talkpolitics | Entries tagged with global warming

Pun unintended (or is it?)

As the world struggles with another summer with an extreme climate, experts are observing something unusual - this year the effects are more heavily pronounced in areas that used to be spared of this trouble in general.

Wealthy countries such as the US, Canada, Germany and Belgium are joining poorer and more vulnerable nations on a growing list of extreme weather events that scientists say are to a great degree linked to man-made climate change. So this is no longer just a problem for poor countries. It is very obvious that it is now a problem for rich countries as well. If they don't pay attention NOW, I don't know when they will.

( Read more... )

airiefairie

Climate change: World's glaciers melting at a faster pace

While the world is fixated on the Covid pandemic, a much more serious menace is already threatening to become irreversible. Of course the most visible indication for what is coming is the rate that the glaciers are melting. And it has been unprecedented for the last 20 years.

While an average of 227 billion tons of ice used to melt annually in 2000-2004, now (2015-2019) this rate has increased to 298 billion tons. The melting processes have affected nearly all 220 thousand glaciers on Earth. And just a couple hundred of them are being permanently monitored. There are many regions that remain a mystery.

The satellite analysis has helped scientists create the first detailed itinerary of global glacier melting, and the picture is not good. The most affected glaciers are in the Alps, Iceland, the Himalayas and Alaska.

The conclusions from this research very much match those of the Key IPCC Conclusions on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations, only they are much more detailed. Especially as far as the effect of glacier melting on rising sea level is concerned. Turns out, more than 20% of that process is caused by glacier melting.

The new data could also help craft adaptation strategies for densely populated areas where glaciers play a key role for agriculture and water supply. While melting glaciers could compensate the water shortages in some regions like India and the Andes, this is only a temporary solution, and the longer-term effects would be much more disruptive than beneficiary.

kiaa

This map shows the northern and southern sea routes between Europe and East Asia in comparison.

Best part: the Middle Eastern cesspit will no longer be relevant. Also it avoids Somalia so there’s that...

Right now, many ships actually go round Africa rather than having to deal with the Suez authorities. The distance isn't that important. Timing is bigger. You want to sell the cargo at the highest possible price and refuel when it is as cheap as possible. Also there are of course schedules in the ports to consider. Lastly, the difference in weather and climate and how that affects the ship, its cargo, and the crew, will also be a factor to consider. But sure, for some this northern passage will suit.

Of course, the climate processes resulting in this new situation are not something to cheer about. When sea levels rise drastically, some of the most populated areas in the world will be directly affected. As well as the interior, which is already being affected by extreme weather every year.

airiefairie.livejournal.com

We could hardly call this evidence of an impending apocalypse, but the meteorological chaos from the recent weeks of 2015 that was otherwise already very rich of climate anomalies, is quite telling. The North Pole had temperatures well over zero Celsius, and in the middle of the polar winter, the snow was melting in regions where one should expect temperatures around -40'C. What's more, the Canadian and Siberian Far North, the tundra and the permafrost soil, are now melting at an alarming speed (although this is still only valid for the top layers), and nearing a tipping point that could unleash vast quantities of additional carbon into the atmosphere. And in the moderate latitudes, fruit trees were blooming around Christmas. One can't help cringing at these anomalies. Or can they? Some are actually welcoming them. Such nice weather in January! That must be great. Except for the times when a freak storm comes, disrupting entire economies, or a polar vortex, or when a deluge becomes the new norm, or when months of drought deprive vast territories of water.

( Read more... )

ddstory.livejournal.com

When an event is dubbed one of our "last chances" for averting dangerous climate change, it naturally creates a lot of expectations. Especially after the failure of Copenhagen'09. Some have hastened to call the Paris climate summit pointless even before it has begun. Meanwhile, US president Obama has urged for reaching an agreement, thus additionally raising the stakes. In fact, this conference is just a step along a very long road. Its purpose is to merely set some basic directions for what's to come in the future - but of course all will depend on the commitment and dedication of all participant countries.

The good thing is, the positive effect is already visible: the countries are working together on a solution for cutting carbon emissions, and this should send a strong signal to the politicians and business circles. And secondly, this event has put the debate on climate change into the spotlight, and it's gaining momentum. So, Paris'15 is becoming a symbol of a process that's already been underway for a while.

