|
Are there any animal species that would thrive on our new Hell Earth? I’m not sure what food sources will survive either.
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 04:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 22:47 |
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:Are there any animal species that would thrive on our new Hell Earth? I’m not sure what food sources will survive either. This is a wildly chauvinistic fear, as soon as humans are gone the planet will re-regulate itself rapidly. The species diversity might not be there because we did a drat good job of destroying it, but even in the purported hell earth there'll just be new biomes established in a geological blink of an eye.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 05:02
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MichaelEMann/status/1026258147177062400 The next economic collapse is going to be extra special.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
Gunshow Poophole posted:This is a wildly chauvinistic fear, as soon as humans are gone the planet will re-regulate itself rapidly. The species diversity might not be there because we did a drat good job of destroying it, but even in the purported hell earth there'll just be new biomes established in a geological blink of an eye. What would possibly make humans “gone” that wouldn’t require burning the entire planet to ash or something?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 05:04
|
|
|
Gunshow Poophole posted:This is a wildly chauvinistic fear, as soon as humans are gone the planet will re-regulate itself rapidly. The species diversity might not be there because we did a drat good job of destroying it, but even in the purported hell earth there'll just be new biomes established in a geological blink of an eye. You are objectively correct but I bet they were more interested in whether there would still be puppies or kittens left, not whether or not we'd have twenty-seven new types of yey even hardier mosquitoes post humanity. Sadly, there will be no more puppies and kittens, beyond any saved in the ultrarich ark zones or whatever is left.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 05:12
|
|
|
Gunshow Poophole posted:This is a wildly chauvinistic fear, as soon as humans are gone the planet will re-regulate itself rapidly. The species diversity might not be there because we did a drat good job of destroying it, but even in the purported hell earth there'll just be new biomes established in a geological blink of an eye. My concern, and this comes with ignorance of geological scale and past extinctions, is that we are already causing a mass extinction even before climate change’s worst effects are felt. It’s like two mass extinctions back to back, one from humanity just doing our thing and wiping out species, and another from the way we have changed the entire climate in such an unprecedentedly short amount of time. Edit; and obviously I want puppies and kittens to continue to exist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 05:12
|
|
|
Evil_Greven posted:This was posted in the Trump thread. This paper is getting picked up pretty widely (more in-depth analysis by the guardian), and for good reason. It's nice to see solid, reputable scientists putting out work that shits without prejudice on the hug-friendly "standard model" which doesn't include feedback loops and tells people we can continue to poo poo all over the planet for a good while yet. Hopefully more throw political correctness and career prospects to the wind and start shoveling the really scary poo poo into journals, now. So far 2018 feels like the year that people woke up to the oven we've sealed ourselves in. The threat posed by climate change really seems to be on everyones minds and conversation, regardless of how reticent they've been to discuss it in the past. Whether or not this leads to meaningful enough change to prevent us all from loving dying, though, I'm skeptical of. As an aside, I've long espoused the opinion that the only way to prevent fish stocks from extinction is to establish a total moratorium and sink any fishing vessels on sight. Indonesia has been doing the latter and seeing some success with the strategy. It would of course be better if they just executed the fuckers in-situ rather than deporting them to find a new vessel and get right back to it, but we'll get there eventually. Rime fucked around with this message at 05:32 on Aug 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 05:20
|
|
|
What would such a planet even look like? I imagine Africa and the middle east would just turn into mostly deserts, right? For Europe, the "standard model" predicts that the Netherlands, for example, would start seeing summers that used to belong to the south of France. So what would we get then? Something like Morocco? Unless the gulf stream stops and we just turn into the equivalent of eastern siberia with its continental summers and winters...
