Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Climate Change

Stick the Windsors in their prison cells, unleash the Republic, and get the genius scientists on the case with no further delay. That and peak oil are the twin tasks ahead and we can't have tyrants cluttering up the place and getting in the way.
 
teqniq said:
au.news.yahoo.com

Crushing climate impacts to hit sooner than feared: draft UN report

Climate change will fundamentally reshape life on Earth in the coming decades, even if humans can tame planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions, according to a landmark draft report from the UN's climate science advisors obtained by AFP.
au.news.yahoo.com au.news.yahoo.com
Click to expand...
Note that that's based on the second draft of the sixth assessment cycle's Working Group II report, which assesses impacts, adaptation and vulnerability to climate change,, not due to officially report until mid-late February 2022. A media (not IPCC) summary graphic of the (not yet fully peer reviewed and finalised) information gleaned from the draft:
E4iQ-jmUcAY_JW0

The first officially released material from the sixth assessment cycle will (should) be the Working Group I report, which assesses the physical science basis of climate change. That is expected to be released on 9 August this year.
 
Madagascar: UN warns 400,000 people at acute risk of starvation
27.06.2021
The WFP chief says climate change is to blame for the food emergency.

The situation is "not because of war or conflict, this is because of climate change," Beasley stressed.

Madagascar has contributed nothing to climate change but "they're the ones paying the highest price," he added.
Click to expand...
"Families have been living on raw red cactus fruits, wild leaves and locusts for months now," Beasley said.

Lola Castro, the WFP regional direction in southern Africa, told a news conference that she witnessed "a very dramatic and desperate situation" during her visit with Beasley.

She added the food situation in southern Madagascar is unlike anything she has witnessed in 28 years of working for the WFP on four continents, with the exception of what is now South Sudan in 1998.
Click to expand...
 
Get the Manhattan Conference of global scientists on the case. They don't need to fly around, just meet on Zoom and sort it out. It might be time for unfashionable forms of geo-engineering. I don't know because I'm not a scientist. I tweeted Michael Mann and Greta Thunberg and Luisa Neubauer but none of them replied. We got the job done on the Ozone layer so there is still some hope but time is running out.

Climate engineering - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Last edited:
Don't let the defeatism encouraged by the fossil fuels industry get you down.

www.scientificamerican.com

Climate Deniers Shift Tactics to 'Inactivism'

Fossil fuel interests are trying to blame climate change on individuals while also sowing division, says Michael Mann, one of their prime targets
www.scientificamerican.com www.scientificamerican.com

Article said:
Although it is too soon to declare victory, Mann cautions, the initial war of disinformation against climate science is now essentially over. The scientific evidence has become impossible to dispute in light of the dramatic increases in extreme weather events, megafires and polar melting in recent years, he says.
...
I use whole bunch of “D” words to describe this: deflection, delay, division, despair mongering, doomism. To start with, there is an effort to deflect attention away from systemic solutions. They are trying to convince people that climate change is not the result of their corporate policies but of our own individual actions. I mean BP [a multinational oil and gas company headquartered in London] was instrumental in the whole idea of a carbon footprint. They introduced the carbon footprint calculator to help get people to think of this as an individual-responsibility issue.
...
If you can get people arguing over these individual lifestyle choices, then you are creating division over questions such as “Are you vegan or not?” “Do you fly?” So it’s a twofer—you deflect attention away from the need for real policy change, and you get infighting within the climate movement so that climate advocates are not speaking with one coherent voice.
...
An e-mail sent to journalists in 2020 by CRC Advisors [a PR firm that represents industry players and others] contained talking points that appeared to attempt to sow racial division within the climate movement. The e-mail suggested that the Green New Deal—supported by white environmentalists—would hurt minority communities. It is an attempt to drive a wedge right down the center of the progressive movement—between social activists and climate activists.
...
Conservative media are promoting people such as Guy McPherson, who says that we have 10 years left before exponential climate change literally extinguishes life on Earth and that we should somehow find a way to cope with our imminent demise. I call it “climate doom porn.” It’s very popular, it really sells magazines, but it’s incredibly disabling. If you believe that we have no agency, then why take any action? I’m not saying that fossil fuel companies are funding people like McPherson; I have no evidence of that. But when you look at who is actually pushing this message, it’s the conservative media networks that air his interviews.
Click to expand...
 
Getting a lot of traction that.

I hope people get good and angry at the fucking lies we've been sold and the corrupt fucking law makers we've had.

 
Artaxerxes said:
Getting a lot of traction that.

I hope people get good and angry at the fucking lies we've been sold and the corrupt fucking law makers we've had.

Click to expand...

Saw a thing from Common Dreams at Facebook last ngiht about suing the companies for their lies.
 
