 3) A tipping point has been reached and we're heading for a new normal.

Others more versed in statistics (it's been a while since I studied it in college) will likely give a better explanation, but that's basically what it's saying as I see it.

randomname2005

If we assume that the data follows Gaussian or bell shaped distribution you would expect 3 out of 1,000 measurements to be outside of the +/- 3 sigma lines (0.3 percent). To me that means that when the extent, either surface area or volume, is measured it will be within 3 standard deviations from the mean or average extent 997 times out of 1,000. Being outside of that is rare enough. For the +/- 6 sigma boundaries you expect 99.9999998 percent of the measurements to be within these boundaries. A measurement this far from the mean is to be expected very very rarely, 2 in one billion measurements from my calculations. Presumably they take many measurements each year which reduces it to millions of years. That is my understanding, basically this little ice in Antarctica is not to be expected.

jackboy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120895623#Comment_120895623

It’s important to understand the graph before making such big claims. It’s hard to understand that graph, would definitely need clarification on what exactly it’s displaying.

cdeb

I think it's saying it's not freezing remotely as much as it usually does.

So it'll enter summer with much less ice cover, melt more, freeze less, etc

Elmer Blooker

I don’t quite understand, the Antarctic ice surely isn’t melting in the middle of a Southern Hemisphere winter?

Supercell

Nothing to see here, move along. All totally normal right?

https://twitter.com/think_or_swim/status/1683556231481286656?t=XS53bLHykiwcP7AZCw9Cog&s=19

Str8outtaWuhan

In another effort to decrease future carbon emissions our government is now funding the manufacture of more carbon producers.

https://www.thejournal.ie/how-will-the-new-publicly-funded-ivf-scheme-work-6128081-Jul2023/

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120894121#Comment_120894121

So its defeatist hedonism for us then, no point in getting off your arse to do anything about it cos its all someone else's fault.

I pity the children with that attitude prevailing.

cnocbui

There is no point in a country responsible for 0.1% of world CO2 emissions, busting a gut at considerable cost, to get to 0.075%, when China isn't and never will.

China approved the construction of another 106 gigawatts of coal-fired power capacity last year, four times higher than a year earlier and the highest since 2015, research shows.

Over the year, 50GW of coal power capacity went into construction across the country – up by more than half compared with the previous year – driven by energy security considerations, the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) and Global Energy Monitor (GEM) said on Monday.

You can put as many solar panels on your roof as you can fit and buy two EV's and vote for Eamon all you like, but it's utterly and completely pointless.

It's the same banana logic Norway employs. They have one of the worlds largest sovereign wealth funds and it's been tasked with making green investments. They have electrified more of their private vehicle car fleet than any other country, and it's all a pointless, conceited and hypocritical sham.

Their sovereign wealth fund is the result of revenue from massive oil and gas exports. The expensive transition to EVs was funded by these revenues. Clearly the Norwegians think that they live on a different planet than everyone else and that if their own country has low CO2 emissions all's good.

Norway awards 47 oil and gas exploration permits

Reuters

January 10, 2023

India, the world's most populous country, is another country that won't make any effort whatsoever to reduce CO2 emissions.

India's power output grows at fastest pace in 33 years, fuelled by coal

By Matthew Chye and Carman Chew

April 6, 2023

Ireland trying hard to reduce CO2 emissions is like it's former rigid adherence to the Catholic Church's edicts on reproduction, leading to the quip that 'The Italians make the rules and the Irish follow them.' While the Irish were breeding like rabbits, Italian women had the lowest fertility rate in the world.

Ireland is at it again, only it's CO2 this time.

.Donegal.

….

cdeb

What I don't accept is that population control is in any way a substitute for Ireland taking active and aggressive steps to address its own emissions

I never said it was. I'm not sure where you think I said that.

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120891402#Comment_120891402

You suggest that some form of population control is needed, I want to know what you mean by that.

I have stated that I understand that population reduction is an essential part to meet the NetZero targets - and have proposed the only humane ways to achieve it. The good thing is that population is actually falling in most parts of the world for the very reasons I suggested as the solution.

What I don't accept is that population control is in any way a substitute for Ireland taking active and aggressive steps to address its own emissions.

cdeb

My proposal for what?

You seem to have gone from "population control is a distraction" to "It's an embedded assumption in the 1.5 scenario", via a detour to ask if I'm "prepared to follow through and remove yourself from the problem" and now you're suddenly demanding what my proposal for population control is? Not sure why the attitude tbh.

Yes, education and contraception is a good option. You've cultural norms to overcome of course, so it won't be as easy as all that. And it's happening in parts of India, where vasectomies are subsidised (if not free altogether; I can't remember)

And I think it's absolutely vital to build an economy that doesn't fundamentally depend on continuous population growth - we're failing quite badly on that one here.

And of course that's not a panacea of itself.

Kind of hard to answer your question though when you jump about topics like you've ADHD or something

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120890863#Comment_120890863

So I made a proven practical suggestion of how we reduce population through education and birth control - whats your proposal ?