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 05:26
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:My concern, and this comes with ignorance of geological scale and past extinctions, is that we are already causing a mass extinction even before climate change’s worst effects are felt. It’s like two mass extinctions back to back, one from humanity just doing our thing and wiping out species, and another from the way we have changed the entire climate in such an unprecedentedly short amount of time. Yeah the speed of change is definitely somewhat unprecedented, so macrofauna might struggle in aggregate. I mean, they ARE currently struggling. Can't remember the number off the top of my head but like baseline 2018 is already way below historical biodiversity. However short of the entire planet becoming anoxic (which is wild even for doom and gloom types) you'd see adaptations relatively quickly among primary producer organisms with characteristics that enable rapid reproduction and distribution. Scale up a few hundred generations and fill niches absent the wide scale habitat disruption that humans facilitate at incredible speeds. from a more uh, mercenary? perspective, "species" diversity is extremely nitpicky. Hundreds of organisms that have dozens of variants like "this beetle with two black spots" versus "this beetle with one merged black spot". Note I am not defending or handwaving the loss of biodiversity here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 05:28
|
|
|
IIRC a lot of the practical value in biodiversity to medicine and industry lies in weird chemical quirks that can crop up on the same timescale as the spots. We're almost certainly already losing good stuff that could have led to breakthroughs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 07:16
|
|
|
Shibawanko posted:What would such a planet even look like? I imagine Africa and the middle east would just turn into mostly deserts, right? Going by the research and other parts of global climate change: The equator regions and a little beyond that would turn into uninhabitable dead zones, with temperatures ranging in the 50 degrees celsius and with pretty much all forms of complex life dead. You'd probably be looking at scorched desert and cracked dry land with extreme surface temperatures. No sandy dunes here, just dead slightly irradiated wasteland. This is bad news in itself for a start, since this area contains some of the largest majority of flora and fauna, including the sort of trees that do the important job of recycling the atmosphere to help us breathe. Even if these areas were to somehow survive, their temperature levels matched with humidity would be so high that anything in them would die quickly from hyperthermia. North of the equator towards Europe, its ecosystem will be going through varying levels of different effects. Spain would presumably be something equivalent of Morocco by now, with temperatures on a normal day being in the 40's. Italy, Greece and the Turkey would be suffering from the same effects, with wild fires a common occurrence. Further north would become your Spain, with England regularly receiving temperatures in the 35's and Scotland starting to break into the 30's also. You can imagine it as basically the desert sandy areas of the Earth expanding ever increasingly outward. Either that or take a look at this:  And imagine that as just what the world looks like now - bleached and tanned. A dead equator equals a drop in natural flora which equals a rise in carbon dioxide levels which equals death. A rise in temperatures in Europe seems to clearly equal a rise in forest fires which again equals death. Temperature changes in the atmosphere equals the death of the gulf stream which equals regular superstorms which equals death. I mean, every cloud has a silver lining. By the time nature is finished, its likely 40% of the human population will be dead. Presumably that amount of culling will result in a gradual cooling off the Earth over time... Either way we're hosed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 09:00
|
|
|
Shibawanko posted:What would such a planet even look like? I imagine Africa and the middle east would just turn into mostly deserts, right? Paul Beckwith has lots of short informative videos on the subject . I recommend his channel - he covers many of the topics brought up here with solid science and modelling. Usually adds a couple of new videos per week.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 09:18
|
|
|
Communist Bear posted:
40% seems wildly optimistic. Carrying capacity of the planet might be around 1 billion people in 4C to 5C degree warmer world. See the following: https://phys.org/news/2018-08-earth-hothouse-state.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 09:23
|
|
|
Communist Bear posted:Going by the research and other parts of global climate change: Well poo poo. Would there be any sense in trying to rapidly plant forests in places like greenland and north canada and siberia? Not just to sequester carbon, but to prepare the soil for more people presumably fleeing there?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 09:38
|
|
|
Shibawanko posted:Well poo poo. I don't think it would make any significant difference and even if it did, it would only be a short term solution until those trees start suffering from forest fires and gradual deforestation also. Oh, I also forgot to mention that the risk of hyperthermic pockets occurring will gradually increase also, with areas of high temperature and high humidity resulting in extremely deadly weather effects. Imagine for a moment Barcelona suffering from a hyperthermic pocket. Most of the population would be dead. See wet bulb temperature for more info. quote:40% seems wildly optimistic. Carrying capacity of the planet might be around 1 billion people in 4C to 5C degree warmer world. See the following I am being wildly optimistic, as I'm presuming by this point the first world will have put money into massive geothermic technology in order to combat some of the effects of climate change. It's likely 2nd and 3rd world countries that will see the most die off. Communist Bear fucked around with this message at 09:56 on Aug 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 09:48
|
|
|
Is growing weed good or bad for the climate battle?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 10:40