Just read at Wikipedia that Alexander von Humbodlt was the first person to point out human induced climate change in 1800 and 1831. If only more people had listened to him.
 


Argonia said:
Just read at Wikipedia that Alexander von Humbodlt was the first person to point out human induced climate change in 1800 and 1831. If only more people had listened to him.
Click to expand...

He was a top fella, this is well worth a read. In many ways the founder of environmentalism and while he was popular more should have listened to him long after he'd gone. To many lessons ignored, to many struts cut from the web of life

The Invention of Nature: The Adventures of Alexander von Humboldt, the Lost Hero of Science: Costa & Royal Society Prize Winner eBook : Wulf, Andrea: Amazon.co.uk: Kindle Store

The Invention of Nature: The Adventures of Alexander von Humboldt, the Lost Hero of Science: Costa & Royal Society Prize Winner eBook : Wulf, Andrea: Amazon.co.uk: Kindle Store
www.amazon.co.uk
 
Artaxerxes said:




He was a top fella, this is well worth a read. In many ways the founder of environmentalism and while he was popular more should have listened to him long after he'd gone. To many lessons ignored, to many struts cut from the web of life

The Invention of Nature: The Adventures of Alexander von Humboldt, the Lost Hero of Science: Costa & Royal Society Prize Winner eBook : Wulf, Andrea: Amazon.co.uk: Kindle Store

The Invention of Nature: The Adventures of Alexander von Humboldt, the Lost Hero of Science: Costa & Royal Society Prize Winner eBook : Wulf, Andrea: Amazon.co.uk: Kindle Store
www.amazon.co.uk
Click to expand...

Thanks Artaxerxes . He was an utter genius and in the David Attenborough bracket. I downloaded Kosmos to my Kindle (in English because my German is hopeless) and ripped through it last night.
 
OBR saying (no shit) that it will be cheaper to act early on climate change to avoid massive public debt. As we're talking money not lives maybe it will spur some into action.

www.reuters.com

UK faces new debt surge in climate push, early action best - OBR

Britain faces another jump in its 2-trillion-pound ($2.8 trillion) public debt pile to make its economy net carbon zero by 2050,but quick global action could make the hit less severe than that of the coronavirus pandemic, a fiscal watchdog said.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
www.theguardian.com

Shortages hit US services firms, German factories and UK builders; Didi shares tumble after crackdown – as it happened

Office for Budget Responsibility says UK debt will rise to pay for decarbonisation, and early action would limit the bill
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Spoilered a bit from the Guardian as it is from a live feed not an article and may disappear.

The fiscal cost of acting early, or even late, on the transition to net zero pale into insignificance compared to the cost of completely unmitigated climate change, the OBR adds. It has modeled the fiscal risks from an extreme, unmitigated climate scenario, in which increasing CO2 emissions cause average UK temperatures to rise by around 4°C by the end of this century. It found it would cause “progressively more frequent and more costly shocks to the public finances than have historically been the case”, sending debt levels ratcheting higher as a series of shocks hits the government. UK temperature forecasts Photograph: OBR That’s due to extreme weather events at home and the spillovers from even greater damages in hotter countries. This scenario also shows a greater economic and fiscal costs of adapting to higher temperatures. This would add to the UK’s other significant long-term pressures -- such as the increased spending demanded by an ageing society, and other cost pressures in the health system. So debt ratchets up more sharply to reach 289 per cent of GDP by the end of the century, as the hit from each shock increases and the period between them to get debt back down diminishes That’s almost three times today’s debt/GDP levels, and twice as high as you’d expected with a typical number of shocks over the century [and well beyond levels seen as sustainable]. Impact on UK debt from unmitigated global warming Photograph: OBR The OBR says such a worst-case scenario now appears “increasingly unlikely” – it would fail to take into account the mitigation policies already in place. But while based on extremely broad-brush assumptions, they highlight the magnitude of the fiscal costs that might be avoided by successfully stabilising global temperatures in line with the Paris targets, the watchdog says, adding: A true ‘current policy’ fiscal scenario that incorporates only actions underpinned by firm policies that have already been announced would therefore lie somewhere between this illustration of catastrophic unmitigated warming and the early action scenario. Introducing the policies necessary to meet the climate targets that are set out in legislation in the UK and increasingly being adopted elsewhere would shift the ‘current policy’ outcome further away from the catastrophic scenario. But this is very much still work in progress. Updated at 1.26pm BST FacebookTwitter 3h ago 12:40 OBR: Delaying action on net-zero will double the impact on national debt The fiscal cost of achieving net zero by 2050 will be twice as high if the UK government delays taking action until 2030, rather than acting fast now, the UK’s fiscal watchdog says. The Office for Budget Responsibility’s fiscal risks report shows taking early action to decarbonise the economy has a smaller net impact on the UK’s finances than Covid-19 or the 2008 financial crisis. But delaying until the start of the next decade will end up adding twice as much to the national debt as acting fast. And failing to take action has a catastrophic impact on the public finances (and, rather more importantly, the planet), with debt rocketing to 289% of GDP by the end of the century, up from about 100% now. The UK’s Climate Change Committee (CCC) puts the cumulative investment cost for the whole economy between now and 2050, plus the operating costs of emissions removals, at £1.4trn in 2019 prices, the report says. The Government has not said how much of that cost it expects to bear -- but the OBR assumes it meets a quarter of it. When combined with savings from more energy-efficient buildings and vehicles, the net cost to the state is £344bn in real terms. Spread across three decades, that’s an average of just 0.4% of GDP in additional public spending each year. Speaking at today’s press conference, OBR chairman Richard Hughes explains that the watchdog has drawn up an ‘early action’ scenario, in which the UK ramps up carbon taxes and also boosts investment in green technologies from the mid-2020s. In that scenario, making the transition to net zero by 2050 adds about 20% of GDP to government debt over the next 30 years, slightly less than the pandemic is expected to add in just two years, Hughes says. The bulk of the cost comes from the loss of fuel duty, followed by government support for investments in zero carbon technology - which are only partly offset by taxing carbon more heavily. The report says: Carbon tax revenues. Our [early action] scenario assumes all emissions are taxed, and more heavily, from 2026-27 onwards (which could be achieved by extending the UK ETS [emissions trading system] or imposing a uniform carbon tax in its place). The OBR report shows how expanding carbon taxes would raise significant revenue. The OBR report shows how expanding carbon taxes would raise significant revenue. Photograph: OBR But, this is only one scenario for reaching net zero, and arguably ‘quite an optimistic one’ Hughes admits, in which governments around the world act decisively this decade to put their emissions on a steeply declining path. So the OBR has modelled alternative scenarios - varying the timing of the transition, impact on productivity, and fiscal policy choices. One scenario actually saves the government money -- if the investment costs are funded within existing spending plans (meaning a very tight squeeze on other public services), and the loss of fuel duty is replaced by another tax on motoring, such as a road user charge. But under the ‘late action’ scenario, decisive steps to cut emissions globally and in the UK are delayed until the 2030s. Then, the UK must manage a more hurried and costly transition to net-zero - and misses out on five years of carbon tax revenues. Under this scenario, debt in 2050-51 is 23 % of GDP higher than in the early action scenario, with GDP around 3% lower and direct public spending costs increasing by around a half. Hughes says: The price of this delay is a doubling of the total fiscal cost of the transition. Hughes also points out that in some sectors of the economy, such as transport, decarbonisation pays for itself as improvements in battery technology drive the lifetime cost of electric cars below the cost of petrol cars. But other areas have significant net costs, such as replacing household gas boilers with green alternatives, which society would have to bear. The net cost to the government depends on revenues changes - net zero provides threats and opportunities. At risk are the revenues collected from petrol duty - which are almost certain to disappear once fossil-fuel cars are banned by 2030. But, this can be partly made up for with a carbon tax (although the revenues here would decline as the economy shifted to net zero). Here are more key charts from the report: And here’s some reaction:
Click to expand...
 
CNT36 said:
OBR saying (no shit) that it will be cheaper to act early on climate change to avoid massive public debt. As we're talking money not lives maybe it will spur some into action.

www.reuters.com

UK faces new debt surge in climate push, early action best - OBR

Britain faces another jump in its 2-trillion-pound ($2.8 trillion) public debt pile to make its economy net carbon zero by 2050,but quick global action could make the hit less severe than that of the coronavirus pandemic, a fiscal watchdog said.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
www.theguardian.com

Shortages hit US services firms, German factories and UK builders; Didi shares tumble after crackdown – as it happened

Office for Budget Responsibility says UK debt will rise to pay for decarbonisation, and early action would limit the bill
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Spoilered a bit from the Guardian as it is from a live feed not an article and may disappear.
Click to expand...
That was what Nick Stern said in his government-commissioned review, 15 fucking years ago.
 
The heat won't just affect the length of the season. It will extend zones where disease carrying mosquitoes can flourish away from the equator.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

steveo87
Is it possible to change an atom by physically adding or taking away electrons?
Replies
23
Views
604
steveo87
steveo87
F
Gut bacteria can change behaviour
Replies
3
Views
389
paul mckenna
paul mckenna
editor
Google Earth Timelapse: view changes on the planet across time
Replies
0
Views
209
editor
editor
free spirit
Climate change bet is won early...
Replies
10
Views
587
kropotkin
K
C
Star signs have changed...
2 3 4 5
Replies
131
Views
4K
Pickman's model
Pickman's model
Back
Top Bottom