( Read more... )

ddstory.livejournal.com

'Mini ice age' coming in next fifteen years, new model of the Sun's cycle shows

"We are now able to predict solar cycles with far greater accuracy than ever before thanks to a new model which shows irregularities in the sun’s 11-year heartbeat. The model shows that solar activity will fall by 60 per cent between 2030 and 2040 causing a "mini ice age". The conditions predicted have not been experienced since the last "mini ice age" which lasted from 1645 to 1715, called the Maunder Minimum."

Interesting. A lot has been written about the turbulent times of the 17th century, and there's been the argument that it was all largely due to climate change. During that time, Europe and North America had some very harsh winters, according to the scientific theory, caused by an abnormal lack of sunspots.

( Read more... )

telemann.livejournal.com

Stephen Harper's scream

If the NDP wins the Alberta election, it will simply be more proof of climate change. Because Hell will have officially frozen over.
— Allan Pero (@AllanPero) May 6, 2015

There has been precious little coverage about a massive shift to the left in Canada's most conservative region. If Canada has an equivalent to Texas, that would likely be Alberta, notoriously, dependability and consistently conservative. The recent election has ended a 44 year overwhelming conservative run in the provincial parliament. Alberta is the home province for Stephen Harper and many conservative leaders in the Canadian federal government. One political commentator wistfully noted commented on the election results: "Pigs do fly!" And the election has led to several to retire completely out of politics, including Alberta's Premier Jim Prentice, a former member of Tory Prime Minister Stephen Harper's cabinet. Rachel Notley, candidate for New Democratic Party (NDP), will be the new premier. I believe the policies of the NDP are pretty similar to what you find in moderately left parties.

Alberta's new premier, Rachel Notley

The election results are very important to some Americans, because Alberta is an economic force, driven largely by Canada's oil sand deposits, which in turn with a conservative leadership at the local and federal level, led to Canada's decision to abandon the Kyoto protocols, and the country had taken a right turn on climate change.

PC = Progressive conservative in blue, NDP in orange

What will change from this election? Details on the NDP's energy resources were pretty light during the elections, but expect the royalties system to be revamped, to insure transparency, and more equitable return to the citizens of Alberta (in other words, businesses were not paying enough royalties, which were kept low by the conservatives to foster development). Albertans need to have confidence that we are getting a proper return, and that confidence does not exist today because of the lack of accountability and transparency in recent years—people have been kept in the dark.

NDP has said regarding green policies “will take leadership on the issue of climate change and make sure Alberta is part of crafting solutions with stakeholders, other provinces and the federal government.” But NDP is not much different than the conservatives they have replaced. Alberta's previous conservative premier Jim Prentice favored phasing out coal fired electrical power plants. NDP does support a

revolving loan fund for home and small-business energy retrofits, a commitment for broad energy-efficiency policies and for a renewable-energy strategy,” as well as re-allocating funds not spent as part of Ed Stelmach’s carbon capture and storage programs to public transit. While an accelerated phase-out of coal-fired electricity likely offers the most potential for low-cost emissions reductions in Alberta, the elephant in the room remains emissions from Alberta’s oil and gas sector and, in particular, the oil sands. As for what the NDP would do in this area, we’re left with a commitment to serious dialogue and a pledge to do better. There’s a lot left to the imagination here, not the least of which is the question of how NDP commitments to reduce emissions square with a pledge to add incremental refining and other industrial sectors in the province.

Rachel Notley stated during the election she would quit using Alberta's resource to lobby Washington over Keystone, but several observers don't think that's such a big deal. Very few provincial resources were used for for lobbying, and if Obama turns down the project, it's going to be because of the terrible climate costs of allowing the project to proceed. And it's very important to note, Ms. Notley isn't anti-pipeline per se, since she supports several projects in Canada such as the Energy East pipeline to the Atlantic, which would be bigger than Keystone XL and bolster the oil-sands industry. The one pipeline she's soured on, the Gateway project to British Columbia, has little chance of being completed anyway, thanks to fierce opposition from First Nations tribes. So it's not clear if the NDP's pipeline stance will have a big practical impact.

As Brad Plumer noted in his article for Vox

Add it all up, and Tuesday's election could have a big impact on Canada's oil industry, especially if there's some huge change to Alberta's royalty policy. But it's also possible to envision a scenario where surprisingly little changes, at least where oil's concerned.

ADDENDUM: Speaking of oil, The New York Times just published a news alert, President Obama has approved Arctic Ocean oil drilling. :( It looks like President Obama wants the United States to keep it's number one position as the world's largest producer for oil and natural gas. Not good for climate change.

Mood: hungry
Music: Fasch: 01- Ouverture in D major FWV K_D3 - 1. Ouverture

rotschnjak.livejournal.com

The scientists are sure that we can stop global warming by restriction of greenhouse gas emissions. I have very intensive doubts in this aspect. ( Read more... )If you prohibit hurricanes by laws of the state, hurricanes will be appeared anyway.

rotschnjak.livejournal.com

It’s usually for us to trust scientists absolutely, however the nature of science is so, that each fact must be always under doubt. Science without doubts and alternative points of view transform to religion. Albert Einstein has made his theory of relativity because of doubts in classical Newtonian physic science; Nikola Copernicus had doubts in quite convenient and proved geocentric system of Ptolemaist, and he was right.

( Read more... )

peristaltor.livejournal.com

After the poo fling fest recently, I thought a bit about what anthropocentric global warming (AGW) means in the broader picture. In the spirit of our monthly topic, let's go down a few of the rabbit holes and see what the future could bring.

( To the rabbity hole! )

peristaltor.livejournal.com

To be perfectly honest, I was blindsided a few minutes ago. I was checking a comment reply from

sandwichwarrior, whom I had just accused of unnecessary hyperbole. It turns out he was responding to hyperbole from the side of the "debate" opposite his own. A sample:

So when the right wing fucktards have caused it to be too late to fix the problem, and we start seeing the devastating consequences and we start seeing end of the World type events – how will we punish those responsible. It will be too late. So shouldn’t we start punishing them now?

( Moar! )

peristaltor.livejournal.com

I haven't been following the news lately, but last I checked our atmosphere hit a milestone in human history by finally reaching the 400 parts per million concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide. In doing some preliminary research for this entry, I find that the number has since been revised downward . . . to 399.89 ppm.

Well, excuse us. That's entirely different, but still, as the article fairly explains, it's not the number captured in amber and preserved for all time that matters most, but rather "the rate of rise that is most important." That, sadly has not really slowed.

Ah, but I'm not here to boom all gloom and doom on y'all. I'm here now to crow about what is talked about, but not enough, and what should be heralded across the intertubes as more important than an arbitrary odometer moment: There is good news to be had.

You see, a rich guy has offered a prize for a viable process to remove CO₂ from our atmosphere. $25 million will be granted in the Virgin Earth Challenge to the most viable candidate. So far, there are eleven finalists. ( First, lets winnow out the least likely challengers, and point out why they fail. )

( Next, let us inject some much needed optimism. )

telemann.livejournal.com

A new study¹ seems to have found a smoking gun explaining why the eastern seaboard seems to be experiencing increased sea-levels more quickly: the decreased speed of the Gulf Stream, which pulls water out and away from estuaries and bays along the Atlantic's coast line in a northeasterly direction. Worldwide, sea level increased 8 inches over the course of the 20th century. Geological forces (land sinking as a result from the last ice age) are a factor in some cases, but that doesn't explain the rapidity of the increases in seal levels not affected by sinking land.

Personally, this will have a big impact on New York City, at the end of January, based on Superstorm Sandy, FEMA released a new flood zone map² of hardest hit areas including Staten Island, Brooklyn and Queens, which extended the flood zone, requiring upgrades for new construction and suggested modifications for existing buildings, and impacting flood insurance policy coverage. The lobby of the building I live in was flooded to chest high. We had no power for four days and it was nearly impossible to find any local stores open for over a week. And I was very fortunate and count my blessings: no loss of life or property.

Policy decisions are being made now that could impact the loss of life in the future. I'm skeptical of rebuilding houses and businesses so close to the water with two major storms in two years. In New Jersey, towns or beaches with large sand dunes were the ones with the least damage. But local residents with beachfront property (with FEMA flood insurance ironically) opposed increasing the size of dunes because IT BLOCKED THEIR VIEW OF THE OCEAN. New Jersey governor Chris Christie lost his temper when another nor'easter threatened the coast, and said dune expansion and construction would save lives, and helped the economy with local jobs.

"There should be no debate," said the governor. "They are being extremely selfish and shortsighted." The dunes should be protecting the shore, and that is more important than an individual's concern, he said, and the state would look into how to ensure the battle over dunes is won."They're putting people's lives and property at risk because they want to have a better view," he said.³

Flood gates have been mentioned constantly by European engineers, and after heavy flood damage from Hurricane Carol in the 1950s, Rhode Island constructed such a 3,000 foot sea gate barrier (25 feet high). The Fox Point Hurricane barrier subsequently has protected the area from any hurricane flooding or storm surge for over 50 years. The state has more than recovered the barriers' cost in what it saved in loss of property and lives.

The increasing sea levels are a national security issue for the United States and warrant an increased national urgency by the Federal government. Big large federal building projects are what the government does best. The Interstate system was a great example of this in the 1950s and 1960s. So why not have a Interstate Coastal Flood Gate system to protect our cities, especially since the states are doing such projects in piecemeal fashion (and in tight budgetary times, can't even afford the big price tags).

[1.] Gulf Stream's induced sea level rise and variability along the U.S. mid-Atlantic coast by Tal Ezer1, Larry P. Atkinson1, William B. Corlett. Published online 6 February 2013.

[2.] New York Times graphic: Preliminary Flood Zones, published 28 January 2013.

[3.] Christie Critical of Dune opponents. by Wayne Parry, Associated Press, published 16 January 2013.

gunslnger.livejournal.com

The Skeptics Case

The data presented here is impeccably sourced, very relevant, publicly available, and from our best instruments. Yet it never appears in the mainstream media — have you ever seen anything like any of the figures here in the mainstream media? That alone tells you that the "debate" is about politics and power, and not about science or truth.

Please read the link. Go ahead and read it critically. It presents the data and the argument very clearly and isn't a polemic.

I think the main point here is that there is sufficient grounds for there to be a debate/discussion on the issue in society, but that politics and the media are not allowing it. Just like the argument for free speech in general, if the argument on one side is so clear and convincing, then what's the harm in allowing the other side to point out the perceived flaws in it? But a seemingly large proportion of the proponents of global warming tend to just try to shut up the objections. This is probably coming much more from the political arena than from the scientific arena, but they do overlap.

Think about your own reaction to these challenges. How do you respond? Do you want to try and independently verify the claims in some manner or do you simply dismiss it and stick to your belief as it is right now? Then I suggest you think about whether you do this on other subjects too; is it your pattern or is this topic special?

telemann.livejournal.com

The American Heartland Institute (big tobacco's lobbying arm) newest ad campaign.

In some ways, this is an almost perfect illustration of what has happened to the "right." A refusal to acknowledge scientific reality; and a brutalist style of public propaganda that focuses entirely on guilt by the most extreme association. Here's how the Heartland Institute describes this new campaign:

The billboard series features Ted Kaczynski, the infamous Unabomber; Charles Manson, a mass murderer; and Fidel Castro, a tyrant. Other global warming alarmists who may appear on future billboards include Osama bin Laden and James J. Lee (who took hostages inside the headquarters of the Discovery Channel in 2010). These rogues and villains were chosen because they made public statements about how man-made global warming is a crisis and how mankind must take immediate and drastic actions to stop it.

This is where the American right now is:

The people who still believe in man-made global warming are mostly on the radical fringe of society. This is why the most prominent advocates of global warming aren't scientists. They are murderers, tyrants, and madmen.

Mann and Ornstein are correct. Large sections of the American right are now close to insane as well as depraved. And there is no Buckley to rein them in. Just countless Jonah Goldbergs seeking to cash in.

This ad campaign would be hysterical if it wasn't so sad. Considering the millions of dollars the Heartland Institute has, this is the best they could do? Guilt by association? Are sophisticated matters of public policy now reduced to billboard ads with messages shorter than a Tweet? It's just another example of the debate being "dumbed down" by corporate lobbyists that have the money to do so. But in the spirit of Friday "lulz," using the same logic presented in the original ad, here are some mock-ups.

Some of the fine folks in the ONTD political community whipped these up:

Thanks

paulnolan

Thanks

circumambulate

peristaltor.livejournal.com

brucenstein's recent contribution regarding tariffs set on Chinese-made solar panels got me to thinking. There are not just one issue to discuss here — the more obvious and immediate being the way China's government funds industrial activity — but two. We must also consider what kind of electrical grid we have and what kind we want for the future.

To consider that, we need to also consider ( our electrical past. )

acollectivegood.livejournal.com

It always seemed to me that it was just too easy for corporate interests, especially big oil, to promote denial and skepticism about global warming. In this day of easy access to information on the internet, I could quickly look up the funding of scientists who were publishing studies that refuted climate change theories, and I found that they almost always were receiving substantial money from big oil. Somehow companies were succeeding in "buying" this issue, but how? In the past corporate interests, even backed by tons of capital, could not always convince the public to go along with them. What was different in this case?

The more I looked into this the more it became clear. First let me say that my next sentence is NOT about those who are fiscally conservative due to a well reasoned understanding of economics, and its not about those who are socially conservative because that is where their morals and ideals led them - I fully respect those groups. But there is a group of "conservatives" who seem to be inflexible, less insightful, and powerfully driven by a need for certainty and cognitive closure in their world. This group also seems to be overly concerned about a big brother-like takeover by government. It is the latter group that easily falls prey to the PR campaigns of corporate interests who push the idea that global warming is a massive unknown that is not certain, cannot be described in black/white terms, and may need government intervention. These ideas push the buttons of the underlying conservative psychology of this subgroup and makes them seek out the comfort of denial.

Again, I am not putting down conservatives who come to their leanings through rational means and are otherwise flexible and open in their beliefs. But there are many on the right who seem dependent on needs for predictability and certainty, and this group does not seem to want to consider the entire issue of climate change, nor the way that corporate interests are manipulating things. There is much more about this issue at two of my blogs: Conservative Psychology and The Climate Change Journal

Location: United States, Massachusetts, Westwood

russj.livejournal.com

( Onion-style humor continues under the cut )

Note: This article is in honor of tomorrow's day of propaganda, where Mr. Gore and his friends will once again proclaim that "the science is settled" and that "deniers" like myself should be silenced so they can implement their radical policy of government control over energy, food, water and other natural resources.

Mood: amused

sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com

Edit: My position seems have been consistantly misinterpereted so I have rephrased the opening sentence and Bolded the conclusion

~~Conventional wisdom states that the Earth's atmospheric temprature is rising and that man-made Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is to blame~~.

Conventional wisdom states that man-made Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is to blame for an observed increase in the Earth's atmospheric temprature.

To question this assertation is to face ridicule and be labled a "denier", "afterall..." the crowd will shout, "the science is settled!"

The problem with this attitude from a scientific/engineering perspective is that very little of what we consider to be common knowledge is actually settled. One of the first things your professor will be tell you upon embarking on a math or science degree is "much of what you think you know is at best conjecture and at worst outright wrong". It is not enough to simply look out the window and observe the color of the sky, you must be able to prove that it is blue and explain why. This inherent skeptism is the basis of the scientific method.

( with this in mind let's review the evidence )

telemann.livejournal.com

So, 2010 tied as the 2nd warmest year according to NOAA. In fact, they issued this nifty map showing significant weather/climate related events around the world for 2010.

( So what if.... )

Credits & Style Info

Talk Politics.

A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods

MONTHLY TOPIC:
AI Regulation: Striking the Balance

DAILY QUOTE:

"Clearly, the penguins have finally gone too far. First they take our hearts, now they’re tanking the global economy one smug waddle at a time. Expect fish sanctions by Friday."

(nairiporter)

July 2025

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31

Talk politics.

A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods.

Entries tagged with global warming

It's backfiring big time

Before the Deluge

Trade benefits from global warming?

A glimpse of the storms to come

A matter of degree

Winter is coming

It's like if Texas turned blue overnight: Alberta's elections toss out 44 years of conservative rule

What I’d like to propose: variant “B” for actions against global warming.

The global warming: is the thing really so, how it’s presented by official scientists?

Climate Change: What's At Stake

Citations Needed!

Carbon Sequestration: Sifting Through The Finalists

Rising sea levels along Atlantic coast due to slowing of the Gulf Stream

The Skeptics Case - Global Warming

American Heartland Institute runs silly ads against global warming.

The Consumer: Profitable Prospect, or Willing Participant?

Climate Change: Follow the money behind global warming denial

U.S. Al-chemist turns CO2 into gold!

Why I'm an skeptic and you should be too.

So what's to stop someone doing something really drastic on global warming

Credits & Style Info

Links

July 2025

Summary