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Nope, it's a real thing: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-power-hog-20140617-story.html EU regulations limit maximum power drain while a device is off to 0,5 Watts, which certainly helps.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 10:50
|
|
|
Gortarius posted:Is growing weed good or bad for the climate battle? Very good in that it gives me the fortitude to sleep at night As far as growing plants goes another feedback loop we're bound to run into is the rapid advance of sea level super duper loving up the best carbon sequestering biome on the planet, salt marshes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 10:55
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:Are there any animal species that would thrive on our new Hell Earth? I’m not sure what food sources will survive either. Depends on how bad the runaway-effects are. If we gently caress up too badly, it will just get worse and worse until Earth looks like a second Venus. In this case, even microbial life will be mostly extinct.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 11:03
|
|
|
Gortarius posted:Is growing weed good or bad for the climate battle? Sure why not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 11:05
|
|
|
Gortarius posted:Is growing weed good or bad for the climate battle? Indoor weed is legitimately terrible, like a kilo of co2 emissions per gram of bud.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 11:16
|
|
|
People seem to be focusing on the whole "wet bulb temperature"-thing, which is fair, but I think its notable that the problem as presented in the article is actually sea level rise drowning all the places people live. Like, imagine sea level rise coming in and making everyone forget about deadly heat waves and droughts, because poo poo, now the centers of global civilization are actually under water. I think it might be relevant to consider the implication of the scenario as presented though. Like, if the ice caps melt at speeds which are actually relevant to human civilization, then that would imply to me that the 5C increase is largely driven by extreme heating in the polar regions. Which would make sense, given that the geologic record point to temperate poles in a hothouse climate, where the temperature gradient from equator to the poles was far less pronounced. I guess what I'm saying is; we can hope for an equitable drowning of population centers world wide, rather than the unfair burning of everyone between the mid-latitudes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 11:34
|
|
|
Someone please come along and tell me feedback loops are insignificant and/or a lie
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 11:49
|
|
|
If you're actually going to have your mental health damaged by this thread, seriously just remove the bookmark. Don't keep up to date. Tell people it's a problem but don't lose all your sleep over it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 12:06
|
|
|
Eddy-Baby posted:Someone please come along and tell me feedback loops are insignificant and/or a lie The Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum proves it’s real and happened before and was a massive extinction (but didn’t reduce the earth to cinders or make earth Venus or anything fanciful people claim)
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 12:31
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:The Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum proves it’s real and happened before and was a massive extinction (but didn’t reduce the earth to cinders or make earth Venus or anything fanciful people claim) It did probably result in Earth having a Venus like atmosphere though for a good couple of million years! quote:People seem to be focusing on the whole "wet bulb temperature"-thing, which is fair, but I think its notable that the problem as presented in the article is actually sea level rise drowning all the places people live. Like, imagine sea level rise coming in and making everyone forget about deadly heat waves and droughts, because poo poo, now the centers of global civilization are actually under water. True, but that's just one of many (horrible) cascading options. As I mentioned earlier, you're either going to melt to death, die from some sort of super storm, or be flooded to death. Choose your poison.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 12:46
|
|
|
Communist Bear posted:It did probably result in Earth having a Venus like atmosphere though for a good couple of million years! Venus has an air temperature of almost 500C so that sounds very unlikely as something that happened 55 million years ago.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 12:57
|
|
|
keep driving though, everybody keep driving. get in that car and go.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 12:59
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Venus has an air temperature of almost 500C so that sounds very unlikely as something that happened 55 million years ago.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 13:06
|
|
|
As a thought experiment, if there was an armed coup and war leading to full blown ecofascism, would there be any chance, or are we utterly screwed regardless? By ecofascism I would mean a global totalitarian repressive dictatorship, command economy, rationing, bans on meat production, mass 80% sterilisation of all countries to lead to population decline, mass murder and repression of all global warming deniers etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 13:24
|
|
|
Reducing emissions to zero wouldn't get us where we need to be, no. We need carbon capture as well. So yes if carbon capture technology is implemented and also works.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 13:28
|
|
|
ShredsYouSay posted:As a thought experiment, if there was an armed coup and war leading to full blown ecofascism, would there be any chance, or are we utterly screwed regardless? By ecofascism I would mean a global totalitarian repressive dictatorship, command economy, rationing, bans on meat production, mass 80% sterilisation of all countries to lead to population decline, mass murder and repression of all global warming deniers etc. Ahahhaahahaha. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 13:34
|
|
|
Wakko posted:
I think you will find that Thug Lessons is enough of a climate science subject matter expert with regular contact with respected climate scientists for this thread, thank you very much. Communist Bear posted:Ahahhaahahaha. Quote / Post / Avatar / name combo glory FYI it's unlikely we're close enough to the sun to get into the kind of sulfur oxide bake-off needed to become a Venus-grade Venusian hothouse, or at least that was conventional wisdom of planetary astronomers looking at working fluid stability two years ago. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 13:41 on Aug 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 13:34
|
|
|
I highly doubt Venusforming Earth to 500 C is on the cards, now or in the past. Doesn't need that to be nasty though. A century of +4 to +5 C temperatures (double that in the arctic and antarctic?) would cause a population collapse that you'd find hard to compare to any pandemic that ever existed. Black Death, the other historical plagues in the Mediterranean and elsewhere in Europe would pale in comparison. The smallpox and massacres that caused much of the Native American collapse with 80-90% fatality rates is in the same ballpark. And that was the Americas, this is world wide. Famine, pestilence, death and war work together. The Four Horsemen world tour 2018-2100 is going to rock your socks off. IF the global temperatures dip back down in the 22nd century, mankind could one day get their poo poo together again. Depending on how well civilization copes and if we have World War III or not. Nukes complicate the matter. There is always Antarctica and Greenland, and Siberia might have more farming in the future. We won't all die, just most of us. (Kisses own rear end goodbye.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 13:38
|
|
|
Gunshow Poophole posted:Very good in that it gives me the fortitude to sleep at night Conversely, how potentially effective could it be to replant and form artificial salt marshes/mangroves? Would this be possible as well as feasible?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 13:46
|
|
|
ShredsYouSay posted:As a thought experiment, if there was an armed coup and war leading to full blown ecofascism, would there be any chance, or are we utterly screwed regardless? By ecofascism I would mean a global totalitarian repressive dictatorship, command economy, rationing, bans on meat production, mass 80% sterilisation of all countries to lead to population decline, mass murder and repression of all global warming deniers etc. That's not fascism and i hope that happens
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 15:34
|
|
|
SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:If you're actually going to have your mental health damaged by this thread, seriously just remove the bookmark. Don't keep up to date. Tell people it's a problem but don't lose all your sleep over it. Agreed it's not helpful to endlessly panic about the future. At the same time, it's worth spending some serious time getting your head straight re: reality. As the average western computer janitor goon, you've been sold a lie. The future doesn't look like star trek, with boundless consumption stretching to distant solar systems. The future is (optimistically) a period of degrowth as we transition to a sustainable economy amidst an increasingly uncomfortable climate. Sticking your head in the sand, ignoring reality with "oh technology will solve this" and going back to worshipping at the altar of materialism will leave you increasingly poorly prepared for the future. Like I told the guy who just shows up to panic, it's important to build an ethos that's compatible with living interesting times.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 15:46
|
|
|
Wakko posted:Agreed it's not helpful to endlessly panic about the future. At the same time, it's worth spending some serious time getting your head straight re: reality. As the average western computer janitor goon, you've been sold a lie. The future doesn't look like star trek, with boundless consumption stretching to distant solar systems. The future is (optimistically) a period of degrowth as we transition to a sustainable economy amidst an increasingly uncomfortable climate. I am planning on buying a 5 acre plot of land and building a greenhouse, sustainable orchard, and planting a large garden as well as a shitton of trees. The house will be small with gray water recycling, solar power, and stuffed with insulation and have strategically placed windows for natural air cooling in the summer. Working on a design to increase water rention from rainfall into my proprties water table. I work from home and my carbon footprint will be minimal and offset by living sustainably. Basically I am trying to prepare for interesting times. I do have hope that things can be mitigated or saved to a degree, if there is no hope then there isnt really a point in living.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
friendbot2000 posted:I am planning on buying a 5 acre plot of land and building a greenhouse, sustainable orchard, and planting a large garden as well as a shitton of trees. The house will be small with gray water recycling, solar power, and stuffed with insulation and have strategically placed windows for natural air cooling in the summer. Working on a design to increase water rention from rainfall into my proprties water table. I work from home and my carbon footprint will be minimal and offset by living sustainably. I think a legitimate green air conditioning system would be a wiser strategy than natural air cooling. I live in a van and it is impossible to go to sleep or casually function in any way before the sun sets in the summer, even with open windows and a breeze. Burt Buckle fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Aug 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 16:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 22:47 |
|
|
friendbot2000 posted:I am planning on buying a 5 acre plot of land and building a greenhouse, sustainable orchard, and planting a large garden as well as a shitton of trees. The house will be small with gray water recycling, solar power, and stuffed with insulation and have strategically placed windows for natural air cooling in the summer. Working on a design to increase water rention from rainfall into my proprties water table. I work from home and my carbon footprint will be minimal and offset by living sustainably. But where to locate? Having had two wildfires come within sight of where I currently live (Carlsbad, CA) AT THE SAME TIME I would hate to be in some nice forest (Oregon) and wake up to that situation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 16:53
|